The tea party conservatives are models of consistency — they have a perfect record of wasting Congress' time in fighting against ObamaCare. And there will be more losses to come.
Polls consistently show fewer than 25 percent of voters are tea party supporters. You can't get very far with those numbers no matter how loud you are. You really need to have ideas that will advance the nation — ones that are good for many, not a select few.
I recently looked at the Ryan budget this group so loves. Even though the deficit keeps decreasing, the tea folks don't seem to notice.
The average Social Security payment is $1,260 a month. Social Security is the sole income for more than a third of recipients, and for more than two-thirds, it's a majority of their income. He would effectively eliminate Social Security for many people. This hurts people and the economy because people spend this money at the mall and the grocery store each month.
The Ryan budget also increases out-of-pocket Medicare costs and turns Medicare into a voucher system.
We need to start sending people to Washington who want to work on keeping our great country the envy of the free world, not tea party people who want to tear it down and create who knows what.
Hurting old people, single mothers and the working poor is no way to win hearts and minds. Not knowing the real facts may advance your cause in the short run, but not in the long run. See the Joe McCarthy saga in the 1950s for a reference point.
Thank God that elections do matter in the long run and we re-elected the right leader last November.
John Emery West Jr.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.