Category Archives: Tea Party

80 Reasons Why It’s Time To Take These Republican/Tea Party ‘Sons Of Bitches’ Down

Here’s another gem that I found on AddictingInfo.com today that I thought I would pass along titled “80 Reasons Why It’s Time To Take These Republican/Tea Party ‘Sons Of Bitches’ Down“. I think it touches upon all the points as to why the Tea Party and its members are so wrong, on so many issues , I hope you agree and feel free to comment:

At a Labor Day event yesterday, Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa gave a fiery speech about the tea party, telling the American people that “It’s time to take these sons of bitches out.” And each and every one of us should listen. For the last thirty years, the American people have been under assault from the right-wing and their corporate overlords. Everything that makes America strong is being weakened and the American people are suffering. So if you need a reason why we should end the Republican/Tea Party, here are 80 of them.

1. They want to take away your Social Security.
2. They want to end Medicare.
3. They want to wipe out labor unions.
4. They want to send every last American job overseas.
5. They want to pollute the air we breathe.
6. They want pollute the water we drink.
7. They want to persecute non-Christians.
8. They want declare a state religion.
9. They took America hostage during the debt ceiling debate.
10. They want to take America hostage in every debate from now on.
11. The want to make it legal for businesses to discriminate.
12. They want to segregate our schools.
13. They want to allow oil companies to rape America’s environmental treasures for any trace amount of oil.
14. They refuse to give aid to the American people who go through natural disasters.
15. They want to end funding for natural disaster warning systems.
16. They want to take away the right to vote.
17. They want to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape.
18. They want to abolish the corporate income tax.
19. They want to raise YOUR taxes but not taxes on the wealthy.
20. They want to end workplace safety regulations.
21. They ARE racists.
22. They disrespect the President at every opportunity.
23. They don’t support health care for every American citizen.
24. They want to allow health insurance companies to drop people.
25. They want to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency.
26. They want to illegally spy on American citizens.
27. They want more wars.
28. They want to indoctrinate our kids.
29. They want to make laws requiring every person to own a gun whether you like guns or not.
30. They want kill Planned Parenthood and end critical health care services for women.
31. They want to ban contraceptives and condoms.
32. They want to kill homosexuals.
33. They want to end unemployment benefits.
34. They want our infrastructure to crumble.
35. They want to end the independent judiciary branch, and turn it into a strictly conservative branch.
36. They want to keep women from earning equal pay for equal work.
37. They want President Obama to fail at all costs.
38. They want to continue the same failed economic policies that put us into a recession.
39. They rewrite and distort history.
40. They want to end public education for all.
41. They want to repeal the Voting Rights Act.
42. They care more about Wall Street than they do about Main Street.
43. They have voted to end 1.9 million jobs and have created zero.
44. They want to make it legal to kill doctors who provide abortions.
45. They want to reinstate ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
46. They encourage gun violence.
47. They refuse to vote for cleaner, more efficient energy sources.
48. They want to deport hispanics, whether they were born here or not.
49. They support Israel’s President over our own.
50. They want to abolish minimum wage laws.
51. They think corporations are people.
52. They want to repeal portions of the Constitution.
53. They want to pull America out of the United Nations.
54. They support torture.
55. They want to teach creationism in schools.
56. They reject science.
57. They want to make cohabitation before marriage a crime.
58. They want to allow health insurance companies to not cover sick children.
59. They want to end food stamps.
60. They make government ineffective.
61. They want to take away your pensions.
62. They want to privatize prisons to put more people in jail.
63. They want to end your right to collectively bargain with your employer.
64. They want to ban the unemployed from being considered for employment.
65. They want end funding for legal services for the poor.
66. They want to end Miranda Rights.
67. They think all liberals are un-American.
68. They refuse to give any credit to President Obama for ordering the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
69. They refuse to acknowledge that 9/11 occurred during the Bush Administration.
70. They declared fiscal martial law in a Michigan town and fired the legally elected local government.
71. They called President Obama a liar during his State Of The Union Address.
72. They refuse to cut the Defense budget, which if cut in half would still be the largest defense budget in the world.
73. They apologize to foreign oil companies when they take heat for oil spills.
74. They take orders from the Koch brothers.
75. They sign pledges drawn up by conservative activists, and ignore their pledge to serve the constituents who voted for them.
76. They use conservative media to push the right wing agenda even if it means distorting the news or flat out lying.
77. They want to cut nutrition programs for children.
78. They want to cut housing and energy assistance programs that help poor people.
79. They want to slash job training programs that help the unemployed.
80. They think teachers are thugs.

Leave a comment

Filed under AddictingInfo.com, energy, Health Care, Jimmy Hoffa, Labor Day, labor unions, minimum wage, Social Security, sons of bitches, Tea Party, Teamsters, United Nations, US Constitution, voting rights act

Cut And Grow Fail: CBO Schools Tea Party Freshman In Basic Economics

This little ditty was posted Friday on Talking Points Memo. It should be a wake-up call to all those TEA partiers and other right-wingers out there that think that all will be fine in the world if we only cut spending and do nothing to increase revenue.

Unfortunately though, regardless of economic schooling provided by the CBO, there will those that continue to burry their heads in the sand and refuse to believe anything a socialist government agency has to say:

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), a Tea Party-backed freshman who voted against the final debt limit bill, recently asked to hear from the Congressional Budget Office about the impact of government spending on economic growth. It’s an article of faith on the right that vastly shrinking government will unleash the forces of private enterprise, and faced with CBO’s opposing view, Huelskamp wanted to know the answer to two questions:

1). What current federal departments, agencies, programs, or portions thereof do not contribute to economic growth?

2). In the programs that CBO believes do contribute to economic growth, what level of spending cuts would amount to a level you believe would be significant enough to “probably slow the economic recovery”?

But if the newly elected member of the Budget Committee was hoping the non-partisan CBO would buy into his premise, he’ll be sorely disappointed.

In a response letter Thursday, CBO-chief Doug Elmendorf gives Huelskamp a layman’s lesson in Keynesian economics: Under current economic circumstances, new federal spending would help economic growth, and current and future cuts could stymie it, particularly if they hit key government investment.

“When demand for goods and services falls short of the economy’s ability to produce them, as is the case currently, increasing government spending can increase aggregate demand and thereby narrow the gap between the economy’s actual and potential levels of output,” Elmendorf writes.

The precise details matter. The more robust the economy, the lower the impact. But, according to Elmendorf, “when the Federal Reserve’s ability to lower short-run interest rates is constrained because those rates are already near zero, as they are currently, the short-run effects of changes in government spending on output tend to be larger than usual.”

To illustrate the point, Elmendorf notes that deficit reduction measures that cut spending by $100 billion next fiscal year, and hundreds of billions more over the coming decade “would decrease real (inflation-adjusted) gross national product (GNP) in 2012, 2013, and 2014 by amounts ranging from roughly 0.1 percent to 0.6 percent depending on the year and the assumptions used.” In other words, the GOP’s current governing theory is damaging the economy and, by implication, costing jobs. And for those Republicans who want to cut more, ” a reduction in primary deficits that followed the same gradual time path but was twice as large would produce macroeconomic effects that were roughly twice as large.”

Talking Points Memo on Facebook

There are important growth-related reasons to reduce deficits if and when the economy improves — it reduces the extent to which government spending “crowds out” private investment, by undertaking functions the private sector can do more efficiently. But we’re not there yet and, according to CBO, won’t be until the end of the decade. Spending cuts like the ones describe above, “[a]t the turn of the decade, from 2019 through 2021…would increase [GNP] by roughly 0.5 percent to 1.4 percent.”

But again the specifics matter, and if the GOP wants to slash across the board, they’ll do damage anyhow.

“Some types of spending, such as funding for improvements to roads and highways, may add to the economy’s potential output in much the same way that private capital investment does,” Elmendorf writes. “Other policies, such as funding for grants to increase access to college education may raise long-term productivity by enhancing people’s skills. The positive longer-term impact of deficit reduction on GNP would be smaller if the policies that reduced deficits included cuts in productive government investments.”

Huelskamp’s original letter is here. Read Elmendorf’s response here.

The letters stem from the below exchange between Huelskamp and Elmendorf at a recent Budget committee hearing. Elmendorf and Huelskamp are arguing two different points. Huelskamp would like to see big cuts to federal safety net programs and other spending. Elmendorf argues that while the macroeconomic consequences of slashing some of those programs might be minimal in the long run, the near-term impact would be significant, given the current downturn.

Leave a comment

Filed under Congressional Budget Office, debt deal, economy, government spending, job growth, Talking Points Memo, tax cuts, tax revenues, Tea Party

America Thanks The Tea Party? [video]

Actor, voice over artist and Tea Party gadfly, D.C. Douglas, released another video on Friday nght thanking the Tea Party for its contributions to the debt ceiling debate. Immediately upon it’s release, his video took on even greater meaning.

Though this video’s release occured at roughly the same time that Standard & Poor’s credit downgrade for the US became official – it was mere coincidence. Twitterverse, however, picked up on the video’s sentiment and began forwarding it to friends as way of expressing their less-than-warm-n-fuzzy feelings reagrding the Tea Party’s hand in the credit downgrade.

Apparently this was not without some merit. In S & P’s statement, they write “[T]he downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned…”

In essence, Congressman John Boehner chose to move into the far right Tea Party’s territory rather than into the Republican mainstream. So, in effect, it seems even more fitting that America should Thank the Tea Party!

Leave a comment

Filed under credit rating agencies, D.C. Douglas, debt ceiling, downgrade of debt, economy, Republicans, Standard and Poors, Tea Party

Rush Holt; The Debt Ceiling Downer

For the moment we have put the debt crisis behind us. That is small comfort as the economy at large, the job situation, the housing market, and the financial markets continue to suffer. The Tea Party in Congress and its enablers should never have been allowed to threaten America’s good name in order to advance their view of a diminished government and trickle-down economics. They should never have been allowed to force a closed-door, hurried revision of our entire economy. And they certainly should never have been able to get away with a deal that increases inequities in our society and our economy. You, like most Americans, may have watched in dismay—or even in disgust—as Washington fumbled the self-imposed crisis.

Putting aside the distasteful process and the worrisome prospect that government by hostage-taking will continue, this week I had to face the immediate questions: Was the resulting deal going to help the economy? Would it create jobs? Would it reduce the crippling inequities in our economy and society? Would it bring down the deficit, as was the ostensible goal? On all counts my answer was “No,” and I voted against the resolution on the House floor.

I am pleased that we as a country are paying our debts, but I lament the damage done to the institutions of government and the good name of the United States as the most reliable, most creditworthy entity in the entire financial world. I lament especially the damage done to our view of ourselves. The negotiations were based on Tea Party premises: that our deficit is the principal concern facing us, that America is a pitiful debtor nation, that we must lower our sights, that we must end the quest to free our people from want and inequalities, that we cannot afford any longer to be the nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal. Are we no longer the America of the 1940’s that paid for millions of GI’s to go to college and buy homes, while rebuilding ourselves and Europe, when we were faced with a national debt much greater than today?

The deal this week may have the beneficial effect of showing that in the long run the United States intends to bring expenditures more in line with revenues. In the short term, though, the deal is a downer. It not only avoids dealing with today’s principal needs—job creation and economic growth—it actually will cost jobs and preclude any economic stimulation. At a time when clearly the economy is shaky, it is a mistake to declare, as the deal effectively does, that the federal government will have no direct hand in getting the economy moving. To meet next year’s target of spending reductions will require cuts equivalent to the budgets of all the following government operations combined: the EPA, the National Park Service, the Small Business Administration, FEMA emergency and firefighter grants, and the Women-Infants-and-Children food grants. In subsequent years, the cuts would be even ten times larger. Why should we rally to the cry, “No, We Can’t?” Have we forgotten that barely a decade ago we paid down the deficit with strong economic growth, job creation, and budgetary discipline without resorting to gimmicks, triggers, or Balanced Budget Amendments?

I would have liked to vote on a plan that protected the major functions granted to Congress under the Constitution rather than turning them over to an undemocratic, isolated committee of twelve. I would have liked to vote on a plan that would have accelerated withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, saving lives and dollars, and that would have produced savings in our healthcare costs and dealt with the looming loss of 30 percent of doctors’ reimbursement under Medicare. Instead, the plan that was presented was negotiated on the turf of the Tea Party, which seems to think that it is anti-capitalist to ask those individuals and companies doing well in this economy to bear some of the load, even though the one or two percent of people with the highest income have seen their income grow by about 25 percent while everyone else has seen an effective decline and America’s largest corporations have reaped immense profits by using loopholes and offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes.

Nevertheless, I am making it my job to beat back the pessimistic view in Washington that gave rise to this deal. We must not let this deal be the chart of our country’s future course. It is based on false premises that fail to recognize the inherent fairness that is characteristic of our people, the ingenuity and entrepreneurial energy that have sparked our economy for generations, and the unshakable American meliorism that says we can and must make life better for each succeeding generation. I think that now, more than ever, we must have a realistic view of our situation so that we can strongly defend equality and build a community that reinforces the opportunities for each individual.

Sincerely,

RUSH HOLT
Member of Congress

Leave a comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Congress, Congressman Rush Holt, debt ceiling, economy, EPA, Iraq, Medicare, National Park Service, Tea Party

Senator Menendez Votes Against Debt Deal

August 2, 2011

WASHINGTON – US Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) today voted against the debt deal because it lowers the deficit on the backs of working class Americans, demands no sacrifices from those who can best afford it, and could jeopardize our economy’s fragile recovery.

“I cannot in good conscience support a plan where soldiers, seniors, students, and working families must endure trillions in cuts, but oil companies, billionaires, and corporate jet owners are not asked to pay their fair share” said Senator Menendez. “I supported the Reid plan and previous efforts to reduce the deficit because I believe it’s important to stem our nation’s rising debt, but I believe that we must do so in a balanced way that calls for shared sacrifice, just as the American people have demanded. Such an unbalanced approach is not only unfair, but it could also jeopardize our already fragile economy.”

Senator Menendez took to the Senate floor yesterday to explain his opposition to the plan.

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget Control Act, debt ceiling, debt limit, George Bush, Ronald Reagan, shared sacrifice, spending cuts, Tea Party, US. Sen. Robert Menendez

Lautenberg Stands Up for Everyday Families, Opposes Unfair Budget Deal

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) issued the following statement after voting against a deficit reduction deal that will cut trillions in funding for critical domestic programs:

“This legislation was a shakedown, not a compromise. Tea Party Republicans held our country hostage until their ideological demands were met, with little regard for what it will mean for the average American family. Our debt ceiling had to be raised – as was done 18 times under President Reagan and seven times under President George W. Bush – but it shouldn’t be done in a way that diminishes access to education and health care, a cleaner environment, or homeland security. Our country’s financial future must include a balanced approach of shared sacrifice; taking trillions from programs that help our children, seniors, and middle class, while asking for nothing more from the wealthy or corporations raking in record profits, is not the picture of a fair and democratic society. We must continue to work to reduce our deficits, but countries, like buildings, cannot be built from the top down without injuring the hope and morale of their people and destabilizing the strength of their foundations.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget Control Act, debt ceiling, President George W. Bush, Seniors, shared sacrifice, Social Security, spending cuts, Tea Party, US. Sen. Frank Lautenberg

Holt Statement Opposing Budget Control Act

Monday, 01 August 2011

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today voted against S. 365, the Budget Control Act of 2011. He released the following statement after his vote:

“The default debate is, at its heart, a debate between two visions for America. One side envisions rebuilding our country, investing in jobs and education and infrastructure, and rising from the Great Recession as a stronger and more resilient nation. The other side accepts a pessimistic vision of a weakened America with a shrunken government – a nation hampered by deep cuts to the safety net and hobbled by a refusal to invest in our future.

“I have no doubt that, in a fair debate, a hopeful vision for America would win out. But the default debate has not been held on fair terms. The Tea Party and their enablers have held America hostage. They have insisted that, unless Congress enacted their radical, ideological agenda, they would force an unprecedented default on America’s obligations and thus trigger an economic collapse.

“From the beginning of this debate, I rejected the notion that America’s creditworthiness should be used as a bargaining chip. Yet I was willing to support a balanced, fair deal if that was what was required to prevent a default. Unfortunately, today’s deal is not balanced. It is not fair. Most of all, it is not right.

“The House has voted for vast cuts in government services that ordinary Americans depend on: student loans, unemployment insurance, food safety inspections, highway safety programs, and more. These cuts will force layoffs among teachers, public safety officers, construction workers, and more. These laid-off workers will, in turn, be forced to pare back their spending at their local grocery stores, drug stores, and small businesses, forcing still more layoffs – a vicious circle that threatens to destabilize our fragile economy. We saw in last week’s economic reports that job growth has been choked back by cuts in state and local governments. This deal does not help the situation. It hurts the economy.

“The deal lays the groundwork for another $1.5 trillion in cuts to come, to be negotiated behind closed doors by an unelected super-committee. Given that the first round of cuts will have decimated discretionary programs, these later cuts will very likely focus on Social Security and Medicare. The citizens who will be hurt most are those who have the least voice in our democracy. After all, when a handful of politicians gather in the proverbial smoke-filled room, the interests of ordinary Americans are nearly always left out.

“Yet although most Americans will sacrifice greatly, the most privileged among us will be immune. Favored corporate interests, millionaires, and billionaires will continue to receive special tax breaks as far as the eye can see. That is not the sort of fair, balanced deal that Americans asked for and expected.

“As poor as this deal is on its merits, I am even more troubled by the precedent it sets. The Tea Party and their enablers have, by taking the American economy hostage, transformed a routine budgetary authorization into the most dramatic reshaping of government in decades. Today’s deal establishes that government-by-hostage-negotiation is a legitimate, effective way to achieve one’s political ends. I am frightened by what this means for the future of our democracy.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget Control Act, Congressman Rush Holt, debt ceiling, Social Security, spending cuts, Tea Party