Comments on: The Tea Party wins in Iowa. https://habitablezone.com/2012/01/04/the-tea-party-wins-in-iowa/ Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:05:37 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: RobVG https://habitablezone.com/2012/01/04/the-tea-party-wins-in-iowa/#comment-10382 RobVG Thu, 05 Jan 2012 01:53:56 +0000 http://habitablezone.com/?p=6618#comment-10382 Well I wanted to know what he thinks. It was a good answer. n/t Well I wanted to know what he thinks. It was a good answer. n/t

]]> By: TB https://habitablezone.com/2012/01/04/the-tea-party-wins-in-iowa/#comment-10381 TB Thu, 05 Jan 2012 00:59:00 +0000 http://habitablezone.com/?p=6618#comment-10381 Seriously, Rob, what did you expect? Seriously, Rob, what did you expect?

]]> By: bowser https://habitablezone.com/2012/01/04/the-tea-party-wins-in-iowa/#comment-10374 bowser Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:58:05 +0000 http://habitablezone.com/?p=6618#comment-10374 Sure. The Tea Party embodies GWBs view of the world, in that there are only Good guys and Bad guys and force is the way to resolve all difficulties. The Tea Party does not see a diverse America, with many different groups each with their own identity and values. It has it's own agenda, and does not believe in compromise. It will take down America rather than compromise. It follows that the Tea Party prefers war to negotiation. War should never be a first option. Bush was planning war on Iraq starting in March, 2001, and those weren't contingency plans. The Tea Party's financial plans are to transfer more wealth to the wealthy, cut social programs which help the poor and needy and promote more imperialism by funding a military far, far beyond anything remotely envisioned as "defense". While Bush was never a formal Tea Partier, he was one hell of a partier who smoked rather than drank tea. Nevertheless, his failed policies are represent the Tea Party's agenda. That's why. I believe in less war, more for needy Americans, and from each according to his ability. Sure. The Tea Party embodies GWBs view of the world, in that there are only Good guys and Bad guys and force is the way to resolve all difficulties.

The Tea Party does not see a diverse America, with many different groups each with their own identity and values. It has it’s own agenda, and does not believe in compromise. It will take down America rather than compromise.

It follows that the Tea Party prefers war to negotiation. War should never be a first option. Bush was planning war on Iraq starting in March, 2001, and those weren’t contingency plans.

The Tea Party’s financial plans are to transfer more wealth to the wealthy, cut social programs which help the poor and needy and promote more imperialism by funding a military far, far beyond anything remotely envisioned as “defense”.

While Bush was never a formal Tea Partier, he was one hell of a partier who smoked rather than drank tea. Nevertheless, his failed policies are represent the Tea Party’s agenda.

That’s why. I believe in less war, more for needy Americans, and from each according to his ability.

]]> By: RobVG https://habitablezone.com/2012/01/04/the-tea-party-wins-in-iowa/#comment-10366 RobVG Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:50:44 +0000 http://habitablezone.com/?p=6618#comment-10366 <p>Care to elaborate?</p> About the only problem I have with the tea party is their stand on abortion and gay rights. I don't think they can overturned Roe v Wade by appointing conservative judges and have my doubts that they could push an ammendment through to ban gay marriage. I'm comfortable with their strong gun rights position. George bush was a war monger but I doubt Obama would have a choice If Iran blocked the strait. I'm sure he's planning for it, if it happens, just as any president would. Would a Republican president be more compelled than Obama to use military force? Possibly but if the situation clearly calls for it, it doesn't really matter. What is making you so sad? Care to elaborate?

About the only problem I have with the tea party is their stand on abortion and gay rights. I don’t think they can overturned Roe v Wade by appointing conservative judges and have my doubts that they could push an ammendment through to ban gay marriage. I’m comfortable with their strong gun rights position.

George bush was a war monger but I doubt Obama would have a choice If Iran blocked the strait. I’m sure he’s planning for it, if it happens, just as any president would. Would a Republican president be more compelled than Obama to use military force? Possibly but if the situation clearly calls for it, it doesn’t really matter.

What is making you so sad?

]]>