Tea party is dead!

[Teddy R]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

Is that like slowest climb, up the mountain? Why don't you reserve your election-type lies, for those like yourself.....

You would do well to take your own advice.

[The Rawtruth]

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, there are indeed those who, because of their impeccable academic qualifications and knowledge and their devotion to the Truth and Facts over partisan ideology and political claptrap, do not accept the mendacious spew from the progressive left and partisan political tools.
This clearly does not include you.
Keep chanting your partisan and thoroughly debunked lies if they make you feel better.

I am not here to placate extremists or illiterates.

I am somewhat surorised that someone with your intellect conveniently neglected to mention the fact that;
Obama inherited the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression,caused by none others than the REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY ,for
which they had no solution,then,or now.
The fact that,Obama has been able to resolve the catastrophic mess they created is more than they can bare.
They have done everything in their power to hinder him at every turn by lying,misstating facts,innuendo,rumor mongering and trying to suppress the vote.
Tactics worthy of the most corrupt and dishonest scoundrels in the history of world politics,
But,Incompetence WILL NOT prevail......

If those who caused the problem had the ability to resolve it,they would have never got us into that problem in the first place
.AND SO>>>>>
OBAMA RULES for 4 MORE YEARS.
....Bang,,,,,Bang.....

[The Rawtruth]

From the Palm Beach Post:
Further evidence that The Tea Party is DEAD as a door knob

The South Florida Tea Party — the group that helped Marco Rubio launch his Senate bid and that hosted Donald Trump during his last flirtation with a presidential run — is shedding the words “tea party” as it undergoes a name change.

“We felt for branding reasons that we wanted to differentiate ourselves from certain organizations that have the name ‘tea party’ and we can’t control,” said Everett Wilkinson, leader of the organization that will now be called the National Liberty Federation.

Other local Tea Party groups, like the Palm Beach County Tea Party, are keeping their name but attempting to overhaul their image.“They won. We lost. They have a message that appeals to the masses. We don’t. That must change,” the group’s leader, Michael Riordan, said at a recent meeting.

“We’re faced with a wave of negative impressions,” a member of the Palm Beach County Tea Party, Richard Bock, told the Post.“A lot of negative information, misinformation has been out for a very long time — racist, crazy, you’ve heard all this stuff.”

The Tea Party as a whole has faced some tough times recently, after having limited success fielding national candidates in the 2012 elections, and in general finding themselves much less popular among voters. Last week, a poll from Rasmussen, a conservative-leaning pollster, found that just 8 percent of voters identify themselves as Tea Partyers, down from 24 percent at the height of the movement’s influence, during the healthcare debate in 2010. The same poll found that only 30 percent view the Tea Party favorably, compared with 49 percent who view it unfavorably.

And Politico reported last week, some Tea Partyers have turned to their former nemeses, Washington insiders, looking for support and cash:

Many activists have moved on, while others have turned their focus to local and state fights, or become absorbed into the Republican Party.

[truth]

The Rawtruth wrote:

From the Palm Beach Post:
Further evidence that The Tea Party is DEAD as a door knob
The South Florida Tea Party — the group that helped Marco Rubio launch his Senate bid and that hosted Donald Trump during his last flirtation with a presidential run — is shedding the words “tea party” as it undergoes a name change.
“We felt for branding reasons that we wanted to differentiate ourselves from certain organizations that have the name ‘tea party’ and we can’t control,” said Everett Wilkinson, leader of the organization that will now be called the National Liberty Federation.
Other local Tea Party groups, like the Palm Beach County Tea Party, are keeping their name but attempting to overhaul their image.“They won. We lost. They have a message that appeals to the masses. We don’t. That must change,” the group’s leader, Michael Riordan, said at a recent meeting.
“We’re faced with a wave of negative impressions,” a member of the Palm Beach County Tea Party, Richard Bock, told the Post.“A lot of negative information, misinformation has been out for a very long time — racist, crazy, you’ve heard all this stuff.”
The Tea Party as a whole has faced some tough times recently, after having limited success fielding national candidates in the 2012 elections, and in general finding themselves much less popular among voters. Last week, a poll from Rasmussen, a conservative-leaning pollster, found that just 8 percent of voters identify themselves as Tea Partyers, down from 24 percent at the height of the movement’s influence, during the healthcare debate in 2010. The same poll found that only 30 percent view the Tea Party favorably, compared with 49 percent who view it unfavorably.
And Politico reported last week, some Tea Partyers have turned to their former nemeses, Washington insiders, looking for support and cash:
Many activists have moved on, while others have turned their focus to local and state fights, or become absorbed into the Republican Party.

Fascinating.

[Go Blue Forever]

Teddy R wrote:

<quoted text>
You would do well to take your own advice.

So, you insist our economy is not in recovery, even if slowly....?

[Teddy R]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

<quoted text>So, you insist our economy is not in recovery, even if slowly....?

So, you insist on incessantly trolling your sophomoric strawman rhetorical questions?

What I may "insist" or not is neither here nor there. The economy's anemic performance is a matter of statistical fact, not opinion.

Worst recovery from recession in US history - fact.

GDP growth bumping along at an anemic 2% p.a. for the past 3 years, half of the growth rate seen after prior recessions and that needed to restore full employment and gov't revenues.

You want to cheer that as laudable performance? Be my guest - play the partisan fool. Objective observers know otherwise.

[GOP hole]

The depths of the GOP/bush depression will take years to recover from.

[Just Saying]

GOP hole wrote:

The depths of the GOP/bush depression will take years to recover from.

Considering that Obama added $6 trillion to the deficit in only 4 years, and shows no signs of cutting spending, our economy may never recover.

[Go Blue Forever]

Just Saying wrote:

<quoted text>Considering that Obama added $6 trillion to the deficit in only 4 years, and shows no signs of cutting spending, our economy may never recover.

Can you show that $6 trillion, you claim on President Obama's tab? Seem's i recall, G W Bush leaving off with $10.6 trillion, plus two wars that were not on the books....Your claim does'nt match the real figures....

[Just Saying]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

<quoted text>Can you show that $6 trillion, you claim on President Obama's tab? Seem's i recall, G W Bush leaving off with $10.6 trillion, plus two wars that were not on the books....Your claim does'nt match the real figures....

Current deficit is over $16 trillion. As you said, it was $10.6 trillion when Bush left. I wasn't a math major in school, but simple subtraction says that it has increased more than $6 trillion under Obama.

[Go Blue Forever]

Just Saying wrote:

<quoted text>Current deficit is over $16 trillion. As you said, it was $10.6 trillion when Bush left. I wasn't a math major in school, but simple subtraction says that it has increased more than $6 trillion under Obama.

Tell me...where do you add in the estimated $4 trillion, experts have placed of the still escalating cost's of both wars....not included at all, in that $10.6 trillion?

[truth]

GOP hole wrote:

The depths of the GOP/bush depression will take years to recover from.

Agreed.

[Typical democrat]

Typical democrat, makes a political statement with the taxpayer money,

http://newyorkpost.com/p/news/opinion/editori...

As usual it will cost us, just like the democrat pushed community investment act which created this democrat recession, and the obamacare act which will destroy our healthcare system.

Liberals in action, always spending our money, but being cheap with their own.

[Just Saying]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

<quoted text>Tell me...where do you add in the estimated $4 trillion, experts have placed of the still escalating cost's of both wars....not included at all, in that $10.6 trillion?

Any costs incurred since 2009 belong to him, since he's the Commander in Chief. He did pull us out of Itaq, so those costs have ended. Of course, he kept us in Afghanistan, where more US troops have been killed under his Presidency than under Bush's.

Speaking of costs, let's also mention Obamacare, whose true costs are only just beginning to make themselves felt. It's time to stop blaming Bush, and for Obama to finally take responsibility for his Administration. After all, he's now been President for 4 years, and as Truman's famous desk sign in the Oval Office said, "the buck stops here".

Time for BHO to man up, and own up.

[Go Blue Forever]

Just Saying wrote:

<quoted text>Any costs incurred since 2009 belong to him, since he's the Commander in Chief. He did pull us out of Itaq, so those costs have ended. Of course, he kept us in Afghanistan, where more US troops have been killed under his Presidency than under Bush's.
Speaking of costs, let's also mention Obamacare, whose true costs are only just beginning to make themselves felt. It's time to stop blaming Bush, and for Obama to finally take responsibility for his Administration. After all, he's now been President for 4 years, and as Truman's famous desk sign in the Oval Office said, "the buck stops here".
Time for BHO to man up, and own up.

Time for you to quit quoting numbers without knowing their source....Bush's share of the two wars is approx.$4 trillion, kept conveniently off the books....combined with the deficit, when he left office.....Let's just be honest, instead of political about it....and that does'nt even include the aftercare for all those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, before 2009.....

[White lighter]

Bush and Cheney pulled a smash and grab.

[Just Saying]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

<quoted text>Time for you to quit quoting numbers without knowing their source....Bush's share of the two wars is approx.$4 trillion, kept conveniently off the books....combined with the deficit, when he left office.....Let's just be honest, instead of political about it....and that does'nt even include the aftercare for all those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, before 2009.....

So when does Obama start being responsible for what is happening to this country under his watch, or will you continue to blame Bush forever? The fact remains that the U.S. federal deficit is approaching $17 trillion, and was $10.6 trillion when Bush left office. You can spin that any way you want, but the deficit climbed higher in 4 years under Obama than it did in 8 years under Bush. As far as the wars go, how about being honest, and giving us Obama's share of war costs since 2009, since he continued Bush's policies? Here's another puzzler for you - explain why Obama did nothing to cut rising entitlement costs, or pass a budget, despite having the Democrats control the White House, Senate and House for the first two years of his Presidency? I guess their failure to accomplish anything of substance was the fault of the Republicans too, right, even thought the GOP had no power to stop anything then?

[Go Blue Forever]

Wow, you've skipped right over that $4 trillion, with the skill of a mountain goat.....much of your arguement is contrived, if you insist on ignoring our initial points....you can breakdown the $17 trillon, including all cost's before wondering....ignore it again, and post to yourself....

[In all due respect]

Just Saying wrote:

<quoted text>So when does Obama start being responsible for what is happening to this country under his watch, or will you continue to blame Bush forever? The fact remains that the U.S. federal deficit is approaching $17 trillion, and was $10.6 trillion when Bush left office. You can spin that any way you want, but the deficit climbed higher in 4 years under Obama than it did in 8 years under Bush. As far as the wars go, how about being honest, and giving us Obama's share of war costs since 2009, since he continued Bush's policies? Here's another puzzler for you - explain why Obama did nothing to cut rising entitlement costs, or pass a budget, despite having the Democrats control the White House, Senate and House for the first two years of his Presidency? I guess their failure to accomplish anything of substance was the fault of the Republicans too, right, even thought the GOP had no power to stop anything then?

The amazing thing about liberals is that they do not even have the honesty and integrity to take the blame for their mistakes,

they push high risk loans on banks, to push a political agenda, and when it fails, they blame it on the republicans,

their incompetence leads to the attacks on Benghazi, and they duck questions while in the meantime another deadly attack occurs in Algeria possibly with the same terrorists, an attack you wonder might have been stopped if they had come clean about the first attack, and what do they do,

they grandstand and play politics,

"what difference does it make at this point" well it sure matters to the families of dead americans who are wondering what happened to their loved ones, not wondering about the political careers of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, "in all due respect".

[Just Saying]

Go Blue Forever wrote:

Wow, you've skipped right over that $4 trillion, with the skill of a mountain goat.....much of your arguement is contrived, if you insist on ignoring our initial points....you can breakdown the $17 trillon, including all cost's before wondering....ignore it again, and post to yourself....

You should talk! You ignored the cost of the wars during Obama's tenure in the Oval Office. How much was that, and was it "off the books" as far as the deficit goes? And what about addressing the more than $6 trillion added to the federal deficit since he took office in 2009, which is climbing every day? If you want an honest discussion, how about addressing those points?