Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
Sadly though, the Tea Party is organized and run by the republican party. It is nothing more than a way for the republicans to attempt to expand their base. They are slowly losing their strangle hold on the Christian conservatives so they need other people. The main operating/organizational staff of the tea party are all made up of former Reagan staffers. If these people really were so angry about excessive debt and the rights of the people being taken away, where have they been for 8 years while Bush ran up huge deficits, passed the patriot act and invaded a country that didn't attack us? I'm not saying Obama should get a pass, he shouldn't, but this deficit just didn't spring up 12 months ago. All of this spending and craziness just didn't happen.
|
You don't like the former Reagan staffers? 8 years? You do realize that the Dems took over the house in, I believe, 2006? And I think you think there's a contradiction in wanting certain freedoms, and the Patriot Act.. There isn't. I'm against government expansion and violation of privacy, etc. I'm also supportive of the Patriot Act during wartime. Yes, we are all aware of the slippery slope argument, saying the government can expand this even during peacetime. Whether the argument is valid or invalid, is another story. However, I have nothing to hide and have no problem with what the government is doing, provided it is only done during the fight on terror. And this spending and craziness has been going on since the 70's. It just manifested itself in the past 10 years thanks to the .com bubble bursting, as well as the subprime mortgage failure.
Quote:
|
There is no hope that the Sheeple will change. Case in point. When they announced the tentative dates that Obama could give the State of the Union speech on there was an uproar because one of them was on the same night that the premier of the final season of Lost was on. Obama had to assure people he wouldn't interrupt Lost. When people care more about a TV show then the state of the country, that is sad. The same people keep getting elected because as much as people say they want change, they really don't. People don't care about the deficit or the national debt. We have been hearing about it all our lives and most people don't see how it effects their day-to-day life. So people stick with what they know. They would rather have a guy in office that they know is screwing them, then take a chance on a new guy who they fear might screw them more.
|
This is why I thought Reagan was our greatest president. He did what he thought was right, not caring what anyone, and I really mean ANYONE, thought. That's not to say he was offensive, but he exhibited the kind of confidence that's ridiculously rare among presidents, and only possibly matched by FDR.
Quote:
|
When it comes down to elections people look at their lives and see how they are doing. If they have a decent job and a decent house and car and if the outlook for their immediate future is good, then they pick a candidate based often on moral ideals and not on their potential ability to lead. Case in point: during the last presidential election CNN was interviewing several different people who considered themselves conservatives. These were all voters in Ohio. Of the 10 or so they interviewed about 7 of them all said the same thing. They said they felt that Obama would be a better president than McCain and that he would do a better job than McCain, but they couldn't bring themselves to vote for someone who is pro-choice. So they were voting for McCain simply because he was pro-life. That is a pretty common situation.
|
Eh I wouldn't generalize so much.