Tea Party

[Grumpier Than Thou]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

That is not what the Tea Party is about. The Tea Party is nothing more than a bunch of fascist clowns who think dressing in 18th century garb and holding up poorly-spelled signs about how Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya is an intelligent form of political discourse.

That's an overly exaggerated description of something that would be correct if worded lighter.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

     I agree with this. Just as well, the Tea Party has become a front for the same bog-standard ultra-conservatives that were busy digging us a pit during the Bush Administration. They have no credibility as fiscal conservatives.

[courts]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

     I agree with this. Just as well, the Tea Party has become a front for the same bog-standard ultra-conservatives that were busy digging us a pit during the Bush Administration. They have no credibility as fiscal conservatives.

This literally doesn't even make sense.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

     I agree with this. Just as well, the Tea Party has become a front for the same bog-standard ultra-conservatives that were busy digging us a pit during the Bush Administration. They have no credibility as fiscal conservatives.

This literally doesn't even make sense.

     Meet the new crooks, same as the old crooks.

[courts]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

     I agree with this. Just as well, the Tea Party has become a front for the same bog-standard ultra-conservatives that were busy digging us a pit during the Bush Administration. They have no credibility as fiscal conservatives.

This literally doesn't even make sense.

     Meet the new crooks, same as the old crooks.

'Ultraconservative' implies some kind of consistency. You can't be an 'ultraconservative' but have 'no credibility' as a 'fiscal conservative.'

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party per se, but I do agree with the idea of Smaller Government and Lower Taxes.

     I agree with this. Just as well, the Tea Party has become a front for the same bog-standard ultra-conservatives that were busy digging us a pit during the Bush Administration. They have no credibility as fiscal conservatives.

This literally doesn't even make sense.

     Meet the new crooks, same as the old crooks.

'Ultraconservative' implies some kind of consistency. You can't be an 'ultraconservative' but have 'no credibility' as a 'fiscal conservative.'

Fiscal conservatism has nothing to do with conservative ideologies. Socialists and communists can be more fiscally conservative than conservatives simply by having a balanced budget and keeping revenues at the same level as spending.

[courts]

'Fiscal conservatism' doesn't just mean 'fiscally responsible.' It's a philosophy of low tax and spending levels and generally minimal regulation, clearly. But in any case, in an american context to say someone is 'ultraconservative' but a 'fiscal liberal' is frankly pretty oxymoronic. It's like saying a car is a really pretty blue color all over, especially with that orange stripe decal covering it.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I evidently missed the memo where ultraconservative meant conservative on literally every single issue that exists, has existed, or will exist.

[courts]

Well if someone deviates from 'conservatism' then how are they 'ultraconservative'? That is assuming some sort of coherent definition. You're still not making any sense. If you had said 'neo-conservative' or 'christian conservative' then I would agree with your point, but you didn't.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Well if someone deviates from 'conservatism' then how are they 'ultraconservative'? That is assuming some sort of coherent definition. You're still not making any sense. If you had said 'neo-conservative' or 'christian conservative' then I would agree with your point, but you didn't.

     I think I said these people had no credibility as fiscal conservatives, not that they were fiscal liberals. It's not like these people actually support fiscally liberal policies; they just oppose spending cuts to their myriad pet projects, which in practical terms comes out to be largely equivalent to fiscal liberalism.

[tpfkaw]

Well if someone deviates from 'conservatism' then how are they 'ultraconservative'? That is assuming some sort of coherent definition. You're still not making any sense. If you had said 'neo-conservative' or 'christian conservative' then I would agree with your point, but you didn't.

     I think I said these people had no credibility as fiscal conservatives, not that they were fiscal liberals. It's not like these people actually support fiscally liberal policies; they just oppose spending cuts to their myriad pet projects, which in practical terms comes out to be largely equivalent to fiscal liberalism.

Which.. is not fiscally conservative and hence fiscally liberal, because they support more government spending. Again, doesn't make sense. This is like if someone posted that some church was very fundamentalist, but had no credibility because they believed in evolution and were universalist. It's incoherent.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Well if someone deviates from 'conservatism' then how are they 'ultraconservative'? That is assuming some sort of coherent definition. You're still not making any sense. If you had said 'neo-conservative' or 'christian conservative' then I would agree with your point, but you didn't.

     I think I said these people had no credibility as fiscal conservatives, not that they were fiscal liberals. It's not like these people actually support fiscally liberal policies; they just oppose spending cuts to their myriad pet projects, which in practical terms comes out to be largely equivalent to fiscal liberalism.

Which.. is not fiscally conservative and hence fiscally liberal, because they support more government spending. Again, doesn't make sense. This is like if someone posted that some church was very fundamentalist, but had no credibility because they believed in evolution and were universalist. It's incoherent.

     The issue is that you folks are demanding coherence, when these people are not coherent. You can call them fiscally liberal if you want, but that suggests they have actual reasons for supporting the fiscal policies they do beyond mere selfishness/laziness/base-pandering.

[courts]

No, we're saying you can't call somebody very 'X thing' then say they're not 'X thing' in a pretty significant way. 'Ultraconservative' implies a distinctly conservative (reactionary) approach to issues/world view across the board. Somebody saying we should get rid of all entitlements, welfare, income tax, shut down the borders, etc. is an ultraconservative. Somebody saying Bachmann would make a good president and/or that they want the government out of their medicare is probably an idiot, but not an ultraconservative.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Okay, that makes sense. I didn't think of the fiscal angle as being "pretty significant", since actual opposition to spending (as long as the politician pays lip service to the idea) has not been an important litmus for conservatism amongst the general public for some time now. But that is taking the notion of perception being reality far too seriously.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Yeah, fiscal conservatism and fiscal responsibility are two completely different things.

Fiscal Conservative:



(Voted for TARP and Medicare...)

Fiscally Responsible:



(He did balance the budget...)

[courts]

Your new moderate hero schtick is getting old, Carl Schulz.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Your new moderate hero schtick is getting old, Carl Schulz.

...

[Liberté]

I'm not fond of the idea that one can only want small government if one is a 'fiscal conservative'. I want no government, in the traditional sense of the word - certainly less government than any elected representative from either party who claims to be 'conservative' - and still would radically alter the structure of our economy from being in a nearly complete state of privatization to being mostly collectively (though not privately) held. The two have no relation to each other.

[Redalgo]

This is not about fiscal conservatism. My suspicion is the Tea Party movement is well-intentioned... but also a latent, authoritarian threat concealed in the cloak of American traditions. Many people in the movement are conservative hardliners - not because of a coherent set of ideas - but because of an unwavering trust in whatever their admired leaders and role models tell them to think. Pious dogmatism, compartmentalized thinking, fear, prejudice, and a propensity to conform makes many of them vulnerable to exploitation by anyone in politics who is willing to tell them what they want to hear to get more power. What worries me most is that I do not believe the activists realize this.