Capitalism

[Kirkland Laing]

I didn't really agree with him. Where is he anyway? I bet he's been spending the day teabagging.

...a protest is a protest no matter who it's against...I WORK for a living, so I wasn't going to spend all day holding up some crude sign like a fucking homeless person.

I don't like the way the tax system is set up and I am happy there are millions of people who don't like the taxing and the spending that the government has been doing for quite some time now. It's nice that they decided to call out those responsible for this mess...the Republicans have been voted out in 2006 and 2008 and the Democrats in Congress have earned these protests.

So you weren't teabagging yesterday but teabagging is something you're OK with generally. Interesting to know. I enjoyed watching all those people displaying their teabags in public but really it's all just a big hissy fit because their guy lost the election.

[El Kabong]

Kirkland, does the US government spend too much money?

[Kirkland Laing]

Kirkland, does the US government spend too much money?

They were spending too much money before Obama took over. Between 2000 and 2008 Bush doubled the national debt to ten trillion and gave guarantees to the banks for another ten trillion. Where were the teabaggers then? The only reason they're upset now is that their guy lost the election and there's now a black man in the White House. If McCain had won there'd be exactly the same level of spending but no teabaggers.

[VictorCharlie]

This argument is getting so old. The thing is I know your are better than this b/c I've seen you post on this topic before. Saying that the level of Federal spending is ok b/c the last guy did it too is the kind of debate I'd have with my four year old. Also by your statement we can say that any political protest has no meaning or relevance its just b/c "their" guy lost?

[Kirkland Laing]

This argument is getting so old. The thing is I know your are better than this b/c I've seen you post on this topic before. Saying that the level of Federal spending is ok b/c the last guy did it too is the kind of debate I'd have with my four year old. Also by your statement we can say that any political protest has no meaning or relevance its just b/c "their" guy lost?

I'n not saying the level of spending is OK, I'm wondering why people have only got so exercised about it in the last couple of months.

[VictorCharlie]

This argument is getting so old. The thing is I know your are better than this b/c I've seen you post on this topic before. Saying that the level of Federal spending is ok b/c the last guy did it too is the kind of debate I'd have with my four year old. Also by your statement we can say that any political protest has no meaning or relevance its just b/c "their" guy lost?

I'n not saying the level of spending is OK, I'm wondering why people have only got so exercised about it in the last couple of months.

I think most rationale people can agree that President Bush did a pretty crappy job and it is unfortunate that while he was president many of the GOP refused come out against him. That being said many of the tea party (who picked this stupid name anyway?) attendees might be hypocrites but it doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

[Kirkland Laing]

This argument is getting so old. The thing is I know your are better than this b/c I've seen you post on this topic before. Saying that the level of Federal spending is ok b/c the last guy did it too is the kind of debate I'd have with my four year old. Also by your statement we can say that any political protest has no meaning or relevance its just b/c "their" guy lost?

I'n not saying the level of spending is OK, I'm wondering why people have only got so exercised about it in the last couple of months.

I think most rationale people can agree that President Bush did a pretty crappy job and it is unfortunate that while he was president many of the GOP refused come out against him. That being said many of the tea party (who picked this stupid name anyway?) attendees might be hypocrites but it doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

Most of them are there protesting about tax increases when they just got a tax cut. The money Obama increased spending by is only to counteract the cratering of the economy caused by the policies of the last eight years. He's reacting to the biggest financial disaster for nearly a century and things would be a great deal worse if he hadn't reacted. If McCain had won the election he would have done pretty much the same thing, except we wouldn't have seen any of those teabaggers out protesting.

[El Kabong]

They were spending too much money before Obama took over. Between 2000 and 2008 Bush doubled the national debt to ten trillion and gave guarantees to the banks for another ten trillion. Where were the teabaggers then? The only reason they're upset now is that their guy lost the election and there's now a black man in the White House. If McCain had won there'd be exactly the same level of spending but no teabaggers.

The bold and underlined part answers the question, I didn't ask for a commentary on why people are angry and besides you are wrong in the conclusion you have reached.

Yes the government spends too much. That's all I needed to read, and especially from you who if I am not mistaken wrote in a number of posts that America spends too much and taxes too little. The tea baggers agree that America spends ( and has spent before Obama got in office as well) too much but they don't believe raising taxes does anything other than give the government the green light to spend more money.

There might not be tea baggers had McCain won, however, there would be no lack of protesters, I am sure you will admit to that.

[Kirkland Laing]

They were spending too much money before Obama took over. Between 2000 and 2008 Bush doubled the national debt to ten trillion and gave guarantees to the banks for another ten trillion. Where were the teabaggers then? The only reason they're upset now is that their guy lost the election and there's now a black man in the White House. If McCain had won there'd be exactly the same level of spending but no teabaggers.

The bold and underlined part answers the question, I didn't ask for a commentary on why people are angry and besides you are wrong in the conclusion you have reached.

Yes the government spends too much. That's all I needed to read, and especially from you who if I am not mistaken wrote in a number of posts that America spends too much and taxes too little. The tea baggers agree that America spends ( and has spent before Obama got in office as well) too much but they don't believe raising taxes does anything other than give the government the green light to spend more money.

There might not be tea baggers had McCain won, however, there would be no lack of protesters, I am sure you will admit to that.

After the evidence of my Infallibility and your relentless wrongness over the past couple of years, I find it difficult to believe my eyes here. It looks like you're claiming that Kirkland Laing, The Infallible One, is wrong about something! Your arrogance is breathtaking.

[El Kabong]

After the evidence of my Infallibility and your relentless wrongness over the past couple of years, I find it difficult to believe my eyes here. It looks like you're claiming that Kirkland Laing, The Infallible One, is wrong about something! Your arrogance is breathtaking.

...as is your ignorance.

Did I not mention when Barry was running, even in the Primary that any who opposed the Great Obama would be called a racist


Am I wrong

[killersheep]

After the evidence of my Infallibility and your relentless wrongness over the past couple of years, I find it difficult to believe my eyes here. It looks like you're claiming that Kirkland Laing, The Infallible One, is wrong about something! Your arrogance is breathtaking.

...as is your ignorance.

Did I not mention when Barry was running, even in the Primary that any who opposed the Great Obama would be called a racist


Am I wrong

That is a fabrication.

[Kirkland Laing]

After the evidence of my Infallibility and your relentless wrongness over the past couple of years, I find it difficult to believe my eyes here. It looks like you're claiming that Kirkland Laing, The Infallible One, is wrong about something! Your arrogance is breathtaking.

...as is your ignorance.

Did I not mention when Barry was running, even in the Primary that any who opposed the Great Obama would be called a racist


Am I wrong

And as usual you just keep changing the subject. Why are the teabaggers only getting upset now? Where were they the last eight years?