The Guvmint Shutdown

[Freed Roger]

Why do you believe they want the status quo, TFG? That's certainly not their battle cry.

Because there's too much money wrapped up in the status quo...you think all that money out there is going to allow the Tea Party to take it down? Doubtful. This is just politics.

A basic agreement gets done in the next 2 weeks which will reopen the govt...and they'll kick the can down the road a few months to work out a budget. Expect this to happen again around Christmas. Wheeee!

Wheeeeee!

[/youtube]

[sighyoung]

Tea Party Republican Defends Being on Medicaid While Opposing Medicaid

You can't make this [expletive] up:

Let me set the record straight. Yes, I participate in government programs of which I adamantly oppose. Many of them, actually. Am I a hypocrite for participating in programs that I oppose? If it was that simple, and if participation demonstrated support, then of course. But, my reason for participation in government programs often is not directly related to that issue in and of itself, and it certainly does not demonstrate support. For instance, I participate in government programs in order to stay out of the courts, or jail, so that I can take care of my family; other things I do to avoid fines or for other financial reasons; and some are simply because it is the only practical choice. With each situation, I have to evaluate the consequences of participating or not participating.

He has 10 kids, all on Medicaid.

This is why I think this is really about a competition for resources. I think David Frum argued correctly about this. We're now in a time of scarcity, and people are fighting fiercely for their share of the public pie. The guy's rhetoric is rooted in a key idea of republicanism: in a society devoted to the common good, one must be economically independent to participate freely and act in good conscience in public affairs. But all this guy is really saying is "All for me, none for thee." Everyone else is a slave to the Leviathan, but he's just good folks acting freely based on a clean conscience. It's also why you see signs saying the likes of "Obama--keep government out of health care, and hands off my Medicare!"

[heyzeus]

Tea Party Republican Defends Being on Medicaid While Opposing Medicaid

You can't make this [expletive] up:

Let me set the record straight. Yes, I participate in government programs of which I adamantly oppose. Many of them, actually. Am I a hypocrite for participating in programs that I oppose? If it was that simple, and if participation demonstrated support, then of course. But, my reason for participation in government programs often is not directly related to that issue in and of itself, and it certainly does not demonstrate support. For instance, I participate in government programs in order to stay out of the courts, or jail, so that I can take care of my family; other things I do to avoid fines or for other financial reasons; and some are simply because it is the only practical choice. With each situation, I have to evaluate the consequences of participating or not participating.

He has 10 kids, all on Medicaid.

This is why I think this is really about a competition for resources. I think David Frum argued correctly about this. We're now in a time of scarcity, and people are fighting fiercely for their share of the public pie. The guy's rhetoric is rooted in a key idea of republicanism: in a society devoted to the common good, one must be economically independent to participate freely and act in good conscience in public affairs. But all this guy is really saying is "All for me, none for thee." Everyone else is a slave to the Leviathan, but he's just good folks acting freely based on a clean conscience. It's also why you see signs saying the likes of "Obama--keep government out of health care, and hands off my Medicare!"

I suppose the counter to this hypocrite is wealthy democrats who advocate raising taxes on the wealthy, but who personally hire accountants and lawyers to structure their finances in a way that minimizes their tax burden. I can see what both the Idaho guy and Warren Buffet are saying: "This policy/program is wrong, and I want to change it, but in the meantime I'm just one person who has to act in his own family's self interest until we can make systemic changes."

It's still fairly hypocritical, but I get it. I don't voluntarily pay extra taxes either.

[pioneer98]

Tea Party Republican Defends Being on Medicaid While Opposing Medicaid

You can't make this [expletive] up:

Let me set the record straight. Yes, I participate in government programs of which I adamantly oppose. Many of them, actually. Am I a hypocrite for participating in programs that I oppose? If it was that simple, and if participation demonstrated support, then of course. But, my reason for participation in government programs often is not directly related to that issue in and of itself, and it certainly does not demonstrate support. For instance, I participate in government programs in order to stay out of the courts, or jail, so that I can take care of my family; other things I do to avoid fines or for other financial reasons; and some are simply because it is the only practical choice. With each situation, I have to evaluate the consequences of participating or not participating.

He has 10 kids, all on Medicaid.

This is why I think this is really about a competition for resources. I think David Frum argued correctly about this. We're now in a time of scarcity, and people are fighting fiercely for their share of the public pie. The guy's rhetoric is rooted in a key idea of republicanism: in a society devoted to the common good, one must be economically independent to participate freely and act in good conscience in public affairs. But all this guy is really saying is "All for me, none for thee." Everyone else is a slave to the Leviathan, but he's just good folks acting freely based on a clean conscience. It's also why you see signs saying the likes of "Obama--keep government out of health care, and hands off my Medicare!"

I suppose the counter to this hypocrite is wealthy democrats who advocate raising taxes on the wealthy, but who personally hire accountants and lawyers to structure their finances in a way that minimizes their tax burden. I can see what both the Idaho guy and Warren Buffet are saying: "This policy/program is wrong, and I want to change it, but in the meantime I'm just one person who has to act in his own family's self interest until we can make systemic changes."

It's still fairly hypocritical, but I get it. I don't voluntarily pay extra taxes either.

Well, I'd feel different if this Tea Party guy actually had an alternate solution. For example, what is his plan to get health insurance for his children if/when Medicaid gets cut? And is his plan something the rest of the people on Medicaid can also replicate? They never offer solutions though because they think government itself is the problem, and cutting it is the solution.

The comparison to Warren Buffet is a stretch because Warren Buffet is not running for office. Maybe the Kennedys would be a better comparison for what you are saying. But again, their side is different. By raising taxes to pay for program "X", the Democrats at least are offering some kind of solution to a problem. We can debate whether it is the right solution, and in fact we should be debating that!!! But we don't debate that any more - the debate now has shifted to whether government should do ANYTHING at all.

[docellis]

Size

[SHOW]

[docellis]

Maybe there should be an official labor party, and we have 3 official parties GOP, Dem and Labor.

[TimeForGuinness]

Business groups stand by Boehner, plot against tea party

Things gonna get interestin'

[pioneer98]

This is why I think this is really about a competition for resources. I think David Frum argued correctly about this. We're now in a time of scarcity, and people are fighting fiercely for their share of the public pie. The guy's rhetoric is rooted in a key idea of republicanism: in a society devoted to the common good, one must be economically independent to participate freely and act in good conscience in public affairs. But all this guy is really saying is "All for me, none for thee." Everyone else is a slave to the Leviathan, but he's just good folks acting freely based on a clean conscience. It's also why you see signs saying the likes of "Obama--keep government out of health care, and hands off my Medicare!"

I get your point, but my counterpoint to this is that there is no such thing as someone who is totally independent of government. We are all inside the system created by the government one way or another, unless you are doing illegal stuff.

I'd argue that those of us not collecting Medicaid, WIC, welfare, still benefit from these programs. I don't know, but I like my neighbors to be fed and to be healthy. Hungry people get desperate and may resort to crime to feed themselves. I don't want to live next to desperate people like that. For example, we don't deny people fire protection because they didn't pay enough taxes. We give it to them because if my neighbor's house is burning it is a threat to mine, too.

What it comes down to is the Tea Party people really, really, really dislike their neighbors.

[pioneer98]

The Onion - Republicans Give In Right Before Obamacare Would Have Been Repealed

[Freed Roger]

Business groups stand by Boehner, plot against tea party

Things gonna get interestin'

Yes, it could get interesting- but the Koch Bros own half the world*. Until they decide that someone other than the Tea Party will do their bidding it may be futile. None of them are going to run out of money, and the ROI they get on political spending is greater than anything they could get on the markets.

*Looked up products of their's to boycott (in response to their buying WI) -and it's everything, home building products, insulation, toilet paper etc etc etc etc. Kind of like boycotting oxygen.
http://www.inspirationgreen.com/koch-br ... ducts.html