Is the Tea Party classical liberalism?

[Plane]

Anything else one wants to bring along is fine, so long as it doesn't interfere with the primary mission above

And who says sirs and I can't agree on anything. The Tea party is about fiscal conservatism, nothing more. and any other issue that muddies the water interferes with that primary mission. And please don tell me that alienating part of your base by introducing issues into the mix that aren't primarily about fiscal restraint such as the Planned Parenthood funding issue doesn't hurt your primary cause.

   Did you think that the attempt at closeing Governmment support of PBS was because of an anti entertainment bias?

   Planned Parent hood is a good canadate for being cut as an evil use of money it is low hanging fruit, PBS can make a better case for being a usefull entity.

     When it is time to tackle the hard questions will it be good or bad that smaller and easyer questions were settled first?

     Planned parenthood should not be protected from cuts by virtue of provideing abortions!

    Talk about alienateing MOST of your base!

[Plane]

    To me, the important thing to keep in mind is that some people's expectations for their future retirement will have to be disappointed. Government obligations, including worker pensions, Social Security, and Medicare, are underfunded. Government may renege on its promises. If instead it tries to keep its promises, it will probably have to confiscate the wealth of those who are trying to provide for their own retirement. One of those unpleasant scenarios, or a combination of the two, is fairly certain to occur.

   Right this  is indeed so, .......why not let Michelle Bachman say this?
     If the Tea party must chase off the anti abortion people it will be splitting itself to no purpose.

   I just do not see how the tea party looses validity by being a wide tent and accepting people like Michelle Bachman!   

       Who is better? Who is there out there that has no opinion on Abortion?

Let's be  clear here. I never said run Michelle Bachmann off. What i don't want is her ambitions to muddy the brand of the tea party. I want the tea party to focus on the house and the senate and the state legislatures and take back this country long term.

   And the observation that fiscal Conservatives are mostly social conservatives means nothing to you?

     There can't be a sheild around liberal funding to preserve  "brand" in the tea party, if someone wants to hang a false label the way to fight it is not to agree with it.

    The Tea party will hardly be in favor of big business subsidy will it?
     But to follow your theroy we can't muddy the brand by offending upporters of sugar subsidy , oil subsidy or HUD subsidy by calling for reduction or elimination of the waste.

     Honestly, Taxes and spending have to be cut somewhere, and everywhere taxes are spent someone likes it.

    When someone makes the observation that MOST of the Tea Party has a conservative bent , your reaction is to ensure it isn't going to continue to be so?

    Don't accept the split as a fact, untill you see that it really is, maybe it just isn't.

[Plane]

Then Posners article is correct and that thetea party movement misrepresented itself during the 2010 cycle. Which probably won't help during the 2012 cycle, when all tea partiers are needed the most, with no wedges and divisions in their ranks.


And so it goes.

What has changed?

Why accept this as a wedge and drive the wedge in ?

[BT]

I think that defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting can be sold based on the changing marketplace and lack of need for public assistance based on the demographics and earnings of their audience. It's a luxury we can't afford.

[Plane]

Agreed!

  Planned Parenthood much the same , but it is a wickedness we can't afford.

In either case the saveing will be a tiny fraction of the need for saveing, but if you are going to cut the meat you had best have already cut the fat.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I say both Planned Parenthood and PBS are useful and good and should be funded.

They should defund several marching bands, the Thunderbirds and the Blue Angels if they really need to find something useless to almost everyone.

[BT]

I say both Planned Parenthood and PBS are useful and good and should be funded.

They should defund several marching bands, the Thunderbirds and the Blue Angels if they really need to find something useless to almost everyone.

I don't have a problem adding the Blue angels and other such extravagances to the list.

[Plane]

I say both Planned Parenthood and PBS are useful and good and should be funded.

They should defund several marching bands, the Thunderbirds and the Blue Angels if they really need to find something useless to almost everyone.

  So you actually do like abortion?

  PBS is a pretty good company that could very likely be self sustaining it isn't needfull that it be publicly funded.
    Planned Parenthood is evil and unfortunately probly able to sustain itself also.

     If I agreed to cut the Blue Angles you would agree to cut Planned Parenthood and PBS?
    There may be a deal to make there , since there must be pain we might as well distribute it .

[sirs]

I think we've reached an accord.  Who we need to contact in DC now?

[Plane]

I say both Planned Parenthood and PBS are useful and good and should be funded.

They should defund several marching bands, the Thunderbirds and the Blue Angels if they really need to find something useless to almost everyone.

I don't have a problem adding the Blue angels and other such extravagances to the list.

     The Blue Angels are not just Navy PR, they are a training and retention program for pilots, they really do pull their weight and their aircraft can be combat ready in hours.

       It is a bigger bang for the buck than PBS , lets not give them off for nothing.

[Xavier_Onassis]

That sounds like Navy propaganda to me.

I watch PBS all the time. I have seen the Blue Angels exactly once, for about thirty minutes.

PBS is a national treasure. Most of their programs are not even concerned with politics.

I think they should raise the licensing fees of commercial broadcasting stations to pay PBS's budget.

The US has the largest air force in the world. Why does it also need the second largest as well? If we have the Thunderbirds, why do we also need the Blue Angels? Do we need a second set of stunt pilots than can land on carriers? Why? Or get rid of the Thunderbirds, since any pilot that can land on a carrier should have little difficulty landing on terra firme.

 Manned aircraft are becoming increasingly obsolete.

And why do we need so MANY military marching bands? Maybe two or three, but no, the US government is the largest employer of musicians in the country, between 4000 and 5000 pipers piping, drummers drumming, flutists tootling. The Marines spend $50 million, the Army, $198 million.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2010/09/29/130212353/military-marching-bands

[Plane]

All right I will give you two bands and one crack flight team for one government propaganda arm (PBS) and one immoral medical foundation(PP).

  Now we got some tradeing going on.

What would you give me for giveing up the CMP? It would have to be something good, cause I really like the CMP.

[Xavier_Onassis]

PBS is not a government propaganda. If you think that it is, you have not been watching it.

I do not know what the CMP is.

[Plane]

http://www.odcmp.com/

The CMP Mission
To Promote Firearm Safety and Marksmanship Training With an Emphasis on Youth

Our Vision
That Every Youth in America Has the Opportunity to Participate in Firearm Safety and Marksmanship Programs

I would really rather keep this one , it is a lot of bang for the buck. But for the sake of destroying something seriously wastefull I would be content to loose it.

   What have you to offer?

   You don't see any conflict of intrest in government funded news network?

[Xavier_Onassis]

   You don't see any conflict of intrest in government funded news network?

No, I see no evidence of bias in PBS or NPR's news coverage. They do their best to cover all sides of every issue, and do it better than any other news network.

News on most AM radio is just crappy repetitious filler between constant stupid ads. They never do in-depth reporting on anything.

And most of what is on NPR and PBS is not news. They have a huge variety of entertainment, science, historical, and cultural shows.