http://blogs.reuters.com/james-petho...ight-on-taxes/

Well said. Power and Socialism go together like Tea and Crumpets. This president will be a ONE term flash in the pan, just like the Peanut Farmer.

Originally Posted by GatbTester

Well said. Power and Socialism go together like Tea and Crumpets. This president will be a ONE term flash in the pan, just like the Peanut Farmer.

The peanut farmer broke a long-standing tradition of ex-presidents of not criticizing the President.

How much you wanna bet that this guy will not keep his big mouth shut when we get rid of him in November 2012?

Donna: Don't count on Obama losing in 2012. Unless the Republicans can come up with someone better than McCain or Palin, they're going to lose. Not that Obama is (or will be perceived as) that good but because there just aren't any charismatic Republicans out there. Palin? Palin is to the Democrats what Hillary was to the Republicans - they can't wait to rip her to shreds on the issues. Palin needs a lot more experience - and quitting her job as governor didn't help that.

Who do you see as a viable challenger in 2012?

Originally Posted by djplong

Donna: Don't count on Obama losing in 2012. Unless the Republicans can come up with someone better than McCain or Palin, they're going to lose. Not that Obama is (or will be perceived as) that good but because there just aren't any charismatic Republicans out there. Palin? Palin is to the Democrats what Hillary was to the Republicans - they can't wait to rip her to shreds on the issues. Palin needs a lot more experience - and quitting her job as governor didn't help that.

Who do you see as a viable challenger in 2012?

I think your wrong one this one. I see many, many people who are shell-shocked. Many of these battle scarred people voted for Obama blindly.
I think that there is too much ammunition against the guy and the people will do more investigating this time around. I also think that many who did not vote will show up and vote against this charlatan. Just like the last election people showed up to vote against Bush will show up and vote against Barry.

Donna, you're proving my point. You said they "will show up and vote against Barry".

Who could they possibly vote for? I asked who could be a viable 2012 challenger.

I'll grant you there's a lot of anger out there - there wouldn't be even a SHADOW of a Tea Party movement if there wasn't. But who can step into that void where the opposition is supposed to be. There's a lot of "we're against <fillintheblank>" but nothing in FAVOR of anything.

This is where the '94 GOP had a masterstroke. The Contract With America gave 10 simple principles that someone could sign their name to. There was a lot of publicity over it - the Democrats initially ridiculed it and that ridicule made voters even angrier.

We need another one of those. There isn't another Ronald Reagan out there, not that I can see anyway. But a declaration of principles might be a good second choice.

Originally Posted by djplong

Donna, you're proving my point. You said they "will show up and vote against Barry".

Who could they possibly vote for? I asked who could be a viable 2012 challenger.

I'll grant you there's a lot of anger out there - there wouldn't be even a SHADOW of a Tea Party movement if there wasn't. But who can step into that void where the opposition is supposed to be. There's a lot of "we're against <fillintheblank>" but nothing in FAVOR of anything.

This is where the '94 GOP had a masterstroke. The Contract With America gave 10 simple principles that someone could sign their name to. There was a lot of publicity over it - the Democrats initially ridiculed it and that ridicule made voters even angrier.

We need another one of those. There isn't another Ronald Reagan out there, not that I can see anyway. But a declaration of principles might be a good second choice.

I still disagree with you. What did Obama run on? Hope and change? No taxes for people making under $250,000? Ending the Iraq war? Closing Gitmo?
I don't think it will take a Ronald Reagan to beat Obama. Obama won because he didn't have a track record. Well, he has that record now and they wil;l throw every promise he made against him. Voters did not want McGovern or Dukakus, they do not want a socialist in the white House. Period.

djplong said, "I asked who could be a viable 2012 challenger?"


That might be a good idea for a new thread dpjlong.


But anyway, I'll tell you who I think will run for the GOP nomination. Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Ron Paul and maybe, last but not least Rick Peery.

I took your advice and started a new thread.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgI8BRtt5AQ&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Thousands rally in Illinois to raise are taxes. These people are the opposite of the Tea Partiers.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7136469.story

Originally Posted by Donna2

Thousands rally in Illinois to raise are taxes. These people are the opposite of the Tea Partiers.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7136469.story

If the financial conditions were the same in some other state as they are in Illinois currently, I think the tea-partiers would be few and far between.

It's one thing to rant and rave about taxes and the government being too involved in your life. But when it's the school your kids attend that will be closed, or it's your kids' after school sports or activities program that's being cancelled, or when you're told that your kid will have to attend school in a class of 45 instead of 25, or when they get rid of the library and PE program in your kids' school--all of a sudden the tea-partiers establish a different set of priorities.

I'm sure not proposing tax increases. They may be necessary. But unless they're accompanied with some really harsh cost cuts, they won't accoplish anything. Personally, I'd like not to see the tax-cost cut argument be waged on the backs of our school kids. I certainly think there are other government cost cuts that could be made to begin the process of fiscal responsibility.

The problem is that even though someone's ox must be gored, no one wants it to be their own. And the school kids are the most defenseless.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

The problem is that even though someone's ox must be gored, no one wants it to be their own. And the school kids are the most defenseless.

I think that is a bunch of baloney. Teachers have been hiding behind "the children" for years. They are shameless. The costs per student in USA is highest on earth with the least results.
My home town just turned down a referendum on tax increases for schools by a whooping 3 to 1 margin. Plenty of waste, they need to streamline like everybody else.

Originally Posted by Donna2

I think that is a bunch of baloney. Teachers have been hiding behind "the children" for years. They are shameless. The costs per student in USA is highest on earth with the least results.
My home town just turned down a referendum on tax increases for schools by a whooping 3 to 1 margin. Plenty of waste, they need to streamline like everybody else.

I don't differ with you on that one. My point was that when tea-partier's children are affected by the question of raising taxes or perceiving that their children's education is being diluted, they get quiet in a hurry.

The problem is neither with the teachers or the parents--other than the fact that they are all voters. The teachers will "get all they can get" (more pay for less work) just as any other employee, public or private, will try to do. The parents just "want the best" for their kids, with little thought of the cost or attention to the details. The problem is with the elected officials who refuse to consider the idea of reduced spending, increased efficiency or better ways to accomplish the same high quality education and let the situation become as heated as it apparently is in Illinois, my birthplace and home state for over forty years. Then, their kneejerk "solution" is to cut the quality of education, knowing that the response will be what is occurring now in Illinois. Spineless.

I can tell you one thing for sure, there are no demonstrations regarding the need for increased taxes OR tea party meetings in my hometown on Chicago's North Shore. I don't think the voters have done anything other than vote favorably for every school board referendum for the last 40-50 years. School taxes comprised about 92% of our very high tax bill when we lived there. The cost per student was up there with private schools. But the test scores and college acceptances to really good schools is right up there with the best private schools, as well.

I have attended many school board meetings over the years and the parents expectations--no demands--for the highest quality education for their kids is palpable. In my hometown, at least, I think the parents are getting their moneysworth.

I think it's misplaced tax anger.

Oh our tax bills ahve gone up - no question there. But it's not from Washington. Studies show that federal taxation rates are down. What's *up* are the tax policies being set in Boston, Concord, Albany, Trenton, Springfield, Tallahasse, Sacramento, Austin, and just about every other state capital with the exception of Juneau and Indianapolis. I was just readin an article today on how bad it is in New Jersey and how the unions are finally spitting at each other instead of being in lock-step solidarity.

Ah, found another copy of the article - look towards the bottom here:

http://www.delawareonline.com/articl...NION16/4220310