Contract From America

Thanks. I hope it succeeds.

The 10 points listed at the website are supposed to lay out the plan for how to bring sanity back to the Federal government? They're written like they're for folks with an IQ of less than their age. Why not summarize the 10 points with "Mom & apple pie"? I unerringly love both of those.

I'm on board. Deport Marco!

I'm on board. Deport Marco!

Skunk, how intolerant, Marco was born in the US. Or was it Kenya? I get confused.

I really like the FairTax calculator! I can hardly wait to save more of my hard earned dollars with the new system!!!!

The 10 points listed at the website are supposed to lay out the plan for how to bring sanity back to the Federal government? They're written like they're for folks with an IQ of less than their age. Why not summarize the 10 points with "Mom & apple pie"? I unerringly love both of those.

They're items, not a plan. No need to be rude.

We, the citizens of the United States of America, call upon those seeking to represent us in public office to sign the Contract from America and by doing so commit to support each of its agenda items and advocate on behalf of individual liberty, limited government, and economic freedom.

1. Protect the Constitution
2. Reject Cap & Trade
3. Demand a Balanced Budget
4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government
6. End Runaway Government Spending
7. Defund, Repeal, & Replace Government-run Health Care
8. Pass an ?All-of-the-Above? Energy Policy
9. Stop the Pork
10. Stop the Tax Hikes

The TP sure seems sensible, reasonable and representative of an agenda we can all get on board with-

when they omit divisive rhetoric about civil rights, religion, socialism, etc. etc.

I love that part of their plan to reduce the size of the government is to create another layer of bureaucracy to review what everyone is doing and make recommendations. :roll:

At first glance it seems reasonable and non-partisan - but none of the math adds up.

Do we really need to add into every bill what part of the Constitution it follows? We already have the Supreme Court to decide if anything is unconstitutional.

The TP sure seems sensible, reasonable and representative of an agenda we can all get on board with-

when they omit divisive rhetoric about civil rights, religion, socialism, etc. etc.

The tea party is talking about these things: less government, less spending, less taxes, more freedom.

Liberals talking about the tea party talk about civil rights, religion, socialism etc etc.

We are talking about national survival, no more, no less. Continued fiscal irresponsbility is the path to disaster.

I love that part of their plan to reduce the size of the government is to create another layer of bureaucracy to review what everyone is doing and make recommendations. :roll:

At first glance it seems reasonable and non-partisan - but none of the math adds up.

Do we really need to add into every bill what part of the Constitution it follows? We already have the Supreme Court to decide if anything is unconstitutional.

I believe the intent is to have a task force complete a one time study of the Federal government, not establish a new bureaucracy. But my experience is once government creates something it never goes away. Personally I think the ones we elect to Congress should do this job on their own and skip creating new monsters.
The math adds up but it will be painful. Weaning someone off the teat is always stressful, but necessary for their long range growth.
After 60 years of all three branches of the Federal government ignoring the Constitution when it suits them, I think forcing adherence to the document and citing the authority is a necessary protection.

The tea party is talking about these things: less government, less spending, less taxes, more freedom.

Liberals talking about the tea party talk about civil rights, religion, socialism etc etc.

We are talking about national survival, no more, no less. Continued fiscal irresponsbility is the path to disaster.

I acknowledge that these are the things that you and Andy and other self proclaimed followers talk about.

But even the most sympathetic/supportive media sources regularly tell a different story. And the posterboys and girls for the TP do the same.

Do I really need to post audio, video, articles, etc. of NONLIBERALS (antiliberals actually) talking about civil rights, religion, socialism, etc. within the context of what this movement is about?

I acknowledge that these are the things that you and Andy and other self proclaimed followers talk about.

But even the most sympathetic/supportive media sources regularly tell a different story. And the posterboys and girls for the TP do the same.

Do I really need to post audio, video, articles, etc. of NONLIBERALS (antiliberals actually) talking about civil rights, religion, socialism, etc. within the context of what this movement is about?

I have views on many things outside the context of the tea party. And I certainly do not represent that I am a spokesperson for the movement. But I can tell you that most tea party adherents believe that we must narrowly focus on the core issues that directly effect the fiscal health of this nation.
For too long we conservatives made the mistake of giving our votes to individuals, usually Republican, who gave lip service to pro-life, pro-family stances. In reality they were merely giving lip service to these issues and meanwhile were increasing government programs, infringing on our freedoms and running up huge deficits.
In my view Obama is the left's response to the disaster that was Bush. The tea party is the right's reaction to the disaster that was Bush. Both agree on the problems; Obama's positions have been to increase government intervention into our lives even more while the tea party seeks a reduction.
I have no doubt you can produce "audio, video, articles, etc." showing various tea party participants talking about religion, civil rights, social issues etc. But these are their views and do not represent what the tea party itself is about. Read the statement Kurt posted and you will not find any of those issues discussed.

Instead of bullet points, I prefer actual data. I like Ryan's Roadmap. It's a detailed plan on how we can solve our debt and fiscal problems.

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Roadmap2Final2.pdf

Hopfully a solid chunk of this will get implemented when the democrats lose control of Washington in two years. ;-)

The Roadmap is the blueprint to implement the bullet points.

I have NEVER supported fiscal irresponsibility - either by the government or the individual. My comments are specifically about this list - and how these vague statements don't work in reality.

And while it sounds great to "wean people" the reality is that everyone wants someone else to be weaned.

My jaw dropped the other day when a friend commented that we need to just scrap all the social programs etc. and start over and it will be rough, but it needs to happen. This is an individual whose unemployment got extended, whose spouse got unemployment extended, they are trying to refinance their home loan thorugh a government program, and because they didn't have health insurance but had a health problem, got more than $10K in medical bills forgiven at Sacred Heart.

I keep asking what people are willing to give up to help balance the budget and all I ever hear is how OTHERS can give something up and how OTHERS are the problem.

IF (and it's a big IF) the Tea Party folks are serious about reducing our debt and government waste really is their goal, they need to lead by example.

Have a rally where people come forward and say "my name is Glenn and to help us achieve our goal of fiscal responsibility I am going to give up X,Y, and Z and tell my congressman my community does not need this project" and I'll believe it's your true goal.

I have NEVER supported fiscal irresponsibility - either by the government or the individual. My comments are specifically about this list - and how these vague statements don't work in reality.

And while it sounds great to "wean people" the reality is that everyone wants someone else to be weaned.

My jaw dropped the other day when a friend commented that we need to just scrap all the social programs etc. and start over and it will be rough, but it needs to happen. This is an individual whose unemployment got extended, whose spouse got unemployment extended, they are trying to refinance their home loan thorugh a government program, and because they didn't have health insurance but had a health problem, got more than $10K in medical bills forgiven at Sacred Heart.

I keep asking what people are willing to give up to help balance the budget and all I ever hear is how OTHERS can give something up and how OTHERS are the problem.

IF (and it's a big IF) the Tea Party folks are serious about reducing our debt and government waste really is their goal, they need to lead by example.

Have a rally where people come forward and say "my name is Glenn and to help us achieve our goal of fiscal responsibility I am going to give up X,Y, and Z and tell my congressman my community does not need this project" and I'll believe it's your true goal.

I could not agree with you more. Every single one of us is responsible for the mess our national finances are in and every single one of us will have to give up something in order to get things in order. As I have said before, recovery will not be painless. Anyone who promises you no pain is a liar or an idiot. But if we do nothing the results will be 100 times more painful in the long run.

Idlewind,

I don't think we are on the same page. I'm not posting as a liberal or an anti-TP guy. I'm not telling you that the TP isn't about those core ideals. I don't want to debate what it is about.

I'm telling you as someone who is entertained by/interested in politics how the tea party appears to nonmembers and what I theorize it will mean. I'm providing the perspective of someone who agrees with these core principles but who cannot get behind the movement and I'm providing you with the reasons why.

It isn't self serving for TP folks to assume that liberals are trying to paint the TP in this way. But it is serving to get real about what the TP looks like to a curious outsider.

I believe for every passionate American who showed up at Beck's rally there are 1,000 who would support the movement were it perceived to be about those cornerstones and not the other nonsense.

Idlewind,

I don't think we are on the same page. I'm not posting as a liberal or an anti-TP guy. I'm not telling you that the TP isn't about those core ideals. I don't want to debate what it is about.

I'm telling you as someone who is entertained by/interested in politics how the tea party appears to nonmembers and what I theorize it will mean. I'm providing the perspective of someone who agrees with these core principles but who cannot get behind the movement and I'm providing you with the reasons why.

It isn't self serving for TP folks to assume that liberals are trying to paint the TP in this way. But it is serving to get real about what the TP looks like to a curious outsider.

I believe for every passionate American who showed up at Beck's rally there are 1,000 who would support the movement were it perceived to be about those cornerstones and not the other nonsense.

I am on your page, I am just dyslectic.:roll:
You have identified the main challenge facing the tea party movement. How to draw in like-minded individuals as regards fiscal policy who are not social conservatives. We have argued so much in the last 30 years over social issues that we have not watched our fiscal store and have allowed politicians to drag us into a fiscal doomsday. We all must set the social battles aside for another day and fix the problems fiscally or we will not have a society to battle over.
What I would suggest is to get involved. You are a smart articulate person. You can help keep everyone on message. The good thing about the tea party is there is no central leadership or monolithic organization. You can do your own thing as long as you support the narrow goals of less spending, less government, less taxes and more freedom.

Since I am getting "labeled" again - Why exactly am I not a social conservative?

Because I don't hate/fear gay people and minorities, think people should use birth control, and don't think changing our country to a Christian theocracy solves everything?

"The tea party has no central leadership" - seriously, you need to do some research on who is REALLY financing and promoting the Tea Party. Hint - it's lobbyists and big business who will benefit from all those pesky regulations that were not in the Constitution.

Idlewind,

I don't think we are on the same page. I'm not posting as a liberal or an anti-TP guy. I'm not telling you that the TP isn't about those core ideals. I don't want to debate what it is about.

I'm telling you as someone who is entertained by/interested in politics how the tea party appears to nonmembers and what I theorize it will mean. I'm providing the perspective of someone who agrees with these core principles but who cannot get behind the movement and I'm providing you with the reasons why.

It isn't self serving for TP folks to assume that liberals are trying to paint the TP in this way. But it is serving to get real about what the TP looks like to a curious outsider.

I believe for every passionate American who showed up at Beck's rally there are 1,000 who would support the movement were it perceived to be about those cornerstones and not the other nonsense.

I am on your page, I am just dyslectic.:roll:
You have identified the main challenge facing the tea party movement. How to draw in like-minded individuals as regards fiscal policy who are not social conservatives. We have argued so much in the last 30 years over social issues that we have not watched our fiscal store and have allowed politicians to drag us into a fiscal doomsday. We all must set the social battles aside for another day and fix the problems fiscally or we will not have a society to battle over.
What I would suggest is to get involved. You are a smart articulate person. You can help keep everyone on message. The good thing about the tea party is there is no central leadership or monolithic organization. You can do your own thing as long as you support the narrow goals of less spending, less government, less taxes and more freedom.

So glad Y'all are on the same page that Y'all are not on the same page.

Since I am getting "labeled" again - Why exactly am I not a social conservative?

Because I don't hate/fear gay people and minorities, think people should use birth control, and don't think changing our country to a Christian theocracy solves everything?

"The tea party has no central leadership" - seriously, you need to do some research on who is REALLY financing and promoting the Tea Party. Hint - it's lobbyists and big business who will benefit from all those pesky regulations that were not in the Constitution.

Do ya'll get money for every time you chant "theocracy?"

Do you get money every time you use a label to deflect a question about actual substance?

Do you get money every time you use a label to deflect a question about actual substance?

" Social conservatives in many countries generally: favor the pro-life position in the abortion controversy and oppose public funding of embryonic stem cell research; oppose both Eugenics (inheritable genetic modification) and human enhancement (Transhumanism) while supporting Bioconservatism [1]; support a traditional definition of marriage as being one man and one woman; view the nuclear family model as society's foundational unit; oppose expansion of civil marriage and child adoption rights to couples in same-sex relationships; promote public morality and traditional family values; oppose secularism and privatization of religious belief; support the prohibition of drugs, prostitution, premarital sex, non-marital sex and euthanasia; and support the censorship of pornography and what they consider to be obscenity or indecency."

I took a guess and decided that you do not fit the above Wikipedia description.;-) Since I was answering Geo, I really don't know when I "labeled" you one way or the other. If I misjudged you though I apologize.

Why on earth would anybody want to be considered a social conservative?

Since I am getting "labeled" again - Why exactly am I not a social conservative?

Because I don't hate/fear gay people and minorities, think people should use birth control, and don't think changing our country to a Christian theocracy solves everything?

"The tea party has no central leadership" - seriously, you need to do some research on who is REALLY financing and promoting the Tea Party. Hint - it's lobbyists and big business who will benefit from all those pesky regulations that were not in the Constitution.

"I've never been able to understand why a Republican contributor is a 'fat cat' and a Democratic contributor of the same amount of money is a 'public-spirited philanthropist'. " --Ronald Reagan