It's official. The Tea Party hates their own country.

@woiyo,

Here, let me ask it again....

1. What spending programs are expanding that are making the deficit worse?

@parados,

I just gave you 2 that you ignore.

I suspect you will pat yourselves on the back by saying the deficits are lower than before.

Another stupid line of thought.

You suggest that this administration is doing a good job because it is losing money at a slower pace than before. So instead of going bankrupt on Monday, we will go bankrupt on Tuesday. You must have been a very successful business person !!!

1 Reply

@woiyo,

Actually, I am stating a fact when I say the deficits are lower than before. There is nothing stupid about facts. It's only stupid when people ignore those facts because they don't fit their world view.

If deficits are lower and you think they are "worse" then the only conclusion I can reach is you want higher deficits.

Quote:

You suggest that this administration is doing a good job because it is losing money at a slower pace than before. So instead of going bankrupt on Monday, we will go bankrupt on Tuesday. You must have been a very successful business person !!!

Actually a lot of successful companies became so because they started losing money at a slower pace until they finally started making a profit. Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook all lost money when they were starting out. That doesn't mean that all companies that lose money will become successful but it certainly points out that slowing down loses can lead to success.

1 Reply

@parados,

No idiot. I want surplus or breakeven !!! The democrats have had 6 years to fix this economy and they have demonstrated they do not have the ability to do so.

The US is not a "new company". It is a mature company that is being crippled by dummies on it's Board of Directors who spend more then they take in.

By you picture, you spend too much time on the crapper and not enough in the real world.

As I stated earlier, you and others who think like you, are the problem in this country.

2 Replies

@woiyo,

You are wrong on everything, proving that You are the idiot.

Keep in mind that virtually everything Obama has done has been shut down in the House by the controlling Reps, or filibustered to death in the Senate by the Reps. Obama doesn't have the line item veto to cut wasteful provisions. Moreover, austerity is not the way to go.

0 Replies

@woiyo,

woiyo wrote:

No idiot. I want surplus or breakeven !!! The democrats have had 6 years to fix this economy and they have demonstrated they do not have the ability to do so.

Oh.. you want to go back to the GOP deficits? Who is the idiot here? The last time we had surpluses the GOP decided they wanted to eliminate them with a tax cut. That was idiotic.

Quote:

The US is not a "new company". It is a mature company that is being crippled by dummies on it's Board of Directors who spend more then they take in.

No, we are a country. A country where 20% of the GDP comes from the government. Stop deficit spending immediately and you will force a recession which will only drive down government revenues which will restrict government spending more if you want a surplus which will further hurt the economy.

Quote:

By you picture, you spend too much time on the crapper and not enough in the real world.

As I stated earlier, you and others who think like you, are the problem in this country.

No. woiyo. The problem is people like you that can't see past the next step in their actions.

1 Reply

@parados,

Stop being a sitting a-hole.

I say I want breakeven or surplus.

Then you say I want deficits.

Maybe the english language is your problem.

1 Reply

We had surpluses under Clinton. Baby Bush couldn't wait to **** that up with needless tax cuts--after all, tax cuts are mandated in Republican scripture.

1 Reply

woiyo Rome was a mature company. Egypt was a mature company. We're barely teenagers. Snot nosed teenagers that could use an adult to kick the **** out of us behind the barn.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

2 things about Clintons "budgets". 1st Clinton only had a surplus after the GOP took control of the house after the 1996 elections. 2nd the surplus was only for those years he was in office for his 2nd term, 1998, 1999 and 2000 as they were yearly budgets. The National Debt continued to climb even under Clinton.

2 Replies

@woiyo,

woiyo wrote:

Stop being a sitting a-hole.

I say I want breakeven or surplus.

Then you say I want deficits.

Maybe the english language is your problem.

Math and economics seems to be your problem. Just because someone points out your ideas are incorrect doesn't make them a a-hole.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Of course you should mention that the deficit went down every year before that under Clinton. Even without the GOP congress, it was on the way to surpluses.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

The GOP took over the Congress in 1994, not 1996. Second, they wanted to eliminate the deficit by cutting entitlement programs at the same time as they enacted tax cuts--typical idiot Reaganomics. Clinton vetoed that legislation, and that lead to two government shutdowns in 1995. Things are never as simple as people like to make them out to be, especially polemical Republicans:

Quote:

The Republicans made one other critical error. Between Christmas and New Year's, Clinton, going against some of his advisers, accepted one of the proffered Republican proposals. But the House Republicans, whom Gingrich was having trouble holding together, rejected Clinton's acceptance. "The Republicans wouldn't take yes for an answer," one of Clinton's senior advisers later said. "History turns on small things. If the Republicans had accepted the president's offer, it would have been a great victory for Gingrich, the Republicans would have been able to say that they had achieved what they set out to achieve with their Contract with America in less than a year, the federal government would have shrunk more, and Clinton might have lost the 1996 election. But they didn't."

Source at CNBC

If you're going to spout off, try to get your facts right.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Oh please. Does A2K really need another one of these threads?

What's it to you?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

You mean they wanted to change welfare into workfare. It wasn't the Dems who wanted the change to how welfare works, that was the Republicans and they got what they wanted. I mean Obama has now thrown those changes out on their ears, the changes were still pushed by the GOP.

I guess anytime the GOP want to make a change to any entitlement it is destroying it?

0 Replies

It's "official," or so says Max, that the Tea Party hates their own country.

It's hard to find a more ridiculous thread title.

And yet those who agree with such a ridicuous accusation seem to have flocked to this thread to support it.

Tea-Baggers
Country Haters
Barbarians
Neanderthals
American Taliban

To name but a few.

These are, obviously, the epithets of a group of clear minded individuals and so they must be true.

What hypocritical clowns they be.

1 Reply

And don't forget the epithets your side of the aisle have been slinging at us for years, Finn, (and I think well before anybody on the other side started retaliating), for example

libtard
dumbasses
Bill Klintler
Bill KKKlinton
Hitlery KKKlintler
demonKKKrats
"liberals, i.e. liars" (OmSigDavid, today)

far from a complete list

Gonna suggest to me that these are the "clear minded" thinkers you value?

On the other hand we have a political party that is perfectly willing and indeed proud of taking down the government and the economy unless Obama abandons a program that was voted in by a majority, has been declared constitutional, and has survived something on the order of 38 votes that attempted to do away with it (and which I might add, according to the polls gathers a majority of the country when you total those who support it and those who think it doesn't go far enough--who would never support Ted Cruz), and, yes, it does seem to me that they hate the three quarters of the country that disagrees with them, and they're willing to destroy what the majority of the country wants to get their way.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

"My side?" What is that?

You have listed thread tags used within this forum which, most likely, can be attributed to one or two posters. Somehow, apparently, you believe these one or two posters to be the personfication of conversatism in America.

You are ducking the issue, as anticipated.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I don't get your beef. Finn.

We just endured a 2 week government shutdown, and a scary trip to the brink of default, because the Tea Party wanted to force concessions on a list of demands. This whole exercise cost tens of billions of dollars and a fair amount of pain. For American citizens to feel a great deal of anger toward the Tea Party right now is at least understandable.

But I really don't understand your desire to stick up for the Tea Party.

I am politically liberal. I make no apologies for that, nor do I expect you to apologize for being conservative. But you and I are different in this...

When there is an extreme group of liberals who is out of touch with mainstream Americans I am smart enough to understand that this hurts my cause. I distance myself from them.

If such a group of extreme liberals ever reached the point where they start hurting the country to push their agenda against the will of the majority of Americans, I would not only distance myself, I would publicly oppose them. Not only does it not help my cause, hurting the country is a line that I don't want to cross.

I don't understand why any sane conservative would stand up for the Tea Party. Not only are they hurting the country, they are damaging the cause of conservatism.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I don't get your beef. Finn.

We just endured a 2 week government shutdown, and a scary trip to the brink of default, because the Tea Party wanted to force concessions on a list of demands. This whole exercise cost tens of billions of dollars and a fair amount of pain. For American citizens to feel a great deal of anger toward the Tea Party right now is at least understandable.

But I really don't understand your desire to stick up for the Tea Party.

I am politically liberal. I make no apologies for that, nor do I expect you to apologize for being conservative. But you and I are different in this...

When an extreme group of liberals who is out of touch with mainstream Americans I am smart enough to understand that this hurts my case. I distance myself from them.

If such a group of extreme liberals reaches the point where they start hurting the country to push their agenda against the will of the majority of Americans, I would not only distance myself, I would publicly oppose them. Not only does it not help my cause, hurting the country is a line that I don't want to cross.

I don't understand why any sane conservative would stand up for the Tea Party. Not only are they hurting the country, they are damaging the cause of conservatism.

Excellent response, Max...and delivered with dignity.

I am a proponent of a progressive agenda...and for the most part I support liberal candidates and initiatives. But when the fringes of the left start their campaigns...I take then on in battle as I would a staunch conservative.

Our country needs more of that kind of thinking right now.

0 Replies

It's official. The Tea Party hates their own country.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know