Which one of these beliefs is "extreme"?

​

 

Whether or not it is "extreme" depends on what the meaning of "extreme" is.

I read through the whole thing. It says we should "Eliminate Excessive Taxes," "Eliminate the National Debt," and "Eliminate Deficit Spending."

It does not say how. How to cut taxes and pay off the national debt is not some trivial detail to be worked out later. It is an impossible goal. The reason it is impossible is not because of the machinations of a conspiracy of liberal elitists plotting in a sub basement in Georgetown. The reason is that there is little popular support for any specific major budget cuts.

This is why the Reagan revolution failed. It is why Republican economic policy since 1980 has been fraudulent.

Another problem with this platform is that while it complains "American politics is burdened by big money from lobbyists and special interests with an undue influence on the peoples’ representatives," it does not specifically condemn the Supreme Court Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision of 2010. This removed restrictions on "big money from lobbyists and special interests." It is also popular with the corporate and plutocratic elite that determines Republican policy.

The problem with this Tea Party platform is that it is restricted to nice sounding generalities that don't sound so good when they are scrutinized.

 

Why? Because most Americans did not care about the stupid made up Republican scandal about Monica Lewinsky?

 

Ask deviousdave. I am responding to his comment #156.

 

The teabagger goal to cut taxes and balance the budget is like the liberal goal to raise standards in public schools and reduce the dropout rate. It cannot be achieved. Anyone who has trouble understanding why is delusional.

 

This proves that you don't know jack about the Tea Party. Like the rest of those who "bear false witness" against the patriots known as the Tea Party you build strawmen to attack.

The Tea Party is OPPOSED to all welfare (both corporate and private).

Also, the former presidents plan to cut taxes to spur economic growth was a great plan....






If I had been alive then I would have AGREED with JFK's plan. :excited:

(The above fact about JFK shows just how loony left the Dem Party has become since the last halfway decent Dem President JFK.)

 

But, which is extreme? What is wrong with eliminating excess taxes?? What is wrong with eliminating the national debt??? What is wrong with eliminating deficit spending???

You and a bunch of others called the Tea Party extreme, that list is their avowed platform, what in it is extreme?

You might disagree with them that any of the planks can be accomplished, but how are they extreme?

At one time or another, those planks were part of the Democratic's platform.

 

It is you who does not understand and is delusional.

Cutting taxes does not mean ALL taxes. Balancing the budget is very easy to do, just make sure that your expenses are not greater than your income.

What is cut is the problem, your sacred cows are not necessarily someone elses. Bureaucracies burn cash without conscious, bureaucracies grow when not checked, the larger the bureaucracy the more waste is generated and even less work is performed.

 

What?!?! Don't let "outgo" EXCEED income?!?! Surely you jest!!! :lol:

This is the MOST RADICAL THING that I've EVER HEARD!!! Not even states, local governments, and families who don't go into debt do such UTTER NONSENSE as this!!! :lol:

 

Sorry to shock your sensibilities so early in the morning Joe, might put you off your feed or something.

 

lets balance the federal budget now
cut federal welfare for all privately held enterprises
prosecute every one with delinquent taxes
end all foreign aid
end all federally elected officials salaries and health care and then add in their pensions
dismantle every government run website
mandate a 10% income tax with no deductions or subsidies
impose fines on people that hire or in any manner assist illegals
force drug tests on all who receive welfare
and require that every citizen vote in the election periods

 

Whether or not they are "extreme" is a red herring. What matters is that they cannot be achieved for reasons I have already explained.

 

DL, you have called the Tea Party "extreme", do you now change that position or are you going to back your claim up?

The reasons you explained are what you think is necessary, why do you think their thoughts are fundamentally wrong.

How can you spend more than you earn without incurring debt?

How can you sustain your level of debt without paying it off?

How can you increase the rate of your borrowing, without running out of sources?

 

As Sequester Deadline Looms, Little Support for Cutting Most Programs

I shouldn't have to keep posting this, but I guess I do.

----------

Pew Research Center FEBRUARY 22, 2013

As the March 1 deadline for a possible budget sequester approaches, a new national survey finds limited public support for reducing spending for a range of specific programs, including defense, entitlements, education and health care.

For 18 of 19 programs tested, majorities want either to increase spending or maintain it at current levels. The only exception is assistance for needy people around the world.
http://www.people-press.org/2013/02...oms-little-support-for-cutting-most-programs/

Foreign Aid is one percent of the federal budget.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-foreign-aid-makes-1-percent-us-b/

 

Just don't scare me like that again with such a CRAZY and RADICAL idea as actually spending no more than what one takes in. OK? :excited:

 

Cutting expenses is not something that you do by polling the public, you get out the axe and start trimming every single one of the departmental budgets.

You will accomplish nothing by using a 300 million person committee, you grow some balls and do what you said you would do when you were campaigning.

 

As soon as the Reagan administration tried doing that it ran into effective resistance from the same people who voted for Reagan. You see, they believed him when he said he could cut taxes, raise defense spending and balance the budget without cutting popular middle class entitlements.

 

Reagan did not run up against the public's resistance, he bartered with Congress over other issues, he reneged on his promise to the public.

But you are simply ignoring the FACT that you cannot continue to spend more than you earn, it does not and can not continue to work indefinitely.

What the House tried to do, was to get the administration and the Senate to commit to stopping the red ink. Not only were they rebuffed, they were blackmailed into assenting to increasing the debt limit. And you think that was just fine. They asked that Obamacare be held off for a year, something that now the Democrats are asking for.

So who got fucked?

 

No, because most Americans do not care that the president of the U. S.
can and will get on national TV, point his finger at the world and lie.

What part was made up. Clinton had a young girl working under him give him a blow job. Any company in the U.S. would have been forced to fire him.
.

 

Show me any husband who is caught in that situation that won't lie first. Don't give me the tired old "higher standard" bullshit. The President is a man first, then President. You are just looking for arguments.