Featured Boehner's Dangerous Game

There was only one who squandered a double-digit lead, and that was Missouri's Todd Akins. He is an idiot and didn't deserve to win. Unfortunately, he gave Claire McCaskill her seat back when she was vulnerable to being sent packing back to Kansas City.

 

The Tea Party movement represents most Americans’ positions on the issues. Unfortunately, the number of low-information voters is growing and they have been manipulated by a corrupt government-influenced education system and a biased media to fear these patriots. The media viciously continues to marginalize, ridicule and smear the leaders that you mention in your article. A good example is Gov. Sarah Palin, who was targeted for destruction as soon as she stepped on the national stage.

The message is the conservative principles such as fiscal responsibility, limited government, strict interpretation of the constitution, etc… That is the message that needs to get to the American voters. That message is not getting through to Americans today, to a large extent because of the mainstream media today. It has nothing to do with the message itself, but the refusal of the media to give credence to a valid, conservative message that, left unadulterated and unsabotaged, would sway the U.S. electorate.

 

This has happened before, and will happen again. What the Republicans had going for them in 1860 was their opposition to slavery.

In 1854 the Kansas-Nebraska act was so unpopular in the North (because it allowed slavery in some new territories) that the Republican party emerged because it offered a contrast to the existing democrats and whigs who both compromised on slavery. In 1856 they were a fractured mess of former whigs and anti slavery democrats, but by 1860 they were unified and sent Abraham Lincoln to the white house. Of course we know that was not so popular in the democrat strong south.

The original two parties we had in this county, the Federalist Party (John Adams) and the Democratic-Republicans (Thomas Jefferson and James Madison) are both long gone. Since then we have had National Republicans, Whigs, and a host of smaller 3rd parties.

Right now the Libertarians are the only 3rd party with a state organization in all 50 states, but many others have come and gone over the years. There is no national Tea Party as a political organization. They have never nominated or run anyone for any office. Perhaps they will emerge as a new party, perhaps the libertarian party will. I believe the political atmosphere in the United States is ripe for a conservative 3rd party. If they could unite those opposed to foreign wars, government healthcare, immigration amnesty, and the current welfare state I believe they could quickly emerge as a major political force that would render the current Republican party obsolete.

Both of our current major parties are pushing agendas in these areas contrary to the majority of public opinion. Approval for congress is less than 40%. Approval for President Obama is 49% (Rasmussen, Sep 24th). With half our population or more opposed to what we have a new party could grow quickly. All they have to do is offer a difference from what we have now.

 

You just proved my point. Those are not the Tea Party messages. But the media has successfully attached those "issues" to the Tea Party and, when the general populace thinks "Tea Party" those kinds of things are what they think of. The media has deliberately and effectively poisoned the public's mind regarding the movement.

Again, that's the perception you have because of the way the media reported on her. None of that is truly Sarah Palin.

One, she did not use campaign funds for a shopping spree. The money was raised by the Republican Party for expressly the purpose it was used for. The laughably named "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics" (a front for a DNC activist committee) filed a complaint with the FEC protesting this use of funds, and the FEC promptly threw it out, stating that the Democrats had legally used funds in the same fashion. But again, the media didn't bother reporting that, nor did they bother citing the elections law that allowed the spending in the first place. They deliberately took a legal act and made it appear illegal for the sole purpose of smearing a good candidate.

What politician hasn't flubbed more than one interview? Remember Ford saying in the '76 debates that that Poland was independent and autonomous without influence by the Soviet Union? Palin's "flubs" were negligible, but were grossly overplayed by biased, attack-dog media that can't stand strong conservative women.

The resignation from the Alaska governor's job was mostly about money, to be sure, but not her own earning potential, as most media reported. It was due to the "insane" (her words) spending the state was having to undertake defending her against ethics allegations that later proved to be groundless, again a liberally biased effort to undermine her as a national political figure.

Surely you jest regarding her book and Fox News Channel deals? How can you fault her for those contracts when Bill Clinton wrote books and charged $1 million a speaking engagement, all to pay off his and Hillary's legal fees over White Water? Every politician does that, and at least she didn't write the book and sign the contract to pay off debt accumulated proving herself innocent of crimes for which she was actually guilty.

Now, you tell me, who destroyed her? She didn't do it to herself, and anyone who bothers to find out the truth behind the smear campaign knows that.

 

Why is it okay for Democrats to be the only ones who are angry?

Am I angry? Yes. I am angry that the majority elected (and the Democrats and mass media continue to support) a man who has NO IDEA what the word "leadership" means. I am angry that we as an electorate give Congress such low ratings, yet we continue to re-elect the same people to Congress. I am angry that my children, grand-children, and future great-grandchildren will live in an America that no longer believes in the very basic rights and principles that it was founded upon. I am angry that the "American Dream" has become a nightmare because we must work harder for less in order to support those who will not work at all.

Yes, I am angry. But I will do my best to use my anger to motivate myself and others to do what we can to keep our beloved country from falling off of a cliff. It's only by the grace of God that we have not already.

I do realize that we have a "better country", but we are also still stewards of the country we are in now.

 

Birthers and truthers get tied to it to discredit it but it is not part of the platform. As far as abolishing the fed most Americans do not have any understanding of that issue and when mentioned their eyes just glaze over. None of this actually effects the Tea Party influence.

 

You know people who believe the birthers, truthers, gold bugs, etc., besides supporting the Tea Party movement. I am a Tea Party supporter, and I don't believe any of the nonsense. You have judged a whole movement on the basis of the statements and beliefs of a few extremists and dreamers.

 

Having a problem with the Federal Reserve and they way it is run is not equivalent to the birther issue

 

OK? So why make a big deal out of it.

 

Didn't see that as one of your criteria for calling us "fanatics" or whatever word you might use ...

And yes, we need to abolish the Fed. Monetary policy will set itself based on supply and demand. The Fed has become nothing more than a White House lapdog that controls money supply and bank interest rates in order to make the economy look better than it actually is.

 

But that's not what you said in your initial reply to me, is it?

 

No doubt, just as there are some in the Democratic party. Remember the "vast right-wing conspiracy"?:laugh: