Skip to comments.Stupid Question about stupid party (Vanity)
Posted on 12/07/2012 8:40:19 AM PST by nitzy
This is probably a stupid question but why is the stupid party framing the "fiscal cliff" the way they are. I don't get it.
1.)Most of the changes that are to occur are reversing legislation that was implemented in the Bush years.
2.)Everybody in America knows that the Democrats have been calling for years to get rid of the "Bush tax cuts"
3.)We know with almost 100% certainty that the "fiscal cliff" will bring about economic pain to everyone in the country.
WHY IN THE HELL ARE WE FRAMING THIS DEBATE IN TERMS OF A NATURAL LANDSCAPE FEATURE??????????
The pain that regular Americans will feel will not be the result of a naturally occurring, unavoidable hole in the ground. It will be caused by collectivism and the shunning of free markets and liberty.
Why aren't the members of the stupid party calling the "fiscal cliff" the "end of the Bush economy". They should simply say to the Dems..."If you want to end the Bush economy and establish the new Obama economy let's do it and see what happens."
If that is how they had been framing this debate the entire time Obama would be begging them for a deal.
It really IS the stupid party! Why are they using Dem terms like ‘revenue’? Call it what it is: more taxes!
Polls show that the general public wants cuts in spending. Any time a reporter asks why we won’t raise tax rates, every Republican should have a list of the absolutely insane things we are currently spending money on, & start reading it out loud. And then say, “When these are cut, I’ll consider increases in taxes!”
I’d like to grab these guys by the shoulders & give them a good shake. There are obvious ways to get our message out that we already know the common folk agree with. I’m so disgusted I could scream!
Socialist Party A, Socialist Party B.
What do they think of us? Lemmings.
Because to call it what it really is: a hard-deadline which will cause default.
This uses the word 'default' and the media (as well as politicians) are really, really scared of using that word.
Why? I think because it indicates that there is real financial trouble and that the "party is over; the long run is here, it's time to get sober."
Yes they do; but that's why they lost my vote for the general election: I refuse to vote on someone whose only good point is "I/m not the other guy."
(I voted for Gary Johnson -- It's really interesting that he got ~1% of the general vote; this is actually incredible considering all the hurdles the Republican/Democrat parties put to third-party acceptance/access after Perot got ~20% of the popular vote and, IMO, scared the R/D parties that their strangle-hold on power could be broken.)
Hence my tagline.
It’s a one party system of Socialists composed of two spending parties. Each party debates over who is the better manager of Socialism. The system is dysfunctional because there is no spending control in Socialism.
Four things have to happen:
1) Abolish the Federal Reserve aka removing the slush fund
2) Abolish automatic payroll withholding aka removing the vigorish
3) Abolish direct election of US Senators aka removing the consiglieres who serve the dysfunctional system and not the states
4) Abolish the IRS and send a bill to each person aka removing the protection racket
4) Why do they let Obama get away with saying ‘pubs are holding tax cuts for the middle class hostage by not letting him raise rates on the rich, when it’s Obama holding those cuts hostage by insisting on raising rates on the rich - Boehner et al should simply pass a bill that permanently adopts all of the Bush tax cuts, and dare Reid and Obama not to go along - but then, they are the Stupid Party........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.