The Tea Party perfectly summed up

This, from Thomas Friedman in today’s New York Times:

The Tea Kettle movement can’t have a positive impact on the country because it has both misdiagnosed America’s main problem and hasn’t even offered a credible solution for the problem it has identified. How can you take a movement seriously that says it wants to cut government spending by billions of dollars but won’t identify the specific defense programs, Social Security, Medicare or other services it’s ready to cut — let alone explain how this will make us more competitive and grow the economy?

And how can you take seriously a movement that sat largely silent while the Bush administration launched two wars and a new entitlement, Medicare prescription drugs — while cutting taxes — but is now, suddenly, mad as hell about the deficit and won’t take it anymore from President Obama? Say what? Where were you folks for eight years?

I agree 100%, and am thrilled someone has the guts to say so. The Tea Party wants to be taken seriously. Its members insist they are not nuts, but genuine patriots interested in taking back “our” country. Fine—give me ideas. Real ideas, not blather about no new taxes and reduced spending. Tell me how we’re going to pay for things and cut taxes? Do you want to get rid of all social programs?

And Friedman’s right—where was this anger when Bush got us into the mess? Why are you so angry now?

12 thoughts on “The Tea Party perfectly summed up”

  1. Obama’s budget is triple Bush’s. 1.5 trillion dollars for two consecutive years. Bush’s largest deficit was $470 billion. This is the main argument of the tea party. Raising taxes will reduce government revenue, not increase it. It’s been shown to be true time after time. The government is not capable of redistributing wealth in an efficient manner. I really can’t believe you’re so sensitive when people say “Obama sucks” considering the hateful things you and others have said and still say about Bush.

  2. “Donald Trump, who knows something about making money, says of course the rich will leave when hit with higher taxes. “I know these people,” he told me. “They’re international people. Whether they live here or live in a place like Switzerland doesn’t really matter to them.””

    Out of curiosity, where were all these people when the taxes were at the proposed level before? The economy seemed to be going just fine in the 90s, and all those rich people lived here and worked.

  3. The reasons are numerous, and depending on which side of the aisle your on can be argued back and forth. The problem is we’re borrowing this money from the Chinese in large part and hanging the bill around our kids necks.

  4. Jason, I know, I know, if you think borrowing trillions from China is a bad idea, you’re a blithering idiot. If you’ve actually looked into the possibility that a trace component in our atmoshere like carbon dioxide could possibly have a bigger impact on the weather than the sun or clouds you’re an idiot dolt. That sandwich did look pretty good though, and that’s a big reason why I always wear a shirt in public. My six year old daughter doesn’t really like it if I don’t wear one inside the house. The tea party is mostly about the deficit, and that scares me, that and clowns.

  5. The sad truth is that no one has it right.

    The national debt, according to the , is at 13 TRILLION dollars. Non-competitive trade markets, a crumbling infrastructure, and runaway entitlements that make defense funding (and other discretionary monies) seem puny in comparison have ensured a bleak future for the country.

    The sad truth is that only a major readjustment of our values will make a dent in the problem. And that includes tax hikes across the board coupled with a dramatic curtailing of our entitlements.

  6. Doug, the reasons are very simple. George W, Bush is a war criminal. Obama, while on that path with Afghanistan, is not yet at that level. There is a huge difference.

Leave a Reply