The Trouble With the Tea Parties

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Trouble With the Tea Parties[/FONT]
Their enemies are the best thing about them. Article by Brian Wilson.
[/FONT]​
[/FONT]
[/FONT]


[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Party Scooper[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Brian Wilson[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]

[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Doesn?t look as if I?ll be invited to be the Featured Speaker at any more Tea Parties.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Not that I ever had been ? but there was a time I was high on the TP Invite List as someone who knew a thing or three about Media Stuff and was willing to share with the Newly Interested at their "learning meet-ups." Many of those "cut-out" sessions were ? and continue to be ? quite good. Fresh faces, yearning to learn free all the things they were never taught (or forgot) about the Constitution, the vision of the Founding Dads as well other stuff they never knew about broadcast and print media, promotion, advertising and assorted "mass com" things. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]So far, they have done much better with the former than the latter.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Thanks to the ego-plumping effects of Media Exposure and Reporter Fawning, many of the Tea Party Spokesmen-Who-Are-Not-Spokesmen-Because-We-Don?t-Have-Spokesmen have become as thin-skinned and self-centered as just about any politician running for re-election. After humble, emotional beginnings fueled by a resuscitated love of Country and the liberating effects of a little factual awareness of how government is eroding Rights, they have suffered the inflation of the ego that causes Blimp Envy, inevitably the predictable result of overexposure to media exposure and the subsequent public recognition it spawns. After 45 years in radio and/or TV in back of a mic or in front of a camera, I have yet to noodle out what it is about those electronic marvels that turn your average Joe or Jane into a Certified Political Pundit after just one or two interviews. Call it the "Joe the Plumber" Syndrome. One shot on national TV turned a struggling entrepreneurial-sometime-plumber into a Tea Party Icon cum Headliner commanding private jets and hefty speaking fees. He even (ghost) wrote a book! Nice guy. Local. Lives out in the ?burbs with his son. But his basic clich?-festooned bon motes are received as pronunciations of Delphic Oracle proportions because he had a "Brush With Greatness": caught on camera with the Great He, complete with national news distribution. Joe has become more selective now about whose calls he returns, where he appears, for whom and for how much. Not just any Tea Party commands his presence and attention. Sean Hannity has him on Speed Dial now! Celebrity perks ? gotta love ?em! But I wonder how many profound insights have sprung forth from JtP that weren?t more eloquently, articulately and accurately expressed years and years earlier, right up to today by Walter Williams, Tom Sowell, James Bovard, Tom Woods and our own Lew Rockwell to name a few stellar examples? [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maybe I?m morphing into a low-brow elitist.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Since the Tea Party Movement began being cast by the MSM as the "Force To Be Reckoned With," many TP (non)-Leaders are reacting to the slightest criticism with a Rapid Response rivaling the Clinton War Room! On my talk show recently, after complimenting The Movement for all it has accomplished raising awareness on a national scale, I suggested the local TP chapters should get active dealing with local issues. Getting involved in your backyard is easier, less expensive and time consuming than yet another road trip to march around DC with spiffy signage, listening to some of my colleagues pounding on the podium, spouting the same old same old. It?s more productive, too. Curing highly contagious Neighborhood Apathy (16% voter turn-out here) would have immediate, positive repercussions with long-term benefits. And, unlike unseating long-entrenched US Senators and Congressman, a lot easier. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"Tim" was on Line 2. "Tim" was a Tea Party (non) Spokesman. "Tim" was not happy ? but he had paid attention at the Media Relations meet-up I conducted so he began by telling me how I am "usually right on target" and he "agrees with me on just about everything." (Here comes the "But"): "But I?m tired of you ragging on the Tea Party all the time. We?(insert super-human accomplishments here) and we don?t? (insert self-serving rationalizations here) and you need to stop criticizing the Tea Party!" I asked how effective were 46 TP?ers picketing and posing for the TV cameras in front of OH 9<SUP>th</SUP> District Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur?s local office recently ? when she wasn?t even in town ? but not one TP member showed up for a public forum with County Commissioners to discuss changing the form of (pitiful) county government?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Crickets from Tim ? but the emails were combustible.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]This isn?t an isolated case. Tea Party people call often. Many times they have correctly isolated an issue negatively impacting Constitutional issues worthy of attention and discussion. Many times they are incensed when I have called out a disconnect between their professed affection and allegiance to the Constitution while (non) spokesmen speak positively and publicly to the media about a Candidate who just regaled the crowd with all the juicy parts of government wealth confiscation and redistribution to their unemployed friends. Where was the outrage?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maybe it was hanging out on the blogs?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Writing after attending a Tea Party event in the DC area, James Bovard?s recent Christian Science Monitor piece generated a carpet bombing of scathing denouncements from TP proponents of free expression whose 1<SUP>st</SUP> Amendment affection was only exceeded by their masterful exercise of objective analysis. Maybe Jim?s line "Many "tea party" activists staunchly oppose big government, except when it is warring, wiretapping, or waterboarding." While MOA accurate, was Jim a tad too "free" for advocates of Freedom? As Jim noted, too many Tea Party people are conservatives pissed off at the GOP for not being conservative enough ? at least on the issues conservatives deem important. If Constitutional concurrence can be firmly established, you win the Back Stage passes. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Responding to Tea Party audiences who say "We love Libertarian principles but we have to vote for Republicans because we can?t let the Democrats win," Ken Matesz, Ohio?s first Libertarian gubernatorial candidate since pterodactyls flew, wrote recently: [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"This makes me wonder about the value of the tea party groups. If their only goal is to prevent Democrats from being elected, then why all the education? Why bother with learning the Constitution? Why bother circulating petitions for health-care amendments? Why bother calling and writing to congressmen and senators? Why bother learning more about free-market economics? Why study the founders and our founding principles? If the solution lies in electing Republicans, then there is no more you need to know. Just show up and vote Republican and all will be well."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I read Ken?s comments on the air. The phone lines should be repaired by next Tuesday.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]And so it goes: Child-like in its innocence and energy; childish is its conduct and response to constructive criticism. If the Tea Party insists on eschewing "leaders," maybe it would be open to a few adults.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In a letter to Liberty Magazine, Joe Martino wrote: "At present, the strategy of the Tea Party movement is not revolution per se, but getting sympathetic candidates through the nomination process in the major parties. The movement has had only mixed success in the primaries so far in 2010, but since it?s less than two years old, perhaps not much more could have been expected? Unless the Tea Party movement is prepared to put lives, fortunes, and sacred honor on the line, it will end up as nothing but a cathartic venting of anger. Ultimately the Tea Partiers ? and those who agree with them but don?t actually go out and protest ? must make it clear to the clowns in Washington that civil disobedience (or worse) lies at the end of the road those clowns are dragging us down. The issue is not that the Tea Partiers want a revolution; the issue is that the government must be made to believe that a revolution is what they will get if they don?t stop encroaching on our freedoms. More than that, the clowns must be made to realize that if they don?t undo their encroachments, they will get a revolution."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In response, Jay Fisher wrote: "If the Tea Party members decide to remain outside the traditional party model and serve as a barometer of public attitude instead, it runs the risk of creating a schism between those who advocate taking part in "politics as is" to create change and those who advocate for more profound action to influence politics. The most likely method the Tea Party can adopt to appease these conflicting interests is having both a political and an action wing, much like in Northern Ireland there existed both Sinn Fein and the I.R.A. However, the United States has no such political tradition to base this organization upon. Thus, the Tea Party entity still ends up trapped by its name."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]There are many good things about the Tea Party Movement. As a result of their outreach efforts and publicity, more people than ever are actually thinking, talking, learning, asking and participating a tremendous nation-wide mass Awareness Raising Learning Experience. Many involved are actively involved, not sunshine patriots who think "maybe nationalized health care isn?t a swell idea" but they don?t know why. They pride themselves on being a "leaderless movement" that doesn?t endorse candidates, encouraging people to vote for whomever they like ? even though the Tea Party really likes the most conservative Republican candidate in the race. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Pragmatically however, a "leaderless movement" may be way too similar to a "jobless recovery." What is to become of it? Can it sustain itself without fracturing into facets of partisanship? Can Tea Party adrenalin fuel the size, scope and long-term needs of the Revolution necessary to save the Republic? Can the TPM police itself to keep from being infiltrated ? and subsequently marginalized ? by the skullduggery of Manchurians From Other Wars? [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Just as tough, draconian austerity programs are the unpopular prescriptions for saving Greece and the rest of the PIGS (and coming to America), it will be at least as difficult to deal with the entrenched power, prejudice and super-hubris of the Government-Media complex. With Aggressive Ignorance and Contagious Apathy at epidemic proportions among those who otherwise would be allies in the fight, to have dissention in the ranks of the Tea Party movement would be the cue for the band to play "The Party?s Over."[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]July 19, 2010[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Brian Wilson [send him mail], nationally ignored talk show host and occasional LRC un-indicted co-contributor, is currently annoying miniscule audiences in a number of markets from his technically challenged studios safely outside the dictatorship of Toledo. Brian may be endured from 3p?6p at www.wspd.com. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Copyright ? 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Best of Brian Wilson[/FONT] <!--endclickprintinclude-->[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript><!--google_ad_client = "pub-9106533008329745";google_ad_width = 336;google_ad_height = 280;google_ad_format = "336x280_as";google_ad_type = "text";google_ad_channel ="";//--></SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/expansion_embed.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/test_domain.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/render_ads.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);</SCRIPT><INS style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; POSITION: relative; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 336px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline-table; HEIGHT: 280px; VISIBILITY: visible; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0px"></INS>​
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
shirleysherrod.jpg



SHOCK: Video Suggests Racism At NAACP Event
Official At Freedom Fund Banquet Says Racial Considerations Would Be Factor For How Much

Shirley Sherrod, USDA Rural Development Georgia State Director

(7/1/2010)
Last Tuesday, the NAACP passed a resolution condemning racism in the Tea Party movement. The organization's delegates called on Tea Party leaders to "repudiate those in their ranks who use racist language in their signs and speeches."

Tea Party members and supporters saw the resolution as a condemnation of the group itself, which calls for fiscal responsibility, restrictions on governmental power, and backs political candidates who claim the same.

The NAACP's action caught the attention of Andrew Breitbart of BigGovernment.com, who said the controversy was "absolutely manufactured for political gain," in a summer "in which the economy is the number one issue affecting blacks and whites in this country. This country can ill afford the schism of race to be exploited the way [he is] based upon the false premise of the Tea Party being racist."

He also claimed to possess recorded evidence of racism from the NAACP.

On Monday, Breitbart posted a video of a speech by Shirley Sherrod, USDA Rural Development Georgia State Director, delivered at the NAACP's 20th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet.

The video shows Sherrod speaking of racial considerations being a factor for how much help she would give.

"The first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm, he took a long time talking but he was trying to show me he was superior to me. I know what he was doing, but he had come to me for help. What he didn't know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was, I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him," Sherrod said.:scared

"I was struggling with the fact that so many black people had lost their farmland, and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land. So I didn't give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough," Sherrod said. "So that when he, I assumed the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me, either that or the Georgia Department of Agriculture, and he needed to go back and report that I did try to help him."

In the video, Sherrod also spoke of referring the white farmer to a white lawyer, thinking the latter would be more sympathetic because of race. "So I took him to a white lawyer that had attended some of training that we had provided because Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farm. So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him."

The NAACP had no immediate response Monday afternoon.
................................................................


This is how DTBlackgumby would treat a black person if they came to him for insurance.

its the reverse discrimination.

its wrong in so many ways.
 
Last edited:

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
CNN) -- Anti-establishment candidates are capitalizing on widespread anti-incumbent fervor and proposing term limits as a way to bring the power back to the people.

As political hopefuls try to persuade voters to send them to Congress, they're also promising they won't be there long.

Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul said that if elected, he can't see himself serving more than two terms. In Rhode Island, Democratic congressional hopeful Bill Lynch has proposed a 12-year cap in the House and Senate. And in Maryland, Republican Andy Harris has assured voters that, should he go to the U.S. House, he'll be out of there by 2023.

It's a message that polls well and gets applause at campaign rallies, but David King, director of Harvard's program for Newly Elected Members of the U.S. Congress, said term limits do more harm than good.

"It's political junk food. It tastes good but hurts the body politic in the long run," he said.

Advocates and opponents of term limits are after the same thing: keeping the power out of the hands of lobbyists and special interests.

King says term limits do the opposite by taking the business of lawmaking away from elected representatives and giving it to professional staff and lobbyists.

Instead, the elections process needs better campaign finance laws and a more engaged electorate, he said.

"That leads to a situation in which we reward politicians or statesmen or stateswoman who have been around for a long time and are terrific, while at the same time being able to get rid of the low-quality legislators at all levels," King said.

But Philip Blumel, president of U.S. Term Limits, points to the high re-election rates as evidence of the need for term limits.

Re-election rates have hovered around 96 percent in the House and 85 percent in the Senate over the past 10 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The average length of service for lawmakers in the current session of Congress is 5.5 terms in the House and 2.2 terms in the Senate, according to the Congressional Research Service.

"You have a situation where you have a long-standing relationship between special interests and an incumbent who can't lose, and that is a toxic combination, and that's most of the Congress," Blumel said. "Term limits ensure regular, competitive elections. They permit change."

It's a debate as old as the Constitution that term-limit supporters hope to amend.

Alexander Hamilton spoke against limits, writing in Federalist Paper No. 72 that, "Nothing appears more plausible at first sight, nor more ill-founded upon close inspection."

Thomas Jefferson, however, said term limitation, at least of the president, was necessary "to prevent every danger which might arise to American freedom from continuing too long in office."

If you value rotation in office, like the founders did, we need some kind of codified term limits.

--Philip Blumel, U.S. Term Limits
After the Constitution was drafted, Jefferson said one aspect he disliked was "the abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President."

"If you value rotation in office, like the founders did, we need some kind of codified term limits," Blumel said.

Fifteen states have term limits for state lawmakers. Another six states have agreed to term limits in the past, but the limits were repealed by the legislature or overturned by the courts, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Most of the states with term limits got them through a ballot initiative, a process that only 24 states have.

Jennie Bowser, who tracks term limits for the NCSL, said that while voters are generally supportive of term limits, some studies have shown negative effects that aren't obvious to the average voter, such as a loss of influence in the legislature to the executive branch and a loss of policy champions who spend years building expertise in certain subjects.

"They're sort of inside the legislature, under-the-dome kind of things that people who are close to the legislature notice ... but no legislature has had to go out of business because term limits wrecked them, so it's not stuff that is visible to voters," she said.

The new wave of calls for term limits is reminiscent of the lead-up to the 1994 elections. Armed with a legislative agenda called the "Contract with America," Republicans put forth a message with an emphasis on term limits.

The GOP took back control of the House and Senate for the first time in nearly 50 years, and, for the first time ever, the House voted on legislation that would limit representatives to six two-year terms and senators to two six-year terms.

The vote was 227--204 -- a simple majority, but not the two-thirds required for a constitutional amendment.

At the time, 23 states had passed laws imposing term limits on their federal lawmakers, but in May of 1995, two months after the House vote, the Supreme Court ruled that doing so was unconstitutional.

"Allowing individual States to adopt their own qualifications for congressional service would be inconsistent with the Framers' vision of a uniform National Legislature representing the people of the United States. If the qualifications set forth in the text of the Constitution are to be changed, that text must be amended," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote.

In order to pass a constitutional amendment on term limits, the House and Senate would have to pass legislation with a two-thirds majority, and then three-fourths of the state legislatures would have to ratify it.

South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint introduced a bill to limit lawmakers to six years in the House and 12 years in the Senate.

DeMint's bill has yet to come up for a vote, but for Blumel, the outlook is good.

... Sometimes instinct and anger take us in the wrong direction.

--David King, Harvard Kennedy School of Government

RELATED TOPICS
U.S. Congress
Elections and Voting
"There are periods in history where term limits are at the fore, and if the people of the country want them and demand them now, we have as good a chance as any that we ever had to have them. So it's an exciting time," he said.

But King says that even if the idea had the support of the president and Congress, he is confident that the American public would reject it.

"The evidence after 20 years of this in state legislatures is crystal clear: term limits empower special interests, lobbyists and long-time staffers and they work against the interests of the American people," he said.

The reason the issue polls well, King said, is because there hasn't been a vigorous dialogue about it.

"People are reacting by their instinct and anger, which is understandable. But sometimes instinct and anger take us in the wrong direction," he said.
....................................................................

these fawkers will never allow term limits.

something has to change.

88% of Americans favor term limits.

This shows us where the power really is and it is not with the American people.

Its with the corrupt lobby eating asswipes in Congress and the House.
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
I recently had lunch with a teabagger. As expected, he was ranting about the federal deficit and taxes.

So I asked him, what would you cut out of the federal budget to reduce it by $1 trillion - social security, medicare, defense?

His answer - "none of those, EYE want those things."

So, I asked, where would you cut one trillion?

His answer, the same as all teabaggers was, "Uh, uh, duh, uh, duh, uh, duh..."

And that's the problem with teabaggers. All compliant, no answers.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
I recently had lunch with a teabagger. As expected, he was ranting about the federal deficit and taxes.

So I asked him, what would you cut out of the federal budget to reduce it by $1 trillion - social security, medicare, defense?

His answer - "none of those, EYE want those things."

So, I asked, where would you cut one trillion?

His answer, the same as all teabaggers was, "Uh, uh, duh, uh, duh, uh, duh..."

And that's the problem with teabaggers. All compliant, no answers.
................................................................

you dont cut programs that the goverment has stolen from for the last 100 years

It has to be defense.

There is so much waste in our defense its ungodly.

We got to get out of nations just to be there.

The bases we have around the world are just too much. We are pissing money into the wind.

And for what. To be able to respond a day earlier than we could anyway to whatever the hell we would need to in Europe.

A new submarine cost ...........................

See below if you want to just throw the fawk up over wasted dollars. How many new ways to we need to kill ppl.

when is enough enough ?
 
Last edited:

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
New Navy Sub May Cost $1 Billion More, CBO Says (Update1)
May 25, 2010, 5:47 PM EDT
More From Businessweek

By Tony Capaccio

May 25 (Bloomberg) -- The Navy?s new nuclear-missile submarine could cost on average about $1 billion more than the service projects, according to congressional budget analysts.

Each submarine could cost about $8.2 billion, or almost 14 percent more than the Navy?s estimate of $7.2 billion, the Congressional Budget Office said. The first ship of the class -- typically the most expensive -- could run as high as $13 billion, or $4 billion over the Navy estimate, the nonpartisan agency said in a report released today.

The president?s Nuclear Posture Review issued last month stressed the importance of maintaining the undersea leg of the U.S. triad of nuclear weapons, which also includes land-based missiles and aerial bombs.

The annual report focuses on the budget pressures facing the Navy as it tries to grow from 286 vessels today to at least 313 and as high as 323 over the next 20 years. The submarine?s ?design, cost and capabilities are among the most significant uncertainties? in the shipbuilding programs, CBO said.

The CBO and Navy cost estimates of the submarine program differ because the Navy priced it ?as though it were being built today whereas CBO incorporated the effects that inflation would have on submarines built 10 to 20 years from now,? the agency said.

Still Under Design

The vessel is still under design, and construction of the first of 12 planned isn?t scheduled to begin until 2019. It would be commissioned in 2027.

The new submarines are intended to replace the current Ohio-class fleet, the first of which deployed in 1981.

Northrop Grumman Corp. and General Dynamics Corp. builds the Navy?s submarines. Lockheed Martin Corp. builds the D-5 Trident nuclear missiles the submarines carry.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates in a speech May 3 cited the new submarine?s expense as one example of cost increases that may prove unaffordable.

?We have to ask whether the nation can really afford a Navy that relies on $3 billion to $6 billion destroyers, $7 billion submarines and $11 billion carriers,? Gates told the annual Navy League conference. ?It is reasonable to wonder whether the nation is getting a commensurate increase in capability in exchange for these spiraling costs.?

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, in a speech three days earlier at the National Press Club in Washington, said this of the new submarines: ?Those ships, if they cost what we estimate they will cost today, will knock a big hole? in ship budgets.

Should the first submarine cost $13 billion, as CBO projects, it would be the most expensive Navy vessel ever built -- $1.3 billion more than the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier scheduled for commissioning in 2015.

About $6 billion would be spent though 2015 for research and development. A down-payment on the first submarine would be authorized in 2015 under the current Navy plan with most of the money authorized in 2019, CBO said. The second vessel would be purchased in 2022, followed by one per year from 2024 to 2033.


......................................................................


This is just seriously pathetic .

:SIB :SIB


and this is to say nothing about what it costs
per year to operate a 8 billion dollar submarine

add another billion or two.

Or one of the big destroyers with 3,000 ppl on them . Whats it take to feed them for one day ?


come on tea party ppl and right wing nutters.

come to your fawking senses.

America does not have to rule the world with its defense. We can destroy any country we want 10 times over with 50 nukes directed at them.

when is enough just enough
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,606
252
83
"the bunker"
I recently had lunch with a teabagger. As expected, he was ranting about the federal deficit and taxes.

So I asked him, what would you cut out of the federal budget to reduce it by $1 trillion - social security, medicare, defense?

His answer - "none of those, EYE want those things."

So, I asked, where would you cut one trillion?

His answer, the same as all teabaggers was, "Uh, uh, duh, uh, duh, uh, duh..."

And that's the problem with teabaggers. All compliant, no answers.


repeal obamacare......and all the union carveouts the rest of us are paying for(under the guise of financial reform).......using the stimulous money to pay for extended unemloyment payments(not just tacking it onto the deficit)...

cut the new,kushy perks provided gitmo detainees...the fricking bi-weekly whitehouse concerts....outlaw earmarks....all programs associated with acorn....take a shitpotload of cash out of the house and senate retirements and expense accounts...realign govt wages with the private sector...

zap the real cause of the financiial meltdown(freddie mac and fannie mae)....

that`s a start...
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
I just googled every which way I could to find out how much it costs to maintain a Navy destroyer or a submarine per year at sea.

Guess what.

This info is not available.

Even to find out how many men are on these ships is not available.

It would make you sick to know.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy -- video that now has forced the official to resign.

Shirley Sherrod, the department's Georgia director of Rural Development, is shown in the clip describing "the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm." Sherrod, who is black, claimed the farmer took a long time trying to show he was "superior" to her. The audience laughed as she described how she determined his fate.

"He had to come to me for help. What he didn't know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him," she said. "I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land -- so I didn't give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough."

The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.

"There is zero tolerance for discrimination at USDA, and I strongly condemn any act of discrimination against any person," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a written statement. "We have been working hard through the past 18 months to reverse the checkered civil rights history at the department and take the issue of fairness and equality very seriously.

....................................................................


Here is the differance in reverse discrimination.

The black woman was fired for what she did.


DTBlackgumby would have never been found out and gone on for many years doing the same thing over and over with little worry or regard to the
ways he was affecting peoples lives negatively.

When DTBlackgumby was asked why he would discriminate and try to screw some ppl over others he stated.

It just bee's that way sometimes
 
Last edited:

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
come on tea party ppl and right wing nutters.

come to your fawking senses.

America does not have to rule the world with its defense. We can destroy any country we want 10 times over with 50 nukes directed at them.

when is enough just enough
There's no such thing as enough for chickenhawks when it comes to defense spending Scotty.

In fact, I'm sure there are homeless chickenhawks, who if you asked where they'd like to see our tax dollars spent, they'd reply: "Well, I'd like to see 99 cents of every dollar spent on $8 Billion Nuclear Submarines and the other penny spent on building better cardboard boxes."

Trench
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
There's no such thing as enough for chickenhawks when it comes to defense spending Scotty.

In fact, I'm sure there are homeless chickenhawks, who if you asked where they'd like to see our tax dollars spent, they'd reply: "Well, I'd like to see 99 cents of every dollar spent on $8 Billion Nuclear Submarines and the other penny spent on building better cardboard boxes."

Trench
.............................................................

I agree

all politicians are afraid to make huge takeaways from the military because they will get labeled weak on defense.

its a crazy world but something has to give.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top