The lol @ tea party conservatives thread

[UncleBuck]

Uncle Buck is a classic.

understatement.

my proof:

[video=youtube;Y0awf7TkByM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0awf7TkByM&feature=related[/video]

 

[thedoc08]

The Jerk and Uncle Buck are probably my two favorite classic comedies. Haven't seen UB in a few years though.

 

[andar]

 

[Parker]

Yeah, they want small government. Except when it comes to military spending (the biggest part of our government). Oh and government should also decide who's allowed to get married, what medical procedures women should have, stop doctors from doing research on stem cells, stop mosques from being built, stop people from smoking weed in the privacy of their own homes, continue the drug war, throw more people in prison, institute aspects of Christianity as law, force teachers to teach creationism instead of evolution, invade countries for oil, make being gay illegal, build walls on the boarders, hire more cops so they can stop everyone with brown skin to make sure they are here legally, etc, etc, etc.

But yeah, other than that they totally want small government.

And they want tax cuts for billionaires, they want the government to stop deficit spending, and an economic recovery all at the same time. That is a completely rational point of view.

The all encompassing picture you paint of the Tea Party is a false one. To be sure all members of the Tea Party do not agree on all the issues but then again which group does. The Tea Party has been about lowering the debt and smaller Federal government.

And yes tax cuts for EVERYONE and stopping government spending was what got us out of the depression of the early twenties. It lasted about two years. Government spending and taxes were cut by forty percent. Unemployment went from 11 percent to under 4 in two years. Quit listening to the agenda filled politicians and go with what works.

 

[UncleBuck]

The Jerk and Uncle Buck are probably my two favorite classic comedies. Haven't seen UB in a few years though.

oh, i love the jerk. can't pass up an opportunity to post steve martin!

[video=youtube;8qbc2J0zZr8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qbc2J0zZr8&feature=related[/video]

"he hates these cans!"

[video=youtube;6NxLtVG9_eg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NxLtVG9_eg&feature=related[/video]

 

[jesus of Cannabis]

Obama-mama-dingdong
apologizing for the US being the greatest nation in the world @ how many millions to go to India?

 

[Dan Kone]

The Tea Party has been about lowering the debt and smaller Federal government.

No they aren't. They are about shrinking certain aspects of government and growing other parts, just like everyone else. Ask any tea party if they'd like to increase the largest part of our government (the military) and all of them will say yes. The majority of them would like the government to impose their social views on the entire country. That's not smaller government.

Before Obama was elected, every candidate they supported from Reagan to Bush 2 increased the debt and they said nothing. The one president who took an interest in balancing the budget (Clinton), they didn't like. It's pretty suspicious that on the day Obama got elected then all of a sudden they became interested in balancing the budget.

Every president since FDR has increased spending during a recession including Reagan. The one time a president dared to cut spending during a recession, it crashed the economy again (1937). You don't cut spending during a recession. But they probably know that (at least tea party leadership does). They don't really want lower debt. What they really want is Obama to fail so they can get another republican in office. The best shot at Obama failing is to stop him from spending during a recession so the economy doesn't recover. They could care less about debt.

And yes tax cuts for EVERYONE and stopping government spending was what got us out of the depression of the early twenties.

Ummmm no. The depression was in the 1930's not the 20's first of all. The only time spending was cut during that time it caused the recession of 1937. You are completely misinformed.

Quit listening to the agenda filled politicians and go with what works.

I'm listening to history. Look it up. Who ever gave you all this information is wrong. Verify facts before repeating misinformation.

 

[londonfog]

wow completely amazed that Parker did not know when the "Great Depression" was, but yet still trys to comment on things that he/she apparently knows nothing about...Typical of most folks in this Teabagging revolution or as I like to call them "Uneducated white folks pissed that Obama the POTUS" ....

 

[robert 14617]

Less taxes and smaller government is their general aim. Shit on it all you'd like, but the numbers don't lie.

i think the results of the elections speak tons for the party's influence

 

[londonfog]

i think the results of the elections speak tons for the party's influence

well fact is Republicans would have had the Senate had it not been for the Tea Party...

 

[robert 14617]

that's one way to spin it

 

[londonfog]

spin...???? lol...had they not supported the Witch in Delaware ,the Crazy lady in Nevada, or Phuck Buck in Colorado they would have had it...also it's not so much that the Tea Party controlled any thing...I think its more of a point of who DIDN'T come out and vote in which I think 2012 will be most different...

 

[Parker]

No they aren't. They are about shrinking certain aspects of government and growing other parts, just like everyone else. Ask any tea party if they'd like to increase the largest part of our government (the military) and all of them will say yes. The majority of them would like the government to impose their social views on the entire country. That's not smaller government.

that's your misguided perception. The Tea Party is about reducing government, including the military.

Before Obama was elected, every candidate they supported from Reagan to Bush 2 increased the debt and they said nothing. The one president who took an interest in balancing the budget (Clinton), they didn't like. It's pretty suspicious that on the day Obama got elected then all of a sudden they became interested in balancing the budget.

That is a false statement. The Tea Party was started in 2007 with Ron Paul. Bush was in office then. To be sure the grass roots movement is growing now that people are seeing first hand the destruction of our economy at the hands of the government.

Every president since FDR has increased spending during a recession including Reagan. The one time a president dared to cut spending during a recession, it crashed the economy again (1937). You don't cut spending during a recession. But they probably know that (at least tea party leadership does). They don't really want lower debt. What they really want is Obama to fail so they can get another republican in office. The best shot at Obama failing is to stop him from spending during a recession so the economy doesn't recover. They could care less about debt.

Ummmm no. The depression was in the 1930's not the 20's first of all. The only time spending was cut during that time it caused the recession of 1937. You are completely misinformed.
I'm listening to history. Look it up. Who ever gave you all this information is wrong. Verify facts before repeating misinformation.

The only one with mis information are the hacks YOU listen to without looking to the reasons why.
I gave you figures on a previous depression, the mini depression of the early 20's and you choose to ignore those facts. Bury your head in the sand if you wish but it doesn't change what happened in the early 20's and what worked to get the economy going again. Prove me wrong on what happened during the mini depression.

You missed the point completely on what happened during '36-'37. Among other things, the cause was money taken out of circulation.
1. We saw stricter reserve requirements for banks. Banks had to increase their cash on hand. Forced to keep more cash banks cut back on loans. Two increases btw.
2. Payments to Social Security was taking money out of circulation.
3. The Tax on undistributed profits took money out of circulation. Companies that had the reserves to retain employees no longer had the cash to do so. Money to invest in new equipment was not there either. Companies invested their excess cash in equipment during slow periods. Now it's taxed.

The dip in the economy from 1937 among other things was the hack FDR rehashing a previous failed policy. He didn't learn. He set wages again. The first 6 months wages jumped 11 percent. In the steel industry from October to May the wages jumped 33 percent.

Why is this bad? It happened before during FDRs wage and price fixing in the early 1930's. Wages in 11 key industries averaged 25 percent higher than they otherwise would have done, the economists calculate. But unemployment was also 25 percent higher than it should have been, given gains in productivity. Meanwhile, prices across 19 industries averaged 23 percent above where they should have been, given the state of the economy. With goods and services that much harder for consumers to afford, demand stalled and the gross national product floundered at 27 percent below where it otherwise might have been.

Easy enough to understand. Artificially set wages high and prices will rise. Only those who got the wage increase can afford the new prices with little impact. Employers cannot lower the wage and hire more workers. If those wages were allowed to follow the free market we would have seen lower wages but lower prices as well as lower unemployment. Who is the government to decide who wins and looses?

How many times has the government intervened in trying to help the economy only to see it come crashing down? Why should we rely on the same ones who got us into this mess to get us out? The governments manipulation in the economy may have good intentions but it causes booms and busts and the busts are always worse than the booms. We have learned this through history but we still go back to the very same people looking for answers to problems they created. The free market, in the long run, provides the best answer.

WAKE UP!!!!

 

[Parker]

wow completely amazed that Parker did not know when the "Great Depression" was, but yet still trys to comment on things that he/she apparently knows nothing about...

That is your false interpretation little man. Can't discuss things truthfully so you have to make falsities up because you're too weak minded to put things together. Do some research on the mini depression of the 20's. You haven't heard much about it because we got out of it rather quick and you are rather slow witted. The only way to get the right answer is gather information on what works. Please read up on the mini depression of the 1920's and educate yourself on the basics of what got us out of it. You will come to find out it wasn't so hard to do.

Typical of most folks in this Teabagging revolution or as I like to call them "Uneducated white folks pissed that Obama the POTUS" ....

The name is Tea Party boy. Keep your racist comments between you and your circle of bigoted friends. btw racism has nothing to do with education. It is a defect of the heart.

 

[Dan Kone]

that's your misguided perception. The Tea Party is about reducing government, including the military.

No, less than 20% support cutting military spending, 45% think we aren't spending enough.

The Tea Party was started in 2007 with Ron Paul. Bush was in office then. To be sure the grass roots movement is growing now that people are seeing first hand the destruction of our economy at the hands of the government.

And it was Ron Paul and about 5 of his followers. The tea party was not a relevant organization under Bush. Only when Obama took office did it become a national movement. Ron Paul may have started the tea party (not entirely true, but I get your meaning. People who share Paul's values started it), but freedomworks and fox news made it what it is today.

These people do not necessarily share Ron Paul's political views. They may cheer when he talks about lowering debt or reducing the debt, but most of them would shit themselves if Paul actually had any real power. They are simply responding to sound bites. If Paul had real power and started reduced the military, pulled out of our foreign military bases, ended the drug war, these people would be rioting in the streets.

The only one with mis information are the hacks YOU listen to without looking to the reasons why.
I gave you figures on a previous depression, the mini depression of the early 20's and you choose to ignore those facts.

Except your facts were wrong. You appeared to get them from the department of making shit up. And btw - nice try at the save, pretending you knew when the depression was, but we have a word for "mini-depressions", they are called recessions. No one has referred to the recession of the early 20's as a "depression" since 1929.

And yes, it's still insane to cut spending during a recession, "mini-depression", or a depression. That's why it hasn't been even attempted since 1937. Even conservative god Ronald Reagan increased spending during his recession.

Anyone who thinks now is a good time to cut government spending is ignorant, insane, or wants the economy to fail more so they can get elected.

The dip in the economy from 1937 among other things was the hack FDR rehashing a previous failed policy. He didn't learn. He set wages again. The first 6 months wages jumped 11 percent. In the steel industry from October to May the wages jumped 33 percent.

Except pretty much every credible economist in the world agrees that the recession of 1937 was caused by spending cuts. Only you and a bunch of far right wing nuts think otherwise.

When they increased spending again, the economy recovered. This is all basic commonly accepted history. That's why no president since, republican and democrat alike have cut spending since then.

You can't re-write history just because facts don't fit your ideology.

By the spring of 1937, production, profits, and wages had regained their 1929 levels. Unemployment remained high, but it was considerably lower than the 25% rate seen in 1933. In June 1937, some of Roosevelt's advisors urged spending cuts to balance the budget. WPA rolls were drastically cut and PWA projects were slowed to a standstill.[3] The American economy took a sharp downturn in mid-1937, lasting for 13 months through most of 1938. Industrial production declined almost 30 per cent and production of durable goods fell even faster.
Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938, rising from 5 million to more than 12 million in early 1938.[4] Manufacturing output fell by 37% from the 1937 peak and was back to 1934 levels.[5] Producers reduced their expenditures on durable goods, and inventories declined, but personal income was only 15% lower than it had been at the peak in 1937. In most sectors, hourly earnings continued to rise throughout the recession, which partly compensated for the reduction in the number of hours worked. As unemployment rose, consumers' expenditures declined, leading to further cutbacks in production.

 

[TheAngryLiberal]

well considering obama's policies involve death panels, indoctrination, shariah law, hatred for white people and white culture, socialism, muslim, kenya, and hitler......

you'd be kind of an idiot if you didn't vote against him.....

hahahahaha look at what these crazy fucking people say. see i told you they really are like that lmao

 

[Parker]

Except your facts were wrong. You appeared to get them from the department of making shit up. And btw - nice try at the save, pretending you knew when the depression was, but we have a word for "mini-depressions", they are called recessions. No one has referred to the recession of the early 20's as a "depression" since 1929.

again it was your false perception that led you to believe I called the mini depression of the 20's the great depression. You made an incorrect interpretation and are not adult enough to admit it. Quit lying about what I said. You loose credibility when you do.

And yes, it's still insane to cut spending during a recession, "mini-depression", or a depression. That's why it hasn't been even attempted since 1937. Even conservative god Ronald Reagan increased spending during his recession.

Anyone who thinks now is a good time to cut government spending is ignorant, insane, or wants the economy to fail more so they can get elected.
Except pretty much every credible economist in the world agrees that the recession of 1937 was caused by spending cuts. Only you and a bunch of far right wing nuts think otherwise.

SUREEE why do what works? Why do what has been proven in the past to work. You don't know. You're just a sound bite. You haven't disproved what I said. Style over substance YES WE CAN!!!!

When they increased spending again, the economy recovered. This is all basic commonly accepted history. That's why no president since, republican and democrat alike have cut spending since then.
You can't re-write history just because facts don't fit your ideology.

The economy recovered slowly once we got into the war. After the war the progress made was better.
Like I said. You are just an uninformed sound bite who hasn't disproved a thing I said. A lot of which is common sense and explained in simple English. I'm not here to mislead people. Use your head and re read what I posted and tell me why those simple explanations are incorrect.

I want YOU to tell me why these so called economists YOU follow have not had long term success. Like I said they provide short periods of economic booms for some, the early birds, while more suffer during the busts. Quit ignoring this.

 

[Unnk]

wtf is up with ppl needing a politcal affiliation go ahead play your part in the big SHOW i enjoy non partisanship

 

[Dan Kone]

SUREEE why do what works? Why do what has been proven in the past to work. You don't know. You're just a sound bite. You haven't disproved what I said. Style over substance YES WE CAN!!!!

Not a sound bite, a historical fact. No president has attempted to cut spending during a recession since that very act caused the recession of 1937. Neither republican nor democrat has tried this.

Expecting Obama to obey your political ideology at the cost of another depression is insane. The only reason you want him to do so is because if the economy tanks again you've got a better chance at getting a republican president.

This is very transparent.

"The economy recovered slowly once we got into the war. After the war the progress made was better."

Anyone who can read a simple graph understand this is bullshit. While it is true it was the war that brought on the economic strength of the 1940's, everyone can plainly see the economy started to recover before we got into it.

 

[Unnk]

hahahahaha look at what these crazy fucking people say. see i told you they really are like that lmao

people need a finger to point at and obama him self maybe a good family man i dont care about him but to just play off this argument with out looking at the legislation going on today take a non partisan view on the situation you will realize the president is useless the fed controls the money the fed controls US