• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tea party to GOP: We could make 'examples' of you over debt ceiling

Boo Radley said:
Happens all the time.

But to be honest, it is just a small percentage who actually wanted them to say no to everything. Others just wanted more responsible behavior. others just voted against the other guy. In the end, they very well could be voted out because they did what they said they would do.
Click to expand...

If things were good, maybe. As it is, people are still pissed. Nothing has changed that. If not for those elected to do what they are doing we would be discussing how long QE3 would last and if the new stimulus package should be 900 billion or 1.2 trillion.
 
1Perry said:
If things were good, maybe. As it is, people are still pissed. Nothing has changed that. If not for those elected to do what they are doing we would be discussing how long QE3 would last and if the new stimulus package should be 900 billion or 1.2 trillion.
Click to expand...

They're pissed for a lot of reasons, including congress not working together and doing their job. Anger is too fickle to be relyed upon IMHO.
 
Boo Radley said:
They're pissed for a lot of reasons, including congress not working together and doing their job. Anger is too fickle to be relyed upon IMHO.
Click to expand...

Those who elected those this past term have no interest in seeing Congress work together if it means things they are against. Like I said, if not for them Congress would be working together to pass things they are absolutely against. You don't see any outcry for the new members to work with Boehner.
 
1Perry said:
Those who elected those this past term have no interest in seeing Congress work together if it means things they are against. Like I said, if not for them Congress would be working together to pass things they are absolutely against. You don't see any outcry for the new members to work with Boehner.
Click to expand...

Again, I think you're speaking about a small minority. They were added on to others. Lose those others, you lose the election.
 
That small minority includes a large majority of people that pay $65 to fill up their tanks.
 
The current crop was elected on the promise that they would improve the economy and create jobs. If the economy and job situation doesn't improve -- and they are doing nothing to address it -- many of them will be voted right out.
 
1Perry said:
That small minority includes a large majority of people that pay $65 to fill up their tanks.
Click to expand...

And they'll pay that no matter what happens. So, they'll still be mad. ;)
 
Not true. A strong dollar would change that. Anyway,to the discussion.

Tea Party Intensity Continues

Early signs suggest that Tea Party supporters remain the most engaged and committed segment of the Republican base. Republicans and Republican-leaning independent voters who agree with the Tea Party are more than twice as likely as other Republicans to have given a lot of thought to the 2012 election (44% vs. 18%). They also are much more likely to say they are very closely following campaign news (36% vs. 16%), and significantly more committed to voting in their state’s Republican primary or caucus next year (83% vs. 69%).

Obama Loses Ground in 2012 Reelection Bid | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
 
Your Star said:
How is not paying your bills "getting your fiscal house in order"?
Click to expand...

They can simply close all non essential government offices and programs, then pay on our obligations. As long as they allow $60 to $90 billion dollars a year in Medicare fraud to continue as well as hundreds of billions more in waste, fraud and abuse throughout government, they don't deserve another dime in tax money. They have been rotten caretakers of the public's money and they don't seem to care how much gets wasted as long as they can dig in the peoples pockets for more.
 
Last edited:
1Perry said:
They were elected to say "no". No to government spending way beyond what they can pay for.
Click to expand...

They were NOT elected to screw up our debt rating and cause our interest rates to soar. Yes, I want smaller government, less spending and a balanced budget. I know we can't get there in one election cycle, and I know that crashing our AAA rating won't help matters much.
 
BDBoop said:
By the way. Have I mentioned I can see a tea cup from my front porch?
Click to expand...

We can see that same tea cup from all 57 states. Woot!!
 
1Perry said:
Not true. A strong dollar would change that. Anyway,to the discussion.

Tea Party Intensity Continues

Early signs suggest that Tea Party supporters remain the most engaged and committed segment of the Republican base. Republicans and Republican-leaning independent voters who agree with the Tea Party are more than twice as likely as other Republicans to have given a lot of thought to the 2012 election (44% vs. 18%). They also are much more likely to say they are very closely following campaign news (36% vs. 16%), and significantly more committed to voting in their state’s Republican primary or caucus next year (83% vs. 69%).

Obama Loses Ground in 2012 Reelection Bid | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
Click to expand...

You're not going to get a strong dollar this way.

Is it time for dueling polls?

According to a new USA Today/Gallup poll, 47 percent of Americans view the Tea Party movement in an unfavorable light while 33 percent hold a favorable view.

Poll: Tea Party support continues to hurt – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans are more likely to approve of the way President Obama is handling the negotiations to raise the federal debt ceiling than they are to approve of the handling of the situation by Speaker of the House John Boehner or Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, although opinions about all three are more negative than positive.

Obama Rates Higher Than Boehner, Reid on Debt Situation
 
To all those screaming of tea party ignorance and how we must raise the debt ceiling NOW! listen to what Ron Paul says at :43 - :60.

"You do not have to default, right now we are 200 billion over the debt limit yet they have found a way to make those payment"

We are a little late on the debt ceiling....Opps!

I also agree that we should just freeze spending to current levels and start making cuts. No need to go further into debt. We may not have enough to make every payment on time until we make enough cuts but we can pay them all. Their will not be a lack of payment default. This would also be a very good motivator to cut spending. I propose we put politicians paycheck first on the list to delay payments on.

Edit: forgot link http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/28/ron_paul_default_is_coming.html
 
Baralis said:
To all those screaming of tea party ignorance and how we must raise the debt ceiling NOW! listen to what Ron Paul says at :43 - :60.

"You do not have to default, right now we are 200 billion over the debt limit yet they have found a way to make those payment"

We are a little late on the debt ceiling....Opps!

I also agree that we should just freeze spending to current levels and start making cuts. No need to go further into debt. We may not have enough to make every payment on time until we make enough cuts but we can pay them all. Their will not be a lack of payment default. This would also be a very good motivator to cut spending. I propose we put politicians paycheck first on the list to delay payments on.

Edit: forgot link Ron Paul: "Default Is Coming" | RealClearPolitics
Click to expand...

Cuts have consequences. What would you cut, so deep as to not need to rise revenue?
 
Everything across the board over a period of years. Shared sacrifice you know....
 
Ockham said:
Everything across the board over a period of years. Shared sacrifice you know....
Click to expand...

Except don't ask of the wealthy. Shared sacrific only at the middle to lower economic levels, right?
 
LesGovt said:
Democrats lied about balancing the budget in the 1980s and in the 1990s. There is absolutely no reason to believe them now. Where is the budget proposal by the Dems that has details?
Click to expand...

I can appreciate the distinction between Debt Held by the Public and the Total Debt. You are correct that from a Total Debt perspective, there we did not have a surplus in the late 1990's, but that deficit was the lowest it had been in nearly half a century. Do not get so hung up in the political semantics that you miss the point: the deficit was very, very manageable during the Clinton years. It got out of control during the ensuing administration(s).
 
Boo Radley said:
Cuts have consequences. What would you cut, so deep as to not need to rise revenue?
Click to expand...


Of course cuts will have consequences but so will continuously adding debt. We would be much better off cutting spending and living with those consequences then to collapse our entire economy which is exactly what will happen if we continue to add debt.

I would cut every program that we have to a degree. We also have tens if not hundreds of thousands of programs that could be cut out all together. In one of my posts around here I had a list of some of our most outlandish programs that should never have been funded with tax dollars and they were just a small part of what goes on in our spending.

The real question for persons that are ok with continuous spending. Which is better? Make sacrifices now but not so much that our lives can't continue as they are for the most part with perhaps a little less or continue the status quo and live good for 20 years only to collapse everything or have super inflation to the point all but the very wealthy are devastated. I would rather just have a little less.
 
Ockham said:
Everything across the board over a period of years. Shared sacrifice you know....
Click to expand...

Yep, lets ask the people that are hurting to sacrifice so the people that are prospering don't have to be bothered. This concept is the most absurd thing I have seen in my lifetime. The Conservatives should be ashamed.
 
Baralis said:
Of course cuts will have consequences but so will continuously adding debt. We would be much better off cutting spending and living with those consequences then to collapse our entire economy which is exactly what will happen if we continue to add debt.

I would cut every program that we have to a degree. We also have tens if not hundreds of thousands of programs that could be cut out all together. In one of my posts around here I had a list of some of our most outlandish programs that should never have been funded with tax dollars and they were just a small part of what goes on in our spending.

The real question for persons that are ok with continuous spending. Which is better? Make sacrifices now but not so much that our lives can't continue as they are for the most part with perhaps a little less or continue the status quo and live good for 20 years only to collapse everything or have super inflation to the point all but the very wealthy are devastated. I would rather just have a little less.
Click to expand...

I don't suggest we add to the debt. I suggest real shared sacrific, in which there are cuts, means testing, and an increase in taxes. All cuts together, completely cut, would not add up to enough unless you also make significant cuts in the big three. This will not only have consequences to the people who receive these services, but to politiicans who vote for them.

But like I said, no one is actually arguing for uncontrolled spending.
 
upsideguy said:
Yep, lets ask the people that are hurting to sacrifice so the people that are prospering don't have to be bothered. This concept is the most absurd thing I have seen in my lifetime. The Conservatives should be ashamed.
Click to expand...

You could have an argument (and I am all for fixing tax loopholes) if the government didnt spend every single cent it receives regardless of tax revenue. In our history what percentage of the years did we pay down our debt vs how many did we simply increase spending + further in debt.

We could tax the wealthy 80% and in a matter of years that entire revenue would be spent and we would still be in debt.
 
1Perry said:
Not true. A strong dollar would change that. Anyway,to the discussion.

Tea Party Intensity Continues

Early signs suggest that Tea Party supporters remain the most engaged and committed segment of the Republican base. Republicans and Republican-leaning independent voters who agree with the Tea Party are more than twice as likely as other Republicans to have given a lot of thought to the 2012 election (44% vs. 18%). They also are much more likely to say they are very closely following campaign news (36% vs. 16%), and significantly more committed to voting in their state’s Republican primary or caucus next year (83% vs. 69%).

Obama Loses Ground in 2012 Reelection Bid | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
Click to expand...

All very interesting, but Generic Republican will not be running against Obama. Instead, the Republicans will put up someone with a name, and that name has warts. In the case of all named and named potential candidates, that name has very big warts. If you want to look a bit closer at the polls, as of now, Obama handily beats all named potential candidates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom