Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieLion
The difference is these "ignorant" people who are "way over their heads" are saying things the party faithful relate to, and would like to hear your "front-runners" articulate. Who cares if Bachman get a inconsequential history fact wrong. She'd like to dump a cold bucket of whoop-a** on Obama's head, and we'd like to see her do it. We're tired of these "front-runners" going along to get along attitude and their willingness to compromise principles.
|
Umm.. This is a COUNTRY. A representative republic. This is NOT a pay-per-view wrestling event. And isn't "Screw Planned Parenthood" (and lying on the floor of Congress saying abortion is 90% of it's business when it's actually 3%) the conservative version of any number of liberal blather that keeps us focused on minutae and ignores the Elephant in the Living Room?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieLion
Screw compromise; people want someone with a will strong enough to take these progressives on, beat them, and give them a big kick in the backside on their way out the door.
|
Are you forgetting that liberals, progressives and, more importantly CENTRISTS make up more of this country?
Can you name me a case where sloganeering solved a problem?
And I'm not sarcastic here - can you point me to any Tea Party legislator statement that proposed legislation to punish the unelected people who drove our economy ito the ground - the bankers we bailed out and who are now back to their old ways?
*Believe me* I understand the frustration. But time and time again, the polls show that Americans are fundamentally ignorant about where the money comes from and goes to when it travels through Washington. Never mind the fact that you can play with numbers that show whatever you want.
Want to keep taxes low on 'the rich'? Point out that the top 10% of earners pays over a third of the taxes - the top 50% paying 99%.
Want to hike taxes on 'the rich'? Point out that taxes are lower than they have been since the 1950s.
Want to stop development of commuter rail in New Hampshire (to take a local example)? Point out that an annual subsidy of $6M might be needed and make a claim that it should pay for itself.
Want to continue that development? Point out that highways do NO pay their way, they're subsidized just like airports and airlines (Gas tax took in $30B and highways cost $50B - guess where the difference comes from).
It's all 'spin' these days.