Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 1:15 PM ET, 01/27/2011

At first Senate Tea Party Caucus meeting, lawmakers take jabs at Obama

By Felicia Sonmez

Three Republican lawmakers kicked off the first meeting of the Senate Tea Party Caucus Thursday morning, vowing to about 150 supporters in a campaign-style event to stage a showdown on the debt ceiling vote and remain true to the movement's values -- and landing some sharp blows against President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Meeting for two hours in a cavernous Senate committee meeting room on a morning when much of Washington was buried under several inches of snow, Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Rand Paul (Ky.) and Mike Lee (Utah) addressed an older crowd of grassroots activists, several of whom were holding American flags and "don't tread on me" flags as they listened attentively to the proceedings.

"Is the tea party still a force in America?" Paul asked at the event's outset. He was greeted by cheers. Noting that some have wondered whether the tea party movement would be "co-opted" once the new lawmakers it helped to elect arrived in Washington, Paul contended that just the opposite was true.

"I went to my first State of the Union the other day, and guess who's now against earmarks?" Paul asked, adding that the president has now been "co-opted by the tea party."

The gathering had the feel of both a formal hearing and a town-hall meeting. Taking the podium in front of a marble wall bearing a massive United States Senate seal, speaker after speaker took direct aim at Obama and predicted that Republicans will take back the Senate in 2012; at several times during the event, audience members interrupted speakers with polite applause and shouts of "Amen!"

In addition to the founding members of the caucus, other speakers at the event included Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, Tea Party Express Chairman Amy Kremer, Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips, FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe, and Virginia Tea Party Patriot Federation Chair (and Virginia Senate candidate) Jamie Radtke.

Lawmakers at the event mixed policy and politics. All three senators noted that the issue of raising the debt ceiling will be one on which they'll stake out their ground in the new Congress. "We have to link raising the debt ceiling to something of value," Paul said.

When it came to politics, most speakers focused on Obama. Lee called Obama "one of the most liberal presidents" in history and said that while the president has spoken of reining in spending, "there is a difference: we mean it. He doesn't."

DeMint, who played a key role in helping to get Paul and Lee elected, noted that that polls show nearly half of voters now approve of the job Obama is doing. The other half of voters, DeMint said, needs to be more passionate and rally in 2012.

Norquist called Obama "our nation's pre-eminent community organizer" and argued that the agenda of president, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) has "helped organize the tea party movement."

Kremer, meanwhile, projected that Republicans would capture the Senate in the next election.

"In 2012, we will retire Harry Reid as the Senate majority leader," Kremer said, to cheers.

The delicate balancing act between governing and playing the role of insurgents was on display at several times throughout the meeting.

"We're not trying to institutionalize you," DeMint told supporters at one point, noting that he hoped the caucus meeting was the first of many public conversations with activists.

The trio of DeMint, Paul and Lee comprises the founding members of the Senate Tea Party Caucus; other freshman lawmakers, including Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), had been invited to join but declined. Rubio has said he remains unconvinced that there's a need for a formal tea party caucus when other groups of conservative lawmakers such as the Republican Study Committee essentially serve the same purpose.

But several other freshman senators, including Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), also addressed the gathering, and DeMint thanked Toomey, Rubio and Johnson by name, even though they have declined to join the group.

Lee took note of the small number of members founding the caucus but said that he was undeterred.

"I don't care whether this group has three senators or 100," he said.

Update, 1:15 p.m.
Jamie Jacoby, a 53-year-old self-employed IT worker and Radtke supporter, said he arrived at the event just as it was wrapping up after driving through the snow for more than six hours from Richmond.

Even so, he said it was worth the trip.

"I'm in it for as long as it takes," said Jacoby, who is a supporter of the Richmond Tea Party. "And I think there are a lot of people who don't understand that. They're thinking that we're a flash in the pan; that we're going to last a couple of years; people are going to get tired; people are saying the Republicans gained control of the House in the 2010 elections, so the pressure's off; people are going to stop coming to these events: no, no, no, no, no."

Randy Gilbert, a 54-year-old military veteran and retired small business owner who goes by the nickname "Dr. Proactive" among other tea party supporters online, agreed with Jacoby and noted that he and other grassroots activists have been keeping close tabs on lawmakers' votes and urging others to do the same.

"It's not so much about raising money as it is about raising awareness and getting people to actually call, getting people to actually write, getting people to fax, email," said Gilbert, who attended the event along with his son, Tim, 30. "It is difficult; it does take diligence."

"Hypervigilance," Jacoby added with a laugh.

Patti Weaver and Roberta Gick, both leaders of the Pittsburgh Tea Party, said that even though their senator, Toomey, hasn't joined the tea party caucus, they were glad he spoke at the event and noted that they have arranged to meet with him later Thursday afternoon.

"I am watching him, but so far, so good," Gick said.

By Felicia Sonmez  | January 27, 2011; 1:15 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's motorcade plows through D.C. (photos)
Next: YouTube interviews President Obama

Comments

It won't take long. Certainly by June. The Tea Party including yet another whacko, Radtke, will have to start taking specific positions on issues, and therein their demise.

I recall the NY Times poll from last spring of TeaPartyistas, and the results (available online) are telling. Overwhelmingly, they are the 30% who thought that GWB was the best president of all time, are all for "spending less" but get all squishy when asked about Medicare, Social Security, Defense and Education, and who are basically an angry mob without any coherence.

The result will be, inevitably, that they get marginalized and disbanded to their hovels.

It doesn't help them that so many of their "leaders" are complete idiots.

And it won't help them to have Rand Paul or Jim Demint trying to justify how the Civil Rights Act, the Equal Pay Act for women, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and many others are terrible usurpation of state sovereignty.

I expect that Face the Nation will have a great year this year pointedly creaming them. And the independent voters will get it.

Frankly, more and more the Tea Party is looking like they just can't stand a black president, and that will get them what they deserve: the back of America's hand.

And good for America, at that.

Posted by: aclearview | January 28, 2011 11:06 PM | Report abuse

You will swear allegiance to 'the Party'.
We will win 'Uber Alles'.
Sound familiar?
As an aside, I believe the solution to the Tea Party/Republican dedication to reducing Secretary Gates Military Buget is as follows:
Sign up (conscript) all Tea Party members, whom the majority of which are no doubt armed, locked and loaded, and send them to the battlefield to relieve our combat troops.
I'm sure they would not waver being the super patriots they are.

Posted by: kacameron | January 28, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

You will swear allegiance to 'the Party'.
We will win 'Uber Alles'.
Sound familiar?
As an aside, I believe the solution to the Tea Party/Republican dedication to reducing Secretary Gates Military Buget is as follows:
Sign up (conscript) all Tea Party members, whom the majority of which are no doubt armed, locked and loaded, and send them to the battlefield to relieve our combat troops.
I'm sure they would not waver being the super patriots they are.

Posted by: kacameron | January 28, 2011 8:38 PM | Report abuse

You wi9ll swear allegiance to 'the Party'.
We will win 'Uber Alles'.
Sound familiar?
As an aside, I believe the solution to the Tea Party/Republican dedication to reducing Secretary Gates Military Buget is as follows:
Sign up (conscript) all Tea Party members, whom the majority of which are no doubt armed, locked and loaded, and send them to the battlefield to relieve our combat troops.
I'm sure they would not waver being the super patriots they are.

Posted by: kacameron | January 28, 2011 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Hey thebobbob, the fact that you even brought that up brings one pause. One would think that that might be what their thinking.

Posted by: nowhearthis | January 28, 2011 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Did they demand the right to carry a gun into the Capital Building? Did they demand that teachers lead prayers in classrooms? Did they demand that all elected officials prove their citizenship before taking office? Did they declare that the income tax was unconstitutional and refuse to pay? Do they refuse to send their children to public schools? Do they support The POTUS and Commander-in Chief during times of two Wars?

How crazy are they? Really?

Posted by: thebobbob | January 28, 2011 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Their outlook doesn't appear very realistic, assuming you can find many concrete ideas in their mouthings, most of which are a crumbling rehash of stuff that didn't work the first time. It is interesting that three of those invited to join, according to this article, chose not to. Why could that be? Perhaps they don't want to be identified with a minority viewpoint. DeMint, Lee, and Paul can sit in the back of the chamber and pass notes to each other.

Posted by: sober1 | January 28, 2011 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul is no idiot, but____he is showing his lack/disinterest in fact checking. If he would check back on Obama's first 3 months in office, one of Obama's pet peeves were 'earmarks' and pledged to reduce them. But during the Bush melt down he had to start bringing the country back financially. He could not waste the time sending the needed bill back to Congress on a veto because both parties loaded it down with earmarks. There would have been a long drawn out fight and the country would have suffered. If good ole' boy Rand Paul would just take the blinders off and and use that medical expertise in fixing his selective hearing he could enlighten himself with the facts. If he continues down this path for the sake of 'Tea Party' grandstanding, he'll further reduce his credibility and go the way of Sara Palin.

Posted by: nowhearthis | January 28, 2011 3:19 PM | Report abuse

The biggest mistake we can make is to underestimate the growth of the ultra-right in this country. The Tea Party/pseudo-Libertarian philosophy is about going back to19th Century ideals. No government regulation of the market - i.e., bare-knuckle capitalism is a founding principle. These so-called "idealists" actually believe that there is such a thing as a free market and we just have to get the government off its back. They are too naive to understand that an unregulated market led to the 2008 Crash and the loss of trillions of tax payer dollars. They are too caught up in their mantra of "liberty" to understand that is extensive collusion on the part of the institutional investment community can move the stock market where ever they want it to go. Civil rights? -more government intervention in peoples right to hate and discriminate! Health care? I got mine - you get yours- and Keep the Government out of my Medicare !! We have heard all of this delusional thinking in the past - and the past is where these people want to take us as part of a childish notion that as the Italians say " It was better when it was worse".

Posted by: jeffl240 | January 28, 2011 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I believe...Anti Democracy and Anti Political Civility which is the best Billionaires can buy to control American greed has a name. It is Tea Party wing of the GOP. They are against better living for all Americans by wanting to cut money to Education so they can create a new dummy downed population ,they want to cut Social Security and medicare so our elderly die younger because they are not profitable. They want to create dependence on hand outs from financially strapped charities by cutting help for Heating assistance.re. Michigan Feb2011. They do not want you to have health care so that your premiums will make you dependent on the new Company Health Stores..They will hide behind the false promises of Abortion defeat again...just like they did when the GOP controlled congress,senate and the Presidency..they control the Supreme court but has Wade been overturned...no!..Wake up America....the Anti Christ has made his first move......

Posted by: Americacares | January 28, 2011 1:29 PM | Report abuse

The "Tea Party" must continue the fight to take our country back. The "Tea Party" represents the common American better than any other party. The Liberals want more welfare, mass immigration, and bigger government. The Liberals are controlled by the Ivy League estalbishment that are mis-guided and practically have destroyed our country. The Neo-Cons of the Repulicans want empire and to spread our multi-national corporations throughout the world. They also want mass immigration to lower our wages. Neither the Liberals or the Neo-Cons represent the common man of America. The "Tea Party" is the best thing that has happened to America in a century.

Posted by: TheProfit | January 28, 2011 1:03 PM | Report abuse

There isn't a good reason to trade a higer debt ceiling for something of value. Wake up people we cannot buy a new car when we can't pay for the license plate. This country is below being broke and will financially collapse if we don't cut deeply into spending and that means stop approving new debt and cutting back on new programs.
Don't pick on grandparents social security either they worked and paid for the small retirement checks. (no increases since obama's been in office) It's their money not the government's.

Posted by: vageorge | January 28, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

WOW!!!!
Look at all the (liberal) haters on this site. I do say, you liberals do scare me.

Just to let you know (WE TEA PARTY PEOPLE)
are alive and watching, listening, and supporting, Senator Rand Paul and the other
Tea Party Senators. WE ARE THERE AND WE ARE HEAR. They hear us and we hear them,
time will tell.
God Bless you all. We love you too.

Posted by: designsbypeggy81 | January 28, 2011 12:46 PM | Report abuse

WOW!!!!
Look at all the (liberal) haters on this site. I do say, you liberals do scare me.

Just to let you know (WE TEA PARTY PEOPLE)
are alive and watching, listening, and supporting, Senator Rand Paul and the other
Tea Party Senators. WE ARE THERE AND WE ARE HEAR. They hear us and we hear them,
time will tell.
God Bless you all. We love you too.

Posted by: designsbypeggy81 | January 28, 2011 12:46 PM | Report abuse

The Tea Party and Conservatives relate to the Middle-Class in this country, better than anyone else.
Wake up. The Middle Class relies on Jobs;
conservatives are for protecting Jobs in this country--which protects the Middle Class.
On the other hand, Democrats protect Unions, which HURT Jobs in this country.
Democrats also Demonized business the past 2 years, and Demonizing business doesn't get you Jobs, either.

Posted by: ohioan | January 28, 2011 12:11 PM | Report abuse

LMW: Of course the TparT has Czars. Rand Paul is an example of a hereditary politician. The same game as usual in the monarchist party that falsely goes by the name of "Reublican". CB

Posted by: chrisbrown12 | January 28, 2011 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I thought the Tea Party was against czars. .....

As for Rand Paul's unfounded glee, Obama hasn't changed his position at all.

-------------

The Tea party is fighting to give more power to the executive branch, at Congress' expense, and they don't even know they're voting against their own best interests.

------

The above is typical of the left.....What Czar did the TEA PARTY appoint? It appears that you have taken a suggestion by Laura Ingraham made - half jokingly - which has been blogged about by a few Tea Party affiliated folks and blown that up into the Tea Party appointing a Czar.

And then this out of context and unreal accusation is followed by the marginalization of the Tea Party with the famous "they don't know whats good for them" line.

Obama campaigned on the abolishing of earmarks because it was the thing to do - McCain was big on that prior to his nomination and campaign which forced it into the platform of Obama's campaign - yet, one of the first things he did was pass the budget for the remainder of the fiscal year that had thousands of earmarks in it - promising that it would be the last time he'd sign anything with them - and then didn't keep that promise.

It remains to be seen whether his statement in the SOTU address was politically motivated by the upcoming campaign or was a real issue that he believes in.....

And as for your stance on earmarks - nice try but the truth is that appropriations for the states can be done as stand alone bills - which would also help the president's unfulfilled promise of transparency - with the length of the bills our Congress is passing today - 2400 plus in way too many cases - there is no real transparency as promised. Stand alone bills would take care of that.

And just in case you need an example - take the dark of night last minute addition to the TARP bill by Barney Frank that allowed Maxine Waters to funnel money to her husband's bank and which has now brought her up on charges.

Or the failure of TARP to stop the million dollar bonuses to AIG etc....

Those things, along with earmarks, are buried in thousands of pages of legislation and are a huge part of the issues this country faces.


Posted by: LMW6 | January 28, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I thought the Tea Party was against czars. .....

As for Rand Paul's unfounded glee, Obama hasn't changed his position at all.

-------------

The Tea party is fighting to give more power to the executive branch, at Congress' expense, and they don't even know they're voting against their own best interests.

------

The above is typical of the left.....What Czar did the TEA PARTY appoint? It appears that you have taken a suggestion by Laura Ingraham made - half jokingly - which has been blogged about by a few Tea Party affiliated folks and blown that up into the Tea Party appointing a Czar.

And then this out of context and unreal accusation is followed by the marginalization of the Tea Party with the famous "they don't know whats good for them" line.

Obama campaigned on the abolishing of earmarks because it was the thing to do - McCain was big on that prior to his nomination and campaign which forced it into the platform of Obama's campaign - yet, one of the first things he did was pass the budget for the remainder of the fiscal year that had thousands of earmarks in it - promising that it would be the last time he'd sign anything with them - and then didn't keep that promise.

It remains to be seen whether his statement in the SOTU address was politically motivated by the upcoming campaign or was a real issue that he believes in.....

And as for your stance on earmarks - nice try but the truth is that appropriations for the states can be done as stand alone bills - which would also help the president's unfulfilled promise of transparency - with the length of the bills our Congress is passing today - 2400 plus in way too many cases - there is no real transparency as promised. Stand alone bills would take care of that.

And just in case you need an example - take the dark of night last minute addition to the TARP bill by Barney Frank that allowed Maxine Waters to funnel money to her husband's bank and which has now brought her up on charges.

Or the failure of TARP to stop the million dollar bonuses to AIG etc....

Those things, along with earmarks, are buried in thousands of pages of legislation and are a huge part of the issues this country faces.


Posted by: LMW6 | January 28, 2011 11:48 AM | Report abuse

You would have thought that by electing rookie Congressmen that you would get a whiff of fresh air but instead of that we have a brood of ill-informed people and that could be dangerous. What's more they believe that by making the most outrageous statements they become candidates for the office of President.

Posted by: fasm7700 | January 28, 2011 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Could'nt buck 3 to kill himself


FLAGSTAFF Arizona

a man is charged with eating base from cocaine.

Las Vegas does not tolerate Criminal Solicitation.

Daily News

Posted by: kadija1 | January 28, 2011 10:52 AM | Report abuse

I thought the Tea Party was against czars. It's quite remarkable that one of their first acts in power is to create a budget czar with powers more sweeping than ever before seen on American soil.

Is that your hypocrisy showing?

As for Rand Paul's unfounded glee, Obama hasn't changed his position at all. It is entirely natural for a President to oppose earmarks, because earmarks are one of Congress' ways of circumscribing the power of the executive branch. Get rid of earmarks, and the executive gets to make all the detailed decisions about how appropriations will be spent.

The Tea party is fighting to give more power to the executive branch, at Congress' expense, and they don't even know they're voting against their own best interests.

Typical for the Tea party.

Posted by: lonquest | January 28, 2011 10:42 AM | Report abuse

I thought the Tea Party was against czars. It's quite remarkable that one of their first acts in power is to create a budget czar with powers more sweeping than ever before seen on American soil.

Is that your hypocrisy showing?

As for Rand Paul's unfounded glee, Obama hasn't changed his position at all. It is entirely natural for a President to oppose earmarks, because earmarks are one of Congress' ways of circumscribing the power of the executive branch. Get rid of earmarks, and the executive gets to make all the detailed decisions about how appropriations will be spent.

The Tea party is fighting to give more power to the executive branch, at Congress' expense, and they don't even know they're voting against their own best interests.

Typical for the Tea party.

Posted by: lonquest | January 28, 2011 10:32 AM | Report abuse

What could Randy Gilbert possibly dislike about how this country is running? He gets a government pension and government paid health care and doesn't have to work. How many Americans can retire at 54. My guess is that he's got his government subsidies, but doesn't want anyone else to get them.

Posted by: gboesky | January 28, 2011 8:37 AM | Report abuse

LOL. DeMint, Paul & Lee! There's a three team trifecta that hasn't seen an honest bet in their political lives. And, the "Tea Party" sheep even drive through the snow to listen to the flim-flam men.

I learned very young not to get drawn into a Three Card Monte game on the street corner. Apparently, Tea Partiers never learned any lessons about sidewalk swindlers. But, here are three to lead you down the primrose path!

Randy is even feigning a knowledge of what an ear mark is. If he, actually, means what he's been saying, it's more pathetic. And, he should resign for stupidity and a lack of historical knowledge. If he doesn't mean what he says, he's just a liar in the company of liars at this news conference.

Ear marks don't fund anything Tea Partiers. But, these hucksters don't want to talk about that. Not one of these alleged "cut the deficit hounds" has recommended cutting the funds that have been designated as included in any earmarks.

Earmarks originated, and still serve the purpose, of directing where the Executive Branch must spend the money if they are intent on spending it. So, these guys are either dumb (which I doubt) or liars (which I don't doubt - particularly DeMint & Paul.)

Elminating the earmark without eliminating the funding and the funds are spent at the discretion of the Executive. So no President has ever supported earmarks; but, they have used them as an excuse for some politically, unpopular spending.

Don't believe me Tea Party sheep. Go do some research. And, do not do Bachmann research. Deal with facts & don't merely try to support your pre-conceived conclusions

Ah! It's not even worth going further with this. It's really not fair attempting to get into intellectual combat with those who, by being Tea Party sheep and supporting the trifecta, have shown that they are completely un-armed.

End of discussion!

Posted by: JohninConnecticut | January 28, 2011 7:46 AM | Report abuse

the profundity of these posts shows how enraged and concerned some of the minority has become;; all turd letting aside; you libs got your a---s kicked by the movement and it will happen again soon. Keep shoving your head into the proverbial sand or up your unsavory cloaca. You are ancient history.

Posted by: Nobama11 | January 27, 2011 11:31 PM | Report abuse

I wonder when the tea party will start issuing uniforms to it's members...maybe some nice brown shirts with embroidered insignia.

Posted by: greeenmtns | January 27, 2011 7:49 PM | Report abuse

The homogenous Tea Party that looks nothing like the population of the US. I don't recall seeing or hearing about a huge and loud demonstration against continuing tax cuts. How many of the Tea Party Congressmen and Senators turned down the taxpayer subsidized health insurance? If government-run health insurance is not good for avergae Americans, how is it good for them? And why are they Republican? The Party that squandered the surplus Bill Clinton left, and the group that spent our tax dollars like drunken sailors? Same old, same old.

Posted by: cile92 | January 27, 2011 7:40 PM | Report abuse

If you think the GOP and Tea Party are serious about reducing the deficit and taxes, think again. Here is the URL for tax changes and their effect as proposed by Wisconsin House GOP Congressman Paul Ryan, the GOP Budget Czar. You will see that it increases the deficit in 2001 by another $181 billion, on top of the two year tax cuts extension passed at year's end. Facts are so much more compelling than Teapublican BS:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_XNASUrh0wVI/TUB1pSs8nQI/AAAAAAAAARQ/12C2se8N2pA/s1600/Blog_Ryan_Tax_Rates_0.jpg

Posted by: enough3 | January 27, 2011 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Jim DeMint would like to think, or would like others to think, that he "played a key role" in electing Rand Paul, but as someone who paid close attention to that race, I can assure you that he did not. This should not have gotten past the editors at the Post.

Posted by: alcross1 | January 27, 2011 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Good - the Tea Party is representing the electorate that put them in Congress. Nothing could be more positive for The People.

Posted by: 2012frank | January 27, 2011 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Let's see if I have summed up the Tea Party Principles accurately:

1) My Money.

2) My Tax Dollars.

3) My Medicare, My Social Security.

4) I got Mine, You Can't Have Yours.

5) System was Good when we needed it, now it is bad.

6) Obama is a Commie Pinko.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

@ScottinVa: what a paranoid world you and the rest of the Tea Party brethren must live in -- it's pretty pathetic, and incredibly disingenuous considering you and the rest of your ilk's false outrage didn't REALLY start up until about 2 months into Obama's presidency. The country had already been in the toilet for years. TARP was just the cherry on top of Bush's mountain of mismanagement and shame.

Posted by: stlouie | January 27, 2011 6:29 PM | Report abuse

If Rand Paul feels co-opted now, just wait. His Republican colleagues will bury the Tea Party crowd and the ever-changing political landscape will make them irrelevant. And if that is not enough, let people like Bachmann go on TV and spout stupid talk and let Cantor act the part of the state idiot with his claim that Social Security is wrecking the budget, let another member rant that the SECDEF can't make changes without the approval of his committee and we will see the GOP side of the Congress crash into each other like ice cubes falling from a drink dispenser. IF everything is on the table in the way of cuts, then everything is on the table. If spending cuts have to be made, maybe they should come by way of not giving the ultra rich tax cuts.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 27, 2011 6:26 PM | Report abuse

If Rand Paul feels co-opted now, just wait. His Republican colleagues will bury the Tea Party crowd and the ever-changing political landscape will make them irrelevant. And if that is not enough, let people like Bachmann go on TV and spout stupid talk and let Cantor act the part of the state idiot with his claim that Social Security is wrecking the budget, let another member rant that the SECDEF can't make changes without the approval of his committee and we will see the GOP side of the Congress crash into each other like ice cubes falling from a drink dispenser. IF everything is on the table in the way of cuts, then everything is on the table. If spending cuts have to be made, maybe they should come by way of not giving the ultra rich tax cuts.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 27, 2011 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Aqua Bunga to you all.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Scotty got Beamed up!

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Yawn..bigots pretending to run the show

Posted by: LABC | January 27, 2011 6:12 PM | Report abuse

from ScottinVA: "the Tea Party -- and Conservatives in general -- have been proposing job-creating and deficit reducing steps all along."

They should write them down and present them to... anybody. I've yet to hear any specific proposal, with numbers, from any R who has been elected that addresses the big picture and actually leads us to a balanced budget.

"No, we can't" they cry... I can't believe I actually long for the Reagan Repubs.....

Posted by: josh13 | January 27, 2011 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"Ol Scotty Guy, you give us independents with some Scotch-Irish blood a bad name. Why so ignorant and hateful? If you are so independent, then why not develop the thinking and information to go along with it?
Here are some things you may not know, but should, if you are to succeed in overturning the government and implementing your own reign of terror:
1) traditional conservative principles require that you respect the Constitution All the time , not just some of the time.

2) you forswear foreign entanglements (that means war, bases, support to Israel, Jordan, El Salvador and Colombia, among other US allies. And the current inviolable military & intel budgets are at least 25% of the budget, far beyond what is required to defend the US. They should be in play and sliced to really much more modest levels to balance the budget.

3) You should not depend on the taxes of others to support the operations of your own jurisdiction, like almost all of the red states have been doing for decades in supporting huge NET Federal Tax transfers/expenditures from blue states to red states (California sent $43 billion more in 2005 than it got back.)

The maps of the blue and red states almost exactly match the net contributor and net recipent states - a vast fraud on equity that the right never wants to touch on or mention, even though it involves government welfare which conservatives should frown upon. So the needy Red states are taking from the wealthy Blue states - isn't that communism?

4) Requires that you respect the law all the time, not just when it suits your preferences, like the SCOTUS opinion in 2000 that broke the laws and violated the clear right of the State of Florida to govern its own election procedures.

5) There is not a single mention of corporations in the Constitution, and corporation law was only signed into effect during Lincoln's presidency about 90 years later, so how can you justify the theft of our indiviual based Constitution by the Citizens United decision?

You are no conservative, but rather you are a radical and subversive who has been given the old Korean War era slow water drip torture to brain wash you into believeing subversive thoughts.

And so on.

Scotty, what you guys believe is really very much like the Bolsheviks, who justified all sorts of lies, deceptions, violence, threats and tricks in order to achieve their goals. That's the way the hard right behaves today, so very similar.

Posted by: enough3 | January 27, 2011 5:54 PM | Report abuse

More like a National Socialist caucus

Posted by: hsolares | January 27, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse

ScottinVA -- I think one of your main problems is that you don't understand the meanings of words, not even simple words like left or right. Neocons are NOT left of conservatives; they are right. Bush didn't ignore social issues because he was "left" -- he ignored them because he was lazy and incurious, and after all, they didn't effect him personally, nor his rich friends.

And why is it that absolutely no tea partiers know the meaning of socialist or fascist, and not even communism? Did you know, for example, that it would be very hard to be both a fascist and a socialist?

And the "swiftboat traitor" crap? That was debunked long ago. So, does that mean that you admire anyone who lies and cheats to achieve his own political aims? Sounds as if you're in the right party, if so.

But please: try to get some education. It would help you so much!

Posted by: MaryCan1 | January 27, 2011 5:23 PM | Report abuse

ScottinVA -- I think one of your main problems is that you don't understand the meanings of words, not even simple words like left or right. Neocons are NOT left of conservatives; they are right. Bush didn't ignore social issues because he was "left" -- he ignored them because he was lazy and incurious, and after all, they didn't effect him personally, nor his rich friends.

And why is it that absolutely no tea partiers know the meaning of socialist or fascist, and not even communism? Did you know, for example, that it would be very hard to be both a fascist and a socialist?

And the "swiftboat traitor" crap? That was debunked long ago. So, does that mean that you admire anyone who lies and cheats to achieve his own political aims? Sounds as if you're in the right party, if so.

But please: try to get some education. It would help you so much!

Posted by: MaryCan1 | January 27, 2011 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Who really believes that our President will really veto bills with ear-marks? After all he is a politician; thank God for that.

Posted by: geraldsutliff1 | January 27, 2011 5:22 PM | Report abuse

ScottinVA -- I think one of your main problems is that you don't understand the meanings of words, not even simple words like left or right. Neocons are NOT left of conservatives; they are right. Bush didn't ignore social issues because he was "left" -- he ignored them because he was lazy and incurious, and after all, they didn't effect him personally, nor his rich friends.

And why is it that absolutely no tea partiers know the meaning of socialist or fascist, and not even communism? Did you know, for example, that it would be very hard to be both a fascist and a socialist?

And the "swiftboat traitor" crap? That was debunked long ago. So, does that mean that you admire anyone who lies and cheats to achieve his own political aims? Sounds as if you're in the right party, if so.

But please: try to get some education. It would help you so much!

Posted by: MaryCan1 | January 27, 2011 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Once again, the vast majority of Tea Party patriots hoped to live their lives with little involvement in politics outside of voting;

Well that was irresponsible. This is a democracy and you always had the obligation to be involved, especially as the last president was running up this massive deficit. So many things you guys protest against were occurring during the last president's term that we really can't understand why you chose this particular moment to become so upset.

Posted by: DatMel | January 27, 2011 5:10 PM | Report abuse

The comment that President Obama is most liberal president would never pass muster in a court room. No examples, no facts, just empty rhetoric. In some ways he is more conservative than Bush. Get your facts straight.

Posted by: ddanne1 | January 27, 2011 5:03 PM | Report abuse

scottinva,

Thanks for proving my point about the Tea Party, and again im not a leftist, since you dont know the meaning of Leftist or Socialism i will take that as a compliment. So you can say good bye to the Independent voters, you will never sway us. And NO i dont listen to talk radio, i study and learn, something you should try. Oh and one last thing, here is all you need to know about the GOP:

140 hours of testimony taken about the Clintons Xmas card list

12 hours of Testimony on Abu Ghirab.

No matter what Padilla was deemed he was still an American citizen.

Hope you enjoy your fellow baggers because nobody will be joining your party........

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 5:01 PM | Report abuse

rharring:

You abviously don't listen to talk radio much, because several hosts took issue with President Bush's RINO policies. I, of course, have a very limited voice, but I did inform my congressman to not vote for the TARP bailout (and will never vote for him again because he did).

Padilla was declared an enemy combatant engaged in making war against the United States and its allies. He ought to have been charged with treason. His claims of torture are alleged, and no constitutional mandates were, so far as we know, intentionally violated.

I don't know much about the other case, so I will not comment, except to say that, if you, as a Leftist, contend it is a violation of that "flawed document" written by "a buch of white slave owners", then I feel confident that you are wrong.

I say that because you have been wrong about everything else I have read from you; such as the Abu Ghraib situation. That was a violation of discipline and order by members of the military, who were disciplined accordingly. By your logic, Sarah Palin was responsible for the shooting in Tuscon.

Oh, that's right; you Lefties put your feet in it on that one, too.

Once again, the vast majority of Tea Party patriots hoped to live their lives with little involvement in politics outside of voting; but the clear and present danger of the government of these last four years galvanized them into action.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 4:55 PM | Report abuse

@wewintheylose1

So are you saying tea baggers are lazy?

Posted by: elbuzz1 | January 27, 2011 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a clown, he's an easy target.

Posted by: wewintheylose1 | January 27, 2011 4:51 PM | Report abuse

scottinva,

Bush presidency a success? WOW you do drink the koolaid dont you? Lets see Bush lost more jobs than he created, didnt capture the person responsible for the attack on our citizens, doubled the national debt, outed an undercover CIA agent, gave no bid contracts to his buddies, the list is endless, so if you think this is a success, dont be surprised when the Independents spurn you and the GOP.

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 4:41 PM | Report abuse

ScottinVA,

You should be glad you do not live in Montana.

It is a Big Sky Country. And if a piece of sky fell, it could be a disaster.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 4:37 PM | Report abuse

No.
The Bush presidency was, overall, a success.
I believe it will be considered such in time.
It was the bellowing jackasses in the traitorous press that made it seem like the world was ending.
It was a difficult and tumultuous decade; I don't believe many could have handled it as well (certainly not the swiftboat traitor).

Bush was no Reagan. He was a NeoCon, which is left of Conservative. This was painfully clear in his neglect of social issues and his signing of the Bailout boondoggle.

It is the current administration and the previous Congress that are the greatest threat to this nation since FDR tried to sell us into Socialist slavery.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 4:28 PM | Report abuse

scottinva,

First off im an Independent so taking the country from me means you want to take it back from all hard working Americans. So you call taking the national debt from 5.5 trillion to 11.5 trillion under a Republican congress prospering? Another reason why you cant be taken seriously, and to the point where you and other baggers claim you spoke out when Bush went off the rails, who did you voice this to? I never heard it, and neither have my other independent friends. Funny how just a month after Obama takes over suddenly you need to take your country back. The fact that i have to tell you which amendments Bush broke shows how little you pay attention to current afairs and how little you know about the Constitution. So here they are:

4th amendment (Deals with illegal search and seizures)Rep. Jane Harmon a sitting member of Congress was spied upon by the Bush admin, not to mention the untold phone conversations they listened to WITHOUT a warrant.
6th amendment which guarantees a speedy trial and the right to confront your accusers, American born Jose Padilla was held in solitary confinement without being charged for 7 YEARS, oh and he was tortured all at the behest of the Bush admin.
8th amendment,prohibits excessive fines and bail as well as cruel and unusual punishment, Padilla again an American was tortured by his captors.

So in other words, while Bush was torturing not only Iraqis (Abu Ghurab) he was torturing and keeping American citizens without the right to a lawyer and due process guaranteed under our Constitution.

Your right Crickets arent silent, unless they are Tea Party members during a GOP presidency...........

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 4:27 PM | Report abuse

The economy was actually doing quite well under the Republican Congress, so many of us were complacent....

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 4:10 PM
======================================
You really don't think the USA and the World almost came to a stop during the end of the Cheney/Bush Regime, and its effects are still lingering on?

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 4:18 PM | Report abuse

IN ETERNAL FORM, THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WILL TELL THEIR SPLINTER GROUP SUPPORTERS WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO HEAR, WHETHER IT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTRY, OR NOT. FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I CAN THINK OF NO GREATER UNPATRIOTIC ACT THAN THE REPUBLICAN BETRAYAL OF AMERICA, IN ORDER TO PLACATE ONE SPLINTER GROUP.

COMMONCAUSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

Posted by: commonsense4commongoodcom | January 27, 2011 4:18 PM | Report abuse

IN ETERNAL FORM, THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WILL TELL THEIR SPLINTER GROUP SUPPORTERS WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO HEAR, WHETHER IT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTRY, OR NOT. FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I CAN THINK OF NO GREATER UNPATRIOTIC ACT THAN THE REPUBLICAN BETRAYAL OF AMERICA, IN ORDER TO PLACATE ONE SPLINTER GROUP.

COMMONCAUSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

Posted by: commonsense4commongoodcom | January 27, 2011 4:18 PM | Report abuse

IN ETERNAL FORM, THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WILL TELL THEIR SPLINTER GROUP SUPPORTERS WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO HEAR, WHETHER IT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTRY, OR NOT. FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I CAN THINK OF NO GREATER UNPATRIOTIC ACT THAN THE REPUBLICAN BETRAYAL OF AMERICA, IN ORDER TO PLACATE ONE SPLINTER GROUP.

COMMONCAUSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

Posted by: commonsense4commongoodcom | January 27, 2011 4:18 PM | Report abuse

IN ETERNAL FORM, THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WILL TELL THEIR SPLINTER GROUP SUPPORTERS WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO HEAR, WHETHER IT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTRY, OR NOT. FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I CAN THINK OF NO GREATER UNPATRIOTIC ACT THAN THE REPUBLICAN BETRAYAL OF AMERICA, IN ORDER TO PLACATE ONE SPLINTER GROUP.

COMMONCAUSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

Posted by: commonsense4commongoodcom | January 27, 2011 4:15 PM | Report abuse

IN ETERNAL FORM, THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WILL TELL THEIR SPLINTER GROUP SUPPORTERS WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO HEAR, WHETHER IT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTRY, OR NOT. FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I CAN THINK OF NO GREATER UNPATRIOTIC ACT THAN THE REPUBLICAN BETRAYAL OF AMERICA, IN ORDER TO PLACATE ONE SPLINTER GROUP.

COMMONCAUSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

Posted by: commonsense4commongoodcom | January 27, 2011 4:15 PM | Report abuse

From who? And here is my question for the Tea Party and really why you will never win over a wide majority of Americans. Where were you when our country was being run into the ground under Dubya? Why didnt your form a Tea Party then? He only doubled the debt and broke no less than 3 constitutional amendments while you and the baggers were as quite as crickets, so until you can fully explain why you didnt form when the country was on a downward slide, the American people wont back you...
Posted by: rharring
----------------------------

From you, of course.
We were individually voicing opposition about the NeoCon issues the RINOs were engaging in (amnesty and spending were right up there), but, as with most people, it took a Socialist slap in the face to get the majority of Americans to awaken to the danger we were in.

The economy was actually doing quite well under the Republican Congress, so many of us were complacent.

I am curious to knwo which three constitutional amendments you think bush broke (I might even agree with you, as I am not a huge Bush fan).

BTW, crickets aren't silent.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Should you really call yourself a "caucus" when there are only three of you?..

Posted by: DrainYou | January 27, 2011 4:01 PM
=====================================
May be they should be called Caucasians?

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 4:08 PM | Report abuse

scottinva says:

"Well, open wide, Obfuscator, cause we've only just begun to take back our country."

From who? And here is my question for the Tea Party and really why you will never win over a wide majority of Americans. Where were you when our country was being run into the ground under Dubya? Why didnt your form a Tea Party then? He only doubled the debt and broke no less than 3 constitutional amendments while you and the baggers were as quite as crickets, so until you can fully explain why you didnt form when the country was on a downward slide, the American people wont back you...

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Should you really call yourself a "caucus" when there are only three of you?


Wouldn't "Three Crazy Wingnuts" be more appropriate?

.

Posted by: DrainYou | January 27, 2011 4:01 PM | Report abuse

DeMint is wrong -- the Teabaggers (both in Congress and not) SHOULD be institutionalized.
Posted by: Observer691
----------------------------

Well, open wide, Obfuscator, cause we've only just begun to take back our country.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 3:56 PM | Report abuse

azarkhan says:

"Restroom was occupied by Barney Frank getting busy with some Capitol Hill pages."

I think you meant Mark Foley, you know the GOP guy that was forced to resign after they caught him preying upon pages.......

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Where's Michelle Bachmann? Wasn't she here? We're in Bachmann Tea Party Overdrive.
Posted by: DatMel
---------------------------

Get a clue, DohMel; Bachmann is in the House, not the Senate.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 3:50 PM | Report abuse

"Where did this take place? In the mens' room in the basement of the Capitol?"

Restroom was occupied by Barney Frank getting busy with some Capitol Hill pages.

Posted by: Azarkhan | January 27, 2011 3:44 PM | Report abuse

DeMint is wrong -- the Teabaggers (both in Congress and not) SHOULD be institutionalized.

Posted by: Observer691 | January 27, 2011 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Where did this take place? In the mens' room in the basement of the Capitol?

Posted by: johng1 | January 27, 2011 3:30 PM | Report abuse

"I went to my first State of the Union the other day, and guess who's now against earmarks?" Paul asked, adding that the president has now been "co-opted by the tea party."

Clearly, Senator Paul missed the rest of the speech.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | January 27, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Where's Michelle Bachmann? Wasn't she here? We're in Bachmann Tea Party Overdrive.

Posted by: DatMel | January 27, 2011 3:25 PM | Report abuse

One thing you must agree to is that the Tea Partiers are very efficient in organizing.

They had been sleeping through the Cheney Rule, but right at the instant they found out on one November 2008 morning "We elected who?" they organized. In an instance. Like iron filings lining up under the magnetic field.

No wonder they mastered the GOP's "One, Two, Goose-step, One, Two, Goose-step" march so quickly.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 3:24 PM | Report abuse

We have a lot of upset people here posting.
That shows involvement, however we have a problem of spending too much, ... so how many would be in favor of taxing TAX EXCLUSION INCOME in favor of more pay ? How many would be in favor of taxing deferred income at the time of it being extended. That would add needed money to the Treasury for the programs you are seeking to maintain. Lets hear input about our tax code problem that is inequitable to us all.

Posted by: buckaroo5 | January 27, 2011 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Policies which threaten the reliability of American debt repayment, as these Senators seem to be proposing, threaten the value of the full faith and credit of the US government. Threatening the value of the full faith and credit of the US government on American debt is one sure way to catastrophically damage the American economy. I hope that the Senators are aware of this, but I am not optimistic.

Posted by: j762 | January 27, 2011 3:19 PM | Report abuse

So did they have any agenda except being against the President? I would have thought their first caucus would have been devoted to expounding on all the fresh ideas they brought.

Posted by: DatMel | January 27, 2011 3:04 PM | Report abuse

So did they have any agenda except being against the President? I would have thought their first caucus would have been devoted to expounding on all the fresh ideas they brought.

Posted by: DatMel | January 27, 2011 3:02 PM | Report abuse

HEY TEABAGGERS!


WHERE ARE THE JOBS ?!?!


QUIT BLOVIATING AND GET TO WORK, YOU KNUCKLE-DRAGGING NEANDERTHAL'S!!


.

Posted by: DrainYou | January 27, 2011 3:00 PM | Report abuse

I still figure its called the "Tea Party" because "Left Behind" was already taken.

Their so-called "leaders" don't want them too organized, because they would be accountable to an organization. Keep them milling like a herd of cats, and the followers will believe anything.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | January 27, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Does the Tea Party Caucus in the Senate have a cheer?

Like "AQUA BUDDHA! ONWARD THROUGH THE DELUSION!"

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

scottinva says:

"f anything, they are spoiled WINNERS, since your Leftist agenda was renounced last November."

And in which state were these agendas on the ballots? You forget that during the exit polls 63% responded that JOBS were the top priority. You know the things the GOP said would appear during the Bush tax cuts....

Posted by: rharring | January 27, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not the "first black president." Obama is the first MIXED-RACE president. He is neither black nor white. You call him a mulatto.

Posted by: annnort | January 27, 2011 2:52 PM | Report abuse

As it stands, they sound to me like a whiny bunch of spoiled losers; folks who want to take but not give, who want to destroy but not build. Wo offer empty "bumper-sticker" rhetoric but no specific agenda. Who are trying to please their own egos but not the needs of the complex breadth of Americans who live in this great nation.
Posted by: josh13
-------------------------------

If anything, they are spoiled WINNERS, since your Leftist agenda was renounced last November.

And it's hard to belittle someone as "little" as the Communist Organizer in Chief.

If you read some actual news, instead of the comPost, you would learn that the Tea Party -- and Conservatives in general -- have been proposing job-creating and deficit reducing steps all along.

But you wouldn't know that by reading the HuffyPost or watching the Commie News Network.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The Tea Party Movement is still "against" the Republican (pronounced "RINO") Party.

We fight them in primaries.
We fight Leftists everywhere.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 2:26 PM
=====================================
Then you put a "R" behind your name and do rah-rahs with RINOs.

The Libertarians, Green Party and other parties may not have any elected officials but at least they have guts to have their own identity and compete in the elections.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 2:49 PM | Report abuse

trash baggers are always senseless.
let them bark all their stupidities, but we will move on.
Mr. Paul - what kind of knowledge do You have to judge on Budget?
Same thing - self-certified Moron?
======================================
Let see what we are talking about -- how does one define knowledge. Perhaps we could compare Obama to Paul regarding education, accomplishment, etc. Who did Paul work for before this election ? Who did Obama work for before his election to the Senate. I think we should be careful how we express our self about knowledge ... would you not say ????

Posted by: buckaroo5 | January 27, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Let's say the budget is $3,500 billion and the earmarks are $16 billion......

That's nearly a half-penny out of a dollar!

Yup. Tea Party is there to make a difference. They are big thinkers.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

This silly fraternal group seems much more interested in belittling our president than in solving our challenges.

Perhaps if they focused on how to govern rather than who they can tar and blame they would provide some meaningful dialogue.

As it stands, they sound to me like a whiny bunch of spoiled losers; folks who want to take but not give, who want to destroy but not build. Wo offer empty "bumper-sticker" rhetoric but no specific agenda. Who are trying to please their own egos but not the needs of the complex breadth of Americans who live in this great nation.

Posted by: josh13 | January 27, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Tea Party co-opted the President on earmarks? Good gads, as usual they're making it up. During his 2008 campaign, President Obama make it clear that earmarks need to end. How does the Tea Party co-opt somebody who staked out that position before the Tea Party was even created?

The saddest thing is that earmarks account for a very small part of the federal budget -- way less than 1%. Ending them solves nothing. But it will make sure that Congressmen can no longer fund specific needed projects. It's the abuse of earmarks that needs to be remedied.

So once again the radical right creates an issue that really doesn't exist. Just like those wonderful far right wing brownshirted fellows in 1920s and 1930s Germany, the far right wing Tea Party rewrites history and creates scapegoats out of thin air.

Posted by: dl49 | January 27, 2011 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Hey people, let's not jump to conclusions! I'm *sure* the gathered crowd of 150 was a representative cross-section of the United States of America.

Posted by: fishyken | January 27, 2011 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey people, let's not jump to conclusions! I'm *sure* the gathered crowd of 150 was a representative cross-section of the United States of America.

Posted by: fishyken | January 27, 2011 2:32 PM | Report abuse

trash baggers are always senseless.
let them bark all their stupidities, but we will move on.
Mr. Paul - what kind of knowledge do You have to judge on Budget?
Same thing - self-certified Moron?

Posted by: lordmi | January 27, 2011 2:30 PM | Report abuse

trash baggers are always senseless.
let them bark all their stupidities, but we will move on.
Mr. Paul - what kind of knowledge do You have to judge on Budget?
Same thing - self-certified Moron?

Posted by: lordmi | January 27, 2011 2:29 PM | Report abuse

But will they be still joined at the hip with the Republican Party against which they came into existence?
That choice was never theirs or their supporter's.
Posted by: kishorgala
-------------------------------

The Tea Party Movement is still "against" the Republican (pronounced "RINO") Party.

We fight them in primaries.
We fight Leftists everywhere.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 2:26 PM | Report abuse

We have a lot of upset people here posting.
That shows involvement, however we have a problem of spending too much, ... so how many would be in favor of taxing TAX EXCLUSION INCOME in favor of more pay ? How many would be in favor of taxing deferred income at the time of it being extended. That would add needed money to the Treasury for the programs you are seeking to maintain. Lets hear input about our tax code problem that is inequitable to us all.

Posted by: buckaroo5 | January 27, 2011 2:23 PM | Report abuse

An interesting account of 150 mice bragging about how they're going to bell the cat.

Politics; it never changes.

Posted by: drazen1 | January 27, 2011 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives, pay attention to what is happening across the middle east in other right-wing countries. The people are rising against the oppressive rules conservative governments force onto their populations. Conservative societies always fail when enough freedoms are removed.
Posted by: TaxTheRichNow
------------------------------

Excuse me?

Are you comparing Jordan and Egypt to Constitutional Conservatives?

Ariana called; it's time for your daily dose of Huffypost Kool-aid.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 2:20 PM | Report abuse

But will they be still joined at the hip with the Republican Party against which they came into existence?

That choice was never theirs or their supporter's.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 27, 2011 2:19 PM | Report abuse

It is so uninteresting when a bunch a white racists get together to disparage the First Black President.
Posted by: lindalovejones
----------------------------

Yes; it's much MORE interesting to read posts by black racist feminazis.

Posted by: ScottinVA | January 27, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama co-opted by the tea party? Hahahahaha. More likely Obama was co-opted by Paul's hairpiece. Truly, Obama's magic must be back if the tea party wants to claim him as their own.

Be that as it may, memories are short. Before there was a tea party McCain was campaigning against earmarks.

Posted by: cassandra9 | January 27, 2011 2:11 PM | Report abuse

150 supporters? This is a force?

Posted by: dollmike | January 27, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

These people are truly frightening.

Posted by: monk4hall | January 27, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Right-wingers.

Can anyone remember the last time one of them made a serious suggestion on how to fix any of our problems?

Conservatives, pay attention to what is happening across the middle east in other right-wing countries. The people are rising against the oppressive rules conservative governments force onto their populations. Conservative societies always fail when enough freedoms are removed.

Posted by: TaxTheRichNow | January 27, 2011 2:04 PM | Report abuse

150 supporters? This is a force?

Posted by: dollmike | January 27, 2011 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Were they all from "former" slave owning states?

Posted by: WmLaney | January 27, 2011 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Let the hate fest of the delusional and disinformed begin!

Have the teabaggers figured out yet it was the GOP that wrecked the economy, health care, education, and just about everything else they could touch.

I still can't pin down the day our democracy died but I lean more toward November 4, 1980, over June 17, 1972.

It is safe to say S-Corp (Supreme Court of the republican party) kicked a dead horse on December 9, 2000, when they stopped the vote count in Florida.

Posted by: TaxTheRichNow | January 27, 2011 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Maybe if we had a high speed train, Radke wouldn't have been late.

Posted by: jamesmsalt | January 27, 2011 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Did they promise to take a pay cut and forgo life time health and pension benefits?

Posted by: knjincvc | January 27, 2011 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Big, white mouths mouthing off.

Posted by: binkynh | January 27, 2011 1:40 PM | Report abuse

3? And that is news?

Posted by: FoundingMother | January 27, 2011 1:21 PM | Report abuse

All show and talk. These folks live in a fantasy world.

Posted by: jckdoors | January 27, 2011 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Isn't that a good thing from the Tea Party perspective?

Posted by: WmLaney | January 27, 2011 1:16 PM | Report abuse


It is so uninteresting when a bunch a white racists get together to disparage the First Black President.


Posted by: lindalovejones | January 27, 2011 1:14 PM | Report abuse

A round-up of the usual suspects. Hardly newsworthy.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | January 27, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

"We're not trying to institutionalize you"--what a deliciously ambiguous statement.

Posted by: benchatt | January 27, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company