If you've bothered to read any of my other posts, you'd know that I am a fiscal conservative and in many respects espouse what the Tea Party stands for.

What I don't accept is their stubborn embrace of their ideology, even at the expense of ruining the U.S. economy even worse than it already is. They had a wonderful chance to plant the flag for fiscal conservatism and work from there. I'm afraid that their irresponsible conduct in these negotiations will set fiscal conservatism back awhile.

In this case we have a leading member of that caucus setting forth a "plan" which isn't based on real numbers and is simplistically presented to appeal to those who choose not to read or think about what he's saying. Probably the partisans who later will say, "...but the Tea Party had a plan", even though a third-grader would see through the faulty thinking and arithmetic of that plan.

I criticized the number that Mack used to make his plan sound plausible. It's wrong. If you or Congressman Mack bother to check, actual federal spending in FY 2011 was $3.819 trillion. What we spent has nothing whatever to do with what may or may not have been budgeted.

Sorry BBQ that you don't bother to read either my posts or the Mack plan before striking out with a vitriolic reply. You obviously have no idea what I advocate, nor do you appear to understand the errors I tried to point out in the Mack "plan".

And if you choose to simply vote to elect candidates from a political party rather than taking the time to understand what candidates stand for regardless of their party, or what they have accomplished in the time they might have served in government, you'll deserve to get whatever kind of government that results.

Dumbo