TEA stands forTaxedEnough AlreadyThat
doesn't sound like an extreme terrorist position. In fact I think that the
vast majority of Americans (and people world wide for that matter) think they
pay enough in taxes. Many think that others aren't taxed enough and should
pay more, but most believe they personally pay enough.Why all the
fear and loathing?
They need to have a tea party and throw out the "tea party" and other
@LDS Liberal:How do you know what people do and don't pray for?
Are you God? An incredibly presumptuous and blasphemous position.Or
do you suppose that people refuse to pray for someone who was not "their
guy" because that is what you would do? That would be hypocritical. I would suppose, based on my behavior (without being told to do so by my
church leaders), that there are those who do pray often for this country's
leaders, regardless of whether or not it is the one they voted for, and
regardless of what religion they belong to. In many cases the prayers are even
more fervent when the praying person thinks leaders positions are misguided.
After the lesson in Priesthood meeting yesterday -- I think I offer
a pitcher of lemonade and the cool of my shade tree to those upset about the
elections.It makes me sad to hear all the bad talking about this
fine nation of ours.Sadder still, when members of the Lord's
church are asked to pray for our leaders, and who defiently refuse to
follow the living prophets and apostles.
David KingLayton, UTThere are 96 Senators and over 350 House members
who don't affiliate with the so-called Tea Party caucus. ============= ANDUtah accounts for 1 of those 4 Senators and
2 of thise House members.Utah has the highest disproportional membership
in that so-called Tea Party movement than any other state in the Union! Utah•Rob Bishop, Republican U.S. Representative from
Utah's 1st congressional district (2003–present) and a member of the
Tea Party Caucus. Bishop has appeared at Tea Party rallies in Utah.•Jason Chaffetz, Republican U.S. Representative from Utah's
3rd congressional district (2009–present). In August 2011, Amy Walter of
ABC News described Chaffetz as "a rising star in the Tea Party
movement".•Mike Lee, Republican U.S. Senator
(2011–present) and a member of the Tea Party Caucus.BTW - Only
Orrin Hatch (who the Tea-Party hoped to gun down with Dan Liljenquist,) and Jim
Matheson (our only Democrat, who also just beat Tea Party darling Mia Love after
Republican gerrymandering of epic proportions) that are not.So
– Utah DOES affiliate with that ridiculous so-called Tea Party
caucus, more so than any other.
Why are the winning liberals bothering to tell Republicans how to win?
Aren't they happy being in charge? Their suggestion: "Be
more like us."Brilliant. No choice on issues; we all have to
believe the same. I thought they were pro-choice. I am
pro-choice.I choose to shun pre-birth baby murder.I choose to
use mercury free incandescent light bulbs.I choose to promote a working
America, not a gimme America.I choose to try to lift others up, especially
those at the bottom, and not to tear those at the top down.I choose to
value families.I choose to support legal immigration and thwart illegal
immigration.I choose to treat people as equal, making no special
classifications for any groups of people.I choose to worship my God as I
see appropriate, and allow others to do the same.I choose to be a
conservative. Liberalism is inconsistent with my other beliefs. As
far as party, I would choose another party if the Republicans go too far left
for my beliefs. I am not too worried about that happening though. Political
swings are cyclic. We conservatives won't disband on the advice
And when I say Romney made no friends in Europe and Israel....obviously they
don't vote here.But a few minutes around Mitt, and their views were
clearly obvious. They saw no statesman there. They saw a salesman.
Romney might well have won....if he didn't tick off women, students,
immigrants, the elderly, most of Europe, his home state, his other home state,
his Veep's home state, a bunch of other states, auto workers, the
struggling lower class, the struggling middle class, Israel, single parents,
gays, straights, small business owners, medium-sized business owners, the
businesses he crumbled, unions, families, retirees, veterans...did I leave
anyone out?????The GOP is in deep trouble if all they can offer up
are the likes of McCain, Palin and Romney.And.....The Democratic
train will keep on rollin' with Julian Castro on deck to beat back whomever
the GOP throws out there.This is not my Grandfather's GOP. This
is a disaster.
@jsfwhat a sad world you have created for yourself f this is how you
really view it.
You will listen to the rhetoric we tell you to listen to, our propaganda, so
says the liberal. There is no such thing as opposing thoughts or ideas. We are
educated elites, you must do as we say.
@mike richardsthe democrats also won the presidential race and
picked up seats in both houses again this election. So much for the drift right.
Credibility is lost when one tries to offer only selected information to try to
prove a point that does not exists.
When I read articles like this, where liberals are telling conservatives how to
act, it reminds me of the following scripture in 3 Nephi 3:5-8 "5 Therefore
I have written this epistle, sealing it with mine own hand, feeling for your
welfare, because of your firmness in that which ye believe to be right, and your
noble spirit in the field of battle.6 Therefore I write unto you,
desiring that ye would yield up unto this my people, your cities, your lands,
and your possessions, rather than that they should visit you with the sword and
that destruction should come upon you.7 Or in other words, yield
yourselves up unto us, and unite with us and become acquainted with our secret
works, and become our brethren that ye may be like unto us—not our slaves,
but our brethren and partners of all our substance."We have the
conservatives wanting to promote traditional Christian values, and the liberals
telling us to put aside those values and join them. Lets remember what happened
to those cities that put aside their traditional Christian values.
Mike,,I meant to type 2012. figured it didn't need correction.
My mistake."May he be wise enough to stop believing his own
rhetoric and may we be even wiser than he is by not believing his rhetoric."
May you all be smart enough to stop listening to Fox's
Blaming the tea party is fallacious and nonsensical argument. The
tea party has nothing to do with what happened.The problem is the
republican party had no identity.There was no great ideological
distinction. the typically uninformed voter had no idea what
republicans stood for, from the debates one hard tell the the difference. the republican let the democrats and far left define the
republicans,So these weak-minded voters probably bought the leftest
lies and rhetoric the dirty democrats told, also Romney and the
republicans just did not fight very hard, they did not fight like they wanted
it, unfortunately nice guys do finish last.
Conservatives are forced to play the role of the Adult in a Congress full of
reckless teenagers. Someone has to say "no."
if a liberal says its true it must be. So believes the left sided republicans.
The tea party influance got the house in 2010. if you change the party to
liberal policies do you really think the liberals that tell us to change will
join us? Get some backbone republicans. Popular vote was only a couple of
million. the electorial college was as close as 330,000 votes.
Joe,I did not forget 2010. That was an off-year election.
Obama's "charm" and "rock-star" personality was not part of
2010. Citing 2010 would have little to do with the Presidential elections of
2008 and 2010. In 2008, Obama offered change. America was
interested. As his plan for change unfolded, America turned away from Obama -
in droves. Governorships have gone to Republicans. The House was gone to
Republicans. Even the Senate has lost membership to Republicans. Americans may
not have wanted Romney, but 9,000,000 fewer of them voted for Obama.He lost all credibility with the Senate when not one Senator voted for his
budget, yet he had the gall to blame Republicans for budgetary failures.Someone needs to get him a mirror. His habit of blaming everyone else
and everything else is not going to work this term. He told us that he has a
plan. Surely, he's not going to use his failed plans again. He's
already proven that those plans will not work.May he be wise enough
to stop believing his own rhetoric and may we be even wiser than he is by not
believing his rhetoric.
Old Man,I too could have voted Romney if he would have been allowed
to govern as a businessman.Instead, he would have been forced to toe
the party line rather than go where the data and his experience took him.Second point.We have heard repeatedly about Ronald Reagan,
how many jobs he created and his tax policies.Would anyone on the
right be willing to accept the lowest tax rates and brackets that were in effect
in any of Reagan's years?
Mr Richards,I notice that you focused you attention on 2008. And
yet, the GOP did quite well.However, their momentum did not carry
into 2010, where dems kept the presidency, and picked up seats in both the house
and the senate.Did you forget that?
When you tell reliable Republican voters and elected officials "we
don't want your kind around here" you are building a very small tent
for your party. Reagan built a big tent. That is what gave him his victories.
Re: Mike RichardsMy Grandfather used to tell me "There is no such
thing as a moral victory, it what the scoreboard says as you walk off the field
that counts". Scoreboard, Romney 0 Obama 8.
To Mr Richards, your generous spin to the right really has no basis. Democrats
have received over a million more votes than Republicans nationwide and if not
for gerrymandering we would have a triple majority in Washington. The reason for
that is the Repubs have no policies that the electorate can accept. I for one am
happy that moderation is the clear victor in 2012.
Oh, and that same Republican -- whose name I don't recall right now -- also
blasted what he called the "Conservative entertainment" pundits like
Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and others for their role in defeating Romney.Is it too soon to hope that these clowns will disappear now?
Meet The Press this morning was especially enlightening. One of the panelists
was a Republican advisor (to both GWB and Romney) who clearly acknowledged that
the party has moved so far to the right that it is losing all credibility.I could have voted for Romney if Romney had been Romney and had not
tried to become a drone for the Tea Party.Maybe there is some hope
out there.It remains to be seen.
Conservative David Frum is spot on when he says "The Republicans have been
fleeced, exploited, and lied to by the conservative entertainment
complex."The conservative message is hopelessly lost when the
mouthpieces of the movement frame the election around a birth certificate,
college transcripts, and "is he a Muslim". Romney wisely kept trying to
bring the election back to the economy and jobs, but his "supporters"
kept dragging the conversation back into the muck. I don't recall Mr
Romney ever jumping on the Benghazi bandwagon, because he knew there wasn't
a real story there. He knew his answer was economy and jobs.If
conservatives want to win over the middle, they need to change the voices.
Beware the TV commentator promoting "a new book on conservatism!" They
are taking your dollars and costing you an election.
Instead of following Obama''s example of blaming someone else, why not
look at what really happened.In 2008, the previous presidential
election, 29 Democrat governors held office and 21 Republican governors held
office. In 2012, 19 Democrats and 30 Republicans are governors. Democrats lost
44% of their governorships.In 2008, 257 members of the House were
Democrats and 173 were Republicans. In 2012, 194 are Democrats and 233 are
Republicans. Democrats lost 24.5% of the House seats.In 2008, 57
members of the Senate were Democrats and 41 members were Republicans. In 2012,
53 are Democrats and 45 are Republicans. Democrats lost 7% of the Senate
seats.In 2008, 365 electors voted Democrat and 173 voted Republican.
69 million people voted for the Democrat running for president and 60 million
voted for the Republican. In 2012, 332 electors will vote Democrat and 206 will
vote Republican. Democrats will loose 9% of their electors. Democrats lost 11%
of their popular vote and Republicans lost 3% of their popular vote.The nation had a major shift to the right since 2008. Democrats have no
"mandate". The tea party is not the issue, Democrat policies are.
My favorite post-election news is that Herman Cain and Rush Limbaugh would like
to start a third party, a genuine Tea Party, that could provide a home for folks
who think the Republican party is too moderate. I, for one, think this would be
a splendid idea.
Until the republican party, with or without the tea portion, realigns itself to
become more relevant to the nation, it will continue to become less so.
Dick Lugar would have coasted to reelection, but lost his primary to a tea party
candidate. Thanks to that Indiana, a state almost as Republican as Utah, will
have a Democratic senator. Claire McCaskill of Missouri was considered the most
vulnerable senator this cycle and would have almost certainly lost had
Republicans nominated a decent candidate. But they nominated a tea party
candidate instead.In the last cycle Christine O'Donnell, Sharon
Angle, and Tim Buck cost the Republicans 3 easily winnable seats. So instead of
the senate being 55-45 Democrat, it would have been 50-50 had Republicans not
drank the tea.As a Democrat. all I can say is thanks tea party, keep
up the good work.
Well said, Mr. Cunningham, and exactly right.
Many who comment here love to take any opportunity to blame the Tea Party for
every ill in America, from Romney's loss to the state of the economy. I
have never considered myself a member but perhaps a small reality check would be
helpful for us non-Tea party types as well. There are 96 Senators and over 350
House members who don't affiliate with the so-called Tea Party caucus. If
this group wishes to accomplish something without any help from the Tea Party,
they have more than the requisite votes for a super majority. If a four-year
old robs a bank with a water gun, do you scold the four year old, or those who
gave in so easily? Mitt Romney has no one but himself and his campaign staff to
blame for his loss. As the Senate continues without a budget, does it make more
sense to blame the four percent of them that identify with the Tea Party, or the
ninety-six percent who want us believe any one but them is responsible?
Recent comments coming out of the Tea Party groups is that Romney wasn't
conservative enough and they need to further exorcise the Republican Party of
moderate influences. This is truly the wacky and crazy fringe. They want to
remove the Republican leadership including Mitch McConnell and John Boehner for
failing them at this time. As for Mitt Romney, they want him to just
disappear.Unfortunately, demographics is not on the side of the Tea
Party. They see no reason to re-calibrate and adjust to the changes in the
modern world. They believe that if they just fight harder, put up candidates
who fully-embrace movement conservative princibles, and double-down on their
appeal to angry, old, white men, they will get back their country. It
doesn't matter that "their country" never existed, ever.Now, the reactionary Tea Party elements want to exclude 30% of the electorate
because it constitutes that part of America that they fear most. Rather than
try to be inclusive which would destroy the very foundation of their being, they
pull back into their cave and yell "Keep Out!"Ideological
purity is their mantra. Let it remain the path to their extinction.