Work From Home

 

One of the lines the left used on conservatives last year was the Republicans were the Party of No.  The meme the left was trying to convey was a simple one.  The Republicans were blocking all progress and if they would just surrender to Obama we would have nirvana. 

 

After seeing what has happened recently and what a second Obama term is going to look like, what is wrong with being the Party of No?

 

The answer is, there is nothing wrong with being the Party of No.  In fact, that is what we should do.

 

Less than two weeks ago, the Republicans surrendered to Obama yet again.  A massive tax increase, on top of the massive Obamacare taxes scheduled to kick in, was the result of the Republican’s compromise.

 

Were Democrats satisfied?

 

Hell no!

 

Nancy Pelosi immediately came out demanding another $1 trillion in tax increases and adamantly telling Republicans, there would be no further spending cuts.

 

Really?

 

Over in the Senate, Harry Reid is not satisfied with being a 90% dictator.  He wants to be a total dictator of the Senate.   Reid has set up the Senate where it is now impossible for the Republicans to get any bills to the floor for a vote.  The Republicans are not even allowed now to offer amendments to bills.    All Republicans have left is the filibuster.

 

Harry Reid wants to strip one of the last protections of a Constitutional Republic by stripping away the right to filibuster in the Senate. 

 

Barack Obama is looking forward to seeing the end of the filibuster so he can shove through the most radical appointees to be confirmed as a part of his regime.

 

One of the first is Chuck Hagel, Obama’s nominee to be Secretary of Defense.  Many conservatives have objected to Hagel because he is anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.   Israel is one of our best allies, but Israel or a nominee’s position towards Israel should not be the defining issue that decides whether or not he or she is confirmed.  Hagel is a moron who wants to slash our defense budget.  Since Hagel is a Republican, he will be used to give Obama “bipartisan” cover for his destruction of our military.

 

Hagel is not qualified to be dogcatcher in Aberdeen Mississippi, much less be Secretary of Defense.   

 

Another bright light for the Obama Regime’s second term is John Brennan.  He is the nominee to be the Director of Central Intelligence.  If you ask almost any real American, they will tell you the greatest threat we face is from international Islamic terror.

 

Brennan thinks we should not be doing anything about terror.  In fact, he thinks it is not a problem.

 

If terrorism is not a problem, please tell me why the hell Americans are still dying in Afghanistan?  If terrorism is not a problem, someone please explain why Obama is still ordering drone strikes in other nations?  Is he just killing for the fun of it or is terrorism a real threat.  It is an either or proposition.

 

The CIA is supposed to be our front line of defense against terrorism.  They are supposed to discover these terrorist plots before we have another 9/11 or God forbid a nuclear 9/11.

 

How the hell is our top agency supposed to protect us against terrorism if its new director believes terrorism is not a problem?

 

The Democrats have a simple philosophy when it comes to negotiation.  What is theirs is theirs.  What is ours is negotiable.  They refuse spending cuts but will negotiate tax increases.  They refuse to allow America to defend itself but will negotiate our surrender.

 

Enough is enough.

 

For the last two years, John Boehner has tried negotiating.  All we have gotten is his freshly laundered white flag of surrender.

 

It is time for us to be the Party of no.

 

If Harry Reid eliminates the filibuster in the Senate, the House should simply say, we are going to pass our bills and we are going home.  We will consider nothing you send us.

 

We will not fund major parts of the government and we will not increase the debt ceiling. 

 

The left wing media will go into shock over this strategy and will pillory conservatives for it.  On the other hand, they do that already so what is the change.

 

What would be so bad if we simply were the Party of No for two years?

 

Could things get any worse than they are right now?

Tags: barack, boehner, brennan, central, chuck, defense, director, filibuster, hagel, harry, More…intelligence, john, nancy, no, obama, of, party, pelosi, reid, secretary, terrorism

Views: 978

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You know, it's just gone to far. We really need to rise up and stop all of this. We need to protest the GOP, we need to tell them that enough is enough with the white flag of surrender. We need to let them know that outside of D.C. people are dying, we are losing all that we once were. We need to place the blame on THEM, make them get stronger and smarter. We have to force out the REAL American in them. It would be hysterical if the house did what you just said Judson, but they wont and we all know that. We need Newt and West and Bachmann in there. THEY have what we need...a back bone, smarts and the ability to say NO and Jump off that Fiscal Cliff you losers. That's what we need, but we DO NOT HAVE THAT!! They will just slump their shoulders and say "OK Harry you win, I am taking my ball and going home." And that will be that!! WE ARE NO LONGER AMERICA!! I miss my Nation!! 

Yes Katie, We need to do a lot of things but talking is not going to get it done. We need a plan and take action for it's accomplishment. Talk is cheep Katie, what we need is to take action.

Harry Reid has caused this country more problems than Obama but continues to get a free ride by conservative and liberal media.  He has blocked budgeting bills from even being discussed in the Senate eliminating the posibility of timely resolution.  You are right on about what should be done by the House - pass responsible bills and go home.  No budget increase!  We should all rally around eliminating Harry Reid when he comes up for reelection (2yrs?)    

One should always remember that the US Constitution was designed to make Federal actions difficult, with different interests represented by the House, Senate and Executive. Note also that under Article 1 Section 3, Senators from each state were chosen by the legislature thereof until Amendment XVII until April 8, 1913

Therefore, the intent was to block all but actions with broad support of the electorate as well as that of the States.

The Party of NO? Indeed the intent of the Founders was to make actions, any actions, by the Federal government extremely difficult. We lost our way in this a century ago!

Very well stated Vern.

I agree.  Although the media focuses on the fact that "the Republicans control only one-half of the legislative branch," the fact is, _nothing_ can become law without their agreement.  They have _huge_ leverage, and should use it.  I think Boehner and McConnell should tell the President, now, that until the President gets a budget approved, they will approve _no more_ spending, or increase the debt ceiling.  No continuing resolutions, nothing.  And not even negotiate about either until then.  If the President doesn't have an approvable budget basically in his pocket, why do we have an Office of Management and Budget, and pay all those guys, at all?

My friends, I hate to say it and I never thought this happen to our country, but Obama, has to go now if not sooner, we are not going to get him out of office by using Constitutional means, we have people dying all ready, Fast and Furious, Libya, Harry Reid needs to go now, he has effectively rendered the senate useless which is what Obama mandated him to do. Now he going after our military, by using hagel to gut it and in the meantime giving our enemies our war equipment. There will be no negotiations on debt or any of that stuff. He will ban all guns from the people. He is all set to declare Martial law.

Here we go again, entering another calendar year of a lot of blogging and little or no action. Judson,please take into consideration of bringing the leaders of, as many conservative organizations as possible together,iron out any differences, and mutually agree on objectives for the year and action plans for there accomplishment. Judson, you've got some bright people in TPN with the capability of doing so much more than wasting time away starring at a computer screen. For heaven's sake, bring us all together and put us all to work saving our nation.

By definition we remain a grassroots movement, Kenneth. We reach consensus on approaches, formulate responses, then take appropriate actions.

It's the process of creating a community among  individuals in order to coordinate their activities to create significantly greater influence than they could possibly have separately (and greater than the sum of the parts).

We within the Tea Parties remain not a majority! Far from it. But we are a noisy minority. Educate your friends and neighbors, contact your Representatives on all important matters. Be a royal pain. Complaining here serves no purpose!

Vern, just recently I've begun really wondering if the Tea Party is still a grassroots organization.
Here's how I got to that:
We learned that FreedomWorks, one of our big supporters, is financed by large corporations rather than by grassroots support.
Whoever funds us -- whoever funds any group -- has influence over that group.
So, if we're funded by big corporations, we're being guided by their worldview. I'm not saying that's bad, but large corporations certainly take a nationwide, even worldwide, point of view. That's why they're large, after all.
So if they're a big influence on us, are we really grassroots?

TeaPartyNation is not tied to FreedomWorks, is it? Not in any way that I know of... Certainly no financial tie. We neither ask for nor receive support from FreedomWorks,

Not to say that there is anything wrong with "big corporations", per se.

You're right in that, at least as far as I know, TPN is not tied to FreedomWorks, but FreedomWorks has been backing "Tea Party" candidates, and it turns out that that backing has come from large corporations.  

I also agree that there's nothing wrong with that.  

But my question is: Are Tea Party ideas really grassroots if they're guided by multinational worldviews?  

Or, to put it another way: In this connected millenium, the Tea Party already has a national and international brand.  Either we acknowledge it and participate in defining it, or others will.

RSS

Tea Party Nation is a social network

Whole Body Research

Young Living Essential Oils

 






© 2014   Created by Judson Phillips.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service