Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

TEA Party Is Fighting For Our Freedoms

July 9, 2013

To The Reader’s Forum: We’re looking at the political cartoon on today’s opinion page. It depicts various groups that were supposedly “targeted” by the TEA Party and similar organizations....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(90)

50s4ever

Jul-14-13 2:26 PM

Monkey and irony....joined at the lip.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FedUpL8ly

Jul-14-13 1:30 AM

irony- All you have to do is look at the last 20 years and compare which party had control of Congress and chart it with the Labor Workforce Participation Rate. You will quite easily see that with the brief time following 9-11-01 being the exception, the trend line of unemployment goes down when Republicans control Congress and the trend line shows increasing unemployment when the Dems control Congress. Not to be forgotten when Bush was President and creating millions of new jobs, Democrats cried loud and long about how the jobs paid less than when Clinton was President. For the benefit of all of the gullible sheep who can't think for themselves, Republicans should be making the same claim about Obama's jobs and also mention that a great many are part-time jobs. Unfortunately, they don't resort to juvenile antics like Pelosi, Reid and Obama. Wouldn't be too much of a stretch to conclude that many of the uninformed are so enthralled with the current crop of Dems running this country.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bluesman

Jul-13-13 4:15 PM

Motorola just announced that they are opening a factory in N. Texas. I wonder if Irony can explain why they aren't opening one in NY? Keep it pithy Irony.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-13-13 3:53 PM

ironyoozesfromyouryap - I guess when you have to admit Barry's a failure, all things are Irrelevant.

Unemployment is down LOL. - you are correct, it is down from the 9% but no where near the 6% he promised. How about those food stamp figures irony? Are they irrelevant too? I noticed you failed to touch on that.

And irony, once again GWB has been gone a long tie. Just when will Barry be responsible for this mess.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-13-13 3:47 PM

The heavily adjusted “official” U-3 unemployment rate ticked back up to 7.9 percent in October, with a modest 171,000 jobs created. This is just about enough to keep up with population growth, but not enough to keep up with both population and job losses. Expectations from analysts were actually even lower, so from that standpoint, the October BLS report isn’t as bad as it could have been. Unemployment among black Americans notably rose to 14.3 percent…….

"Only the complete departure of millions of Americans from the workforce allows Obama to callously pretend he has high single-digit unemployment. He promised 5.2 percent unemployment by 2012 if he got his trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill, and openly advised Americans to vote him out of office if he failed to deliver on this promise. Remarkably, Obama manages to criticize other people’s numbers for “not adding up” without getting laughed out of the room".

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bluesman

Jul-13-13 1:43 PM

Tough read Irony! I bet you're the life of every party you sneak into. Please, please, please! Don't respond!

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Monkeyboy

Jul-13-13 11:42 AM

At least he has more than personal insults to offer, 50s4ever. Try it some time.

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Jul-13-13 11:25 AM

You really love to hear yourself talk, don't you.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-13-13 9:13 AM

And for your last trick, Obama made no promise about 6%.

What is interesting, when Mittens Romney was running he made a promise to cut it to 6% in 4 years. A much more manageable promise but as exhibited, presidents always make promises that they can't keep. Every president has. Nothing new. You can hold the weight of the world on it but basic historical research would bring you back to Earth. That's asking quite a bit though.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-13-13 9:10 AM

"What was the average GDP under GWB, what is the average under Obama?"

Fools are easy to fool when it comes to economics. I could take out $35k in debt and get a pretty sports car; drive it by your house and you'd think I have it all figured out. Little do you know I pay $425 a month plus interest; you think I have it all paid off. Easy to fool.

Can we get some education in here? All these armchair economists who can barely tie their shoes.

"what happened to "cutting the deficit in half" Obama promised during his first term?"

In 2013, according to the CBO the deficit decreased 32% in the first half of the year. Over the past 5 years since Bush rammed up the deficit, Obama has steadied it and pulled it down. Although I wouldn't attribute it totally to Obama, you mannequins love to do the same, so I guess I'll follow suit and say Obama has done it all.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-13-13 9:03 AM

Ill entertain the questions, although it won't matter to the fools in the theater.

"how much was GWB's stimulus, how much was Barry's?"

Irrelevant. The first one to do it was GWB. They were in the works before and as Obama entered his presidency.

"What was the unemployment rate the last four years of GWB's term?"

Irrelevant. There was a housing bubble created; it burst. That's like going ga-ga over the efficiency of a bomb before it explodes and burns your house down.

"What has it been stuck at for Barry's term?"

When Obama began, it had spiked 2% in the previous six months. In fact, under Bush the unemployment rate went up 3.4% over his second term. Obama entered with a 7.8% unemployment, it is now 7.6%.

"Where are all those "shovel ready jobs" he promised?"

Depends on what your definition of "shovel-ready" is. I'm sure with your logic, it's any job that doesn't exist, whereas you ignore the ones that have be

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-13-13 8:56 AM

I do also appreciate that after I explained basic economics with you your mouth shot off a dozen questions which completely ignored it. I guess that whole "worst recession since Great Depression" hasn't dawned on you yet. McDonald's is recession-proof though, maybe all those patties you flip give you a misguided sense of how time has passed.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-13-13 8:54 AM

"You just can't admit that this is King Obama's economy."

Unemployment is down, stock market is up to record highs. Manufacturing is moving forward.

I would suggest instead of making your laughable biases clear, you should do some research.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bluesman

Jul-12-13 1:00 PM

Ever been waiting for a ride at an amusement park complaining that the ride shouldn't take so long. That is, until it's your turn to ride.

Same with politics, when it's your turn to ride, it's hard to turn away from all the tax payer money you have access to. Sure, many in the Tea party don't have specific answers. They're mostly just folks that are fed up and are "venting."

"How can we fix It" Henry? Call me a pessimist, don't think we can. (Tax payer) Money talks. And with all due respect to the great Neil Diamond. It can also sing and dance, and it can walk.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-12-13 10:53 AM

Fair enough Henryh. And it was defendants, and yes I agree on the over $75 k statement.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HenryH

Jul-12-13 10:48 AM

Doggie, we agree on 4 of the 5 points. Term limits need to be created and PACs need to be removed. There should be a cler cap on spending for each office. But, then it gets complex. Is a corporation a person? They pay tax but do they get a say in fiscal policy?

Just a funny note, did you mean "defendants"? Crime pays, eh? I know, you mean dependants which can be any gender, biological offspring, adopted children, parents, etc.

A flat tax is not an answer as there is an issue of utility spending and regressive taxation. if you say it is a flat tax on income over $75,000, then I'm on board. What about other regressive taxes such as driver license fees and sales tax?

But, I do not see the TEA Party talking about these issues. Also, they want to wrap some changes with religious cloth. If the TEAers had your rhetoric, I'd be on board.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-12-13 10:21 AM

How do you change it? Let's see - #1 term limits would stop a lot of the foolishness going on today. Example, Joe Biden is a millionaire and has been in office for decades? Where did all that money come from? #2 make running for office affordable. How can someone like you or me possibly afford to run for public office? #3. Stop ALL lobbying. #4 do away with all PACS. #5 do away with the Electoral College, popular vote wins. #5 A flat tax, EVERYONE pays the same percentage of tax on all income, no deductions other than defendants.

There are a few examples of changes that need to be done, but NEVER WILL.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HenryH

Jul-12-13 8:25 AM

And Doggie, although I dislike Obama and he has significant failings as a leader, how is it that the TEA Partiers are making it better? You are right to be frustrated by the status quo. It is the same status quo under Bush and Clinton before him. So how to change it Doggie?

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-11-13 7:50 PM

Bluesman, how about Travon Martin could be his son, if he had one. Or how about the untold millions spent on his UNPRODUCTIVE green dream, canceling the space program, stopping the pipeline, cash for clunkers, Obamacare, giving ambassadorships to his big contributors, a $100 million trip to Africa, but Americans can't tour the White House, or the "beer summit", giving the Queen of England crappy gifts, NOT closing GITMO, AS PROMISED,....I'm getting tired, but can continue if needed.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bluesman

Jul-11-13 7:43 PM

Oh sure just bring up the bad stuff. Obama has done plenty in 5 years. He called Sandra Fluke. He called the gay NBA player. Let's see, hold on, I'm thinking, oh yea, 6000 rounds of golf. Spoke at PP, and lots of other stuff. I'm just drawing a blank right now.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-11-13 6:10 PM

ironyoozesfromyouryap - how much was GWB's stimulus, how much was Barry's? What was the unemployment rate the last four years of GWB's term? What has it been stuck at for Barry's term? Where are all those "shovel ready jobs" he promised? What was the average GDP under GWB, what is the average under Obama? How many Americans were on food stamps under GWB, how many now under Obama? Oh, and Irony, , what happened to "cutting the deficit in half" Obama promised during his first term? How about "if the stimulus is passed unemployment will be 6%?

You just can't admit that this is King Obama's economy. Almost 5 years in, it's time to blame the person RESPONSIBLE. Not the guy who has been out of office for that period. So, it appears you are the fool who wishes to disregard facts.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Jul-11-13 5:33 PM

I see one of the babies has been leaning on the abuse button again. Poor little things...wahhhwahhh

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ironyoozesfromyouryap

Jul-11-13 4:26 PM

"Do you actually want to compare the two?"

You don't understand how economics work (as if there was any doubt in that anyways). Each presidency doesn't start at zero. It either breathes on the former or dies on it - or somewhere in between. Needless to say, a predecessor has an effect. Despite what fools want to disregard.

I do appreciate the criticisms of Libertarians (and no, Tea Party Tards are not Libertarian but Neo-Cons), as they are the most consistent political position on the modern American spectrum.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidVA

Jul-11-13 3:35 PM

There isn't s person writing for this comment section with enough raw wealth or income to favor the politics of the current right - TP or otherwise. It stuns me that thinking people can actively oppose their own best interest due entirely to false-flag propaganda.

Just a quick review of the last 50 years shows that the rise of the right correlated almost perfectly with the decline of the wealth and earning power of the 99%. OWS actually picked a good benchmark when they chose that.

Warren Buffet hit it right on the nose. There is a class war going on, and his class is winning. Here's a hint: none of you is in the same class with Warren Buffet. I'm certainly not. Why fight for the rights of the extremely rich to avoid taxation and any regulation of their acitivities. Unlike you or me, they have the power to hurt anyone or anything they wish. Doesn't that desrve a bit of oversight.

Here's another hint: they didn't get that kind of rich by being saints.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Seadog

Jul-11-13 1:16 PM

"Too bad Bush ignited the first stimuluses"

I agree ironyoozesfromyouryap. Without it, there would not have been a fire for Obama to throw gas on. Do you actually want to compare the two?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 90 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web