archer wrote: What the Republicans once were, and what the Republicans are now, is a tale of two parties. I see very little of the Grand Old Party in the Republicans these days.....they used to try and be inclusive, Reagan took that to the next level with his Reagan democrats.....now the Republicans have gone in the opposite direction. No longer are they inclusive, now there is an informal "litmus test" to be a Republican candidate.....add in the Tea Party demands and the Republican party shrinks even more.....there is no room for moderates, there is no room for non-christians.....it's all about being a Republican/Tea Party clone. I find it pretty sad that a once great party has dwindled down to a bunch of people who you must emulate or you are not welcome.
I think that left wing perceptions of republicans, conservatives and the tea party are mostly based on wishful thinking and self deception.
For a dwindled down bunch of people", they did pretty well in 1010. Let us see what 2012 brings.
This is from a committed lib at another site. "It seems to me that a good portion of Tea Party members and sympathizers have a negative attitude towards SCIENCE, education in general, and deductive reasoning utility."
I also think that the feel good deceptions of the left about the right will make any attempt to come back ineffective. On occasion I have seen a perceptive piece by a liberal and the rest of the pack sneers at it.
There is still time, taking Daily in was a good move, but I have not seen much evidence of his influence.
the longer the vast partisan divide continues to widen, the more the Republicans and Democrats become caricatures of what they once were. Republicans are no longer placing emphasis on what they support, they are all about what they hate and how to bring down the Democrats....and the Democrats seem to be supporting anything and everything they know will piss off the Republicans.
While the two major parties play their game of one-up-man-ship, the American people lose. None of the posturing in Washington is about us, it's all about them. I, for one, am getting pretty fed up with the whole lot of them.
archer wrote: <snip>While the two major parties play their game of one-up-man-ship, the American people lose. None of the posturing in Washington is about us, it's all about them. I, for one, am getting pretty fed up with the whole lot of them.
archer wrote: <snip>While the two major parties play their game of one-up-man-ship, the American people lose. None of the posturing in Washington is about us, it's all about them. I, for one, am getting pretty fed up with the whole lot of them.
And isn't this what the tea party is about?
Not even close, the tea party, as far as i can see, grew out of the fact that the Republican party wasn't moving to the far right fast enough, it is an attempt to put even more distance between democrats and republicans, then watch the American people fall off the cliff they created. if ever there was a group of people who couldn't care less about their fellow citizens and any repercussions their policies might have on them, it's the tea party.
archer wrote: <snip>While the two major parties play their game of one-up-man-ship, the American people lose. None of the posturing in Washington is about us, it's all about them. I, for one, am getting pretty fed up with the whole lot of them.
And isn't this what the tea party is about?
You beat me to it. Perot showed that a third party is mistake that just plays into the political class's hands. The TP needs to take over the GOP from within.
archer wrote: <snip>While the two major parties play their game of one-up-man-ship, the American people lose. None of the posturing in Washington is about us, it's all about them. I, for one, am getting pretty fed up with the whole lot of them.
And isn't this what the tea party is about?
Not even close, the tea party, as far as i can see, grew out of the fact that the Republican party wasn't moving to the far right fast enough, it is an attempt to put even more distance between democrats and republicans, then watch the American people fall off the cliff they created. if ever there was a group of people who couldn't care less about their fellow citizens and any repercussions their policies might have on them, it's the tea party.
I think this article does a good job summing up the tea party:
While the Tea Party must be seen as fiscally conservative (which is the main stream position) it has been noticeably silent on social issues. This silence is intentional. While some Tea Party members have advocated for and against some social issues (think gay marriage, legalizing drugs, abortion...) there is no 'official Tea Party position' on those matters. The reason has two separate but equally valid reasons. The first is that there is no centralized Tea Party command which can dictate by fiat what those official opinions or positions are. The second is that the Tea Party did not start out to be a 'party' in the same way Republicans and Democrats are. The Tea Party started out as an expression of disgust over government taxing and spending run amok. To join was an expression of that singular set of beliefs; taxes are to high, government is spending to much, no bailouts, personal responsibility with full repercussions for choice (good or bad [side note: there is an understanding that the ability succeed necessarily requires a chance of failing]). While people joining have other beliefs, their beliefs in no way filter back to become Tea Party positions.
On the basic political spectrum a Libertarian is someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Technically the Tea Party can not truly be defined as Libertarian because they are silent on social matters. Libertarians however could correctly be described as Tea Party people along with Conservatives. The Tea Party can be seen as an alliance of Conservatives and Libertarians putting their disagreement on social issues aside to focus on taking back the country from the fiscal liberals and(/or) Socialists.
Compromising is what brought us to this extreme precipice we are poised to fall over.
Bush was a perfect example of the word compromise. We had 8 years of it- everybody happy with how it turned out? Compromise killed the conservative movement, and diluted any hope of a smaller, more efficient government.
The tea party movement does not want compromise of any kind - that's what I like about it. I'm mostly libertarian - and compromise is not what I am interested in. I'm interested in getting the government out of the business of controlling our lives. I know from experience the only way to do this is to remove the money from it.
The more money we can remove from government, the more power goes back to the people. Our governments ability to tax, regulate and spend out of control comes directly from our willingness to allow it to happen.
I'm glad that the tea party is keeping their focus on smaller government and more conservative leadership. The day they start to lose focus and get involved in social issues is the day they themselves start down the road of "Compromise".
The way I see it - they do not need to get involved in those issues, they have enough to focus on- the massive problem of government out of control with spending and regulation that has our economy near destruction.
I really hope The Real Revolution Has Begun - for our sake.
Compromising is what brought us to this extreme precipice we are poised to fall over.
Bush was a perfect example of the word compromise. We had 8 years of it- everybody happy with how it turned out? Compromise killed the conservative movement, and diluted any hope of a smaller, more efficient government.
The tea party movement does not want compromise of any kind - that's what I like about it. I'm mostly libertarian - and compromise is not what I am interested in. I'm interested in getting the government out of the business of controlling our lives. I know from experience the only way to do this is to remove the money from it.
The more money we can remove from government, the more power goes back to the people. Our governments ability to tax, regulate and spend out of control comes directly from our willingness to allow it to happen.
I'm glad that the tea party is keeping their focus on smaller government and more conservative leadership. The day they start to lose focus and get involved in social issues is the day they themselves start down the road of "Compromise".
The way I see it - they do not need to get involved in those issues, they have enough to focus on- the massive problem of government out of control with spending and regulation that has our economy near destruction.
I really hope The Real Revolution Has Begun - for our sake.
and from another post:
The Tea Party started out as an expression of disgust over government taxing and spending run amok. To join was an expression of that singular set of beliefs; taxes are to high, government is spending to much, no bailouts, personal responsibility with full repercussions for choice (good or bad [side note: there is an understanding that the ability succeed necessarily requires a chance of failing]). While people joining have other beliefs, their beliefs in no way filter back to become Tea Party positions.
I know for a fact that even within the local 285 Corridor Tea Party Group
there are many differences of opinion on social issues.
