SOCIAL SECURITY

[byco42]

Well, you know ... all those NO WAR signs vanished off people's lawns as soon as Obama was inaugurated, too. Politics is politics, and it's what we seem to be comfortable with.

So... you agree the hoopla over spending (only domestic spending of course, defense spending is never enough) is nothing more than politics?

Yes. Does that surprise you? We were way over taxed and government was way too large long before president Obama took office. And some of the Tea Party planks are just poorly worded generalities with no course of action.

"Gun ownership is sacred?" What does that mean?
"Special interests must be eliminated?" With the sacred guns?
"Illegal aliens are here illegally." Thanks for the bulletin. Joe Biden could not have said it better.

I especially love #3. These strict constitutionalists, who revere the Founding Fathers with *ahem* reverence, declare that "A strong military is essential." To what, they don't say, but Jefferson and Adams alike would say that a strong military is essential to tyranny. Only central banks were more threatening to liberty in his mind, and the Tea Party has no opinion on that matter.

No, I do not subscribe to Cafeteria Constitutionalism.

 

[mhughes0021]

Well, you know ... all those NO WAR signs vanished off people's lawns as soon as Obama was inaugurated, too. Politics is politics, and it's what we seem to be comfortable with.

Very true, but I am sure a solid majority of Americans are ready to end the 2 wars in Middle East and outrageous spending in Washington, regardless of party affiliation.

From what I hear most Republicans have said Bush did spend too much. Even Hannity and Bill O have said this.

Many republicans also publically criticized Obama for pulling the troops out. Apparently they did not know that Bush put an end all date in a treaty all those years ago and we have to be out by that date. Once again proving people in congress are morons.

 

[redandguilty]

Does anyone think this is an unreasonable assumption: <blockquote>Certain people - mainly self identified republican voters, or "libertarians" as they prefer to be called - have no problem with deficit spending when a Republican was in the White House; only when a Democrat is in office.</blockquote>All the deficit spending, and associated debt ceiling increases from 2001-2008 was OK... but in January 2009, we crossed the line... what a strange coincidence.

We are supposed to believe that those well-regarded economists in the Tea Party were monitoring gov't spending all along, and according to their calculations, in January 2009, the deficits became unsustainable.

All just crunching the numbers. Nope. Nothing to do with politics.

There was some flipping out late 08 with the bail out, but with regard to the blow hards that dominate the airwaves, yeah, I agree.

 

[tsmith7559]

Does anyone think this is an unreasonable assumption: <blockquote>Certain people - mainly self identified republican voters, or "libertarians" as they prefer to be called - have no problem with deficit spending when a Republican was in the White House; only when a Democrat is in office.</blockquote>All the deficit spending, and associated debt ceiling increases from 2001-2008 was OK... but in January 2009, we crossed the line... what a strange coincidence.

We are supposed to believe that those well-regarded economists in the Tea Party were monitoring gov't spending all along, and according to their calculations, in January 2009, the deficits became unsustainable.

All just crunching the numbers. Nope. Nothing to do with politics.

There was some flipping out late 08 with the bail out, but with regard to the blow hards that dominate the airwaves, yeah, I agree.

Obama's budget for 2011 is $900 billion more than Bush's last budget in 2008......$2.9T to $3.8T in 3 years.....c'mon, that's insane