Thread: Tea Party or GOP?

Originally Posted by 59caddy

not picking on you in general, just fed up with the whole damn bunch of self-centered, power grubbing, money hungry, special interest group, liars, politics as usual, we know what's best for you, bunch of stupid idiots...

A little clearer please Scott. Hard to get a point across by beating around the bush.

I dont know. Waving around pictures of mass graves from the holocaust with the tagline "ObamaCare" would sure embarrass me if they were supposed to be supporting MY agenda.

Originally Posted by 59caddy

not picking on you in general, just fed up with the whole damn bunch of self-centered, power grubbing, money hungry, special interest group, liars, politics as usual, we know what's best for you, bunch of stupid idiots...

Which ones?! Reps or Dems?

So. What is your agenda Ian?
And, do you ever go by just John?

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Which ones?! Reps or Dems?

BOTH, my friend, BOTH guilty as charged.
now i probably have you confused as what or who i am. well first and foremost i am a "conservative, flag waving, do not tread on me AMERICAN" oh and also "you will take my gun, from my cold dead hand"

Yes yes, that's a little clearer.

Nope, name's Ian. Not Scottish, named after Ian Hunter.

When the pollsters come a-calling, I'm the guy sharpening my skinning knife with one eye squinting evilly and muttering to myself about the last "unwanted guests" I had.

I try to stay out of politics. Too many people seem just downright decent until you find out their politics. Too many crazies you cross the street to avoid who just happen to be saying something that when you think about it, you find yourself agreeing with.


I dislike comparing the single most horrific mass genocide in history to a little health plan you happen to disagree with. I try not to focus beyond that.

I myself lean just very slightly to the left. I'm a Republican, but that because that's what my parents are. I rarely vote Republican(though I just did in the NJ Governor race). I also don't vote Democrat too often. I mostly vote for independents. I don't subscribe to any party's platform. I just call things as I see them. I'm sick and tired of the bickering and fighting between both parties. The parties only seem to care about themselves, getting more power and money and getting themselves re-elected and I'm sick of it. They need to work together. They don't need to like each other, but they need to work together and instead they are hell bent on attacking each other whenever they can. Its like beating the other party is more important than solving the nation's problems. I hoping Obama might be able to get something done, but that seems to be less and less likely. The right isn't giving him a fair chance and he is also lean too far to the left and making costly mistakes that the right glorifies in magnifying. I convinced the only way to solve the problem is to get both parties out office. We need to show them that they need to do more than just beat the other party, they need to solve America's problems.

For the original topic, I'd refuse to vote if those were the only 2 choices.

Originally Posted by 59caddy

think what you like, but the facts are that we enjoyed the longest term of growth during peacetime in history...interest rates at or above 20% when he took office and unemployment as great as today...by cutting tax rates we saw the largest jump of revenue come into the feds by far while he was in office..

Actually if you would check instead of accepting the political spin at face value, the revenue increase didn't come from the tax cut in 1981 but from the successive tax increases of 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987. The first tax hike on 1982 actually canceled roughly 1/3 of the 1981 tax cuts. For the average "American family with kids", the tax burden in FY1988 was larger than in FY1980.

In 1982 alone, he signed into law not one but two major tax increases. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act of 1982 raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion

In 1983, Reagan signed legislation raising the Social Security tax rate. This is a tax increase that lives with us still, since it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. As a consequence, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year.


The following year, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of GDP.


The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 raised taxes yet again.



Even the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue-neutral, contained a net tax increase in its first two years.


And the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 raised taxes still more.


The year 1988 appears to be the only year of the Reagan presidency, other than the first, in which taxes were not raised legislatively. Of course, previous tax increases remained in effect. According to a table in the 1990 budget, the net effect of all these tax increases was to raise taxes by $164 billion in 1992, or 2.6 percent of GDP.

Originally Posted by 59caddy

deficit spending went up with both houses controlled by democrats that refused to balance the budget even while controlling the purse strings of the nation(remember a president can only sign into law what has been sent to him by congress) just like under george h. bush, there was supposed to be 2 dollars cut from spending for every dollar of tax increase(we all saw what the democrats being a bunch of liars did to the deficit then and probably going to do again).

As opposed to the fiscal responsibility displayed under the GOP supra-majority between 2001 and 2006? In 2001, when the debt was getting close to $5.6T, the future estimation was $6.5T on Jan 2009. Instead it was at $10.7T.

As I said on the other subject on political affiliation, fiscal conservatism is about not spending money you don't have... increasing spending while reducing tax income isn't fiscal conservatism.

Originally Posted by sffone

I wonder how the SRP membership would vote if there were a "head-to-head" election between just the two?

like most other American voters, I'd let the media make up my mind for me