I remember when I first became interested in the tea party. A national news program showed a picture of a tea party rally. Some of the participants were carrying signs and one caught my attention.
T — Taxed
E — Enough
A — Already
I had to know more about the party. I really don't understand why Republicans object to it.
Tea party members believe in smaller federal and state governments. They believe in fewer government regulations. They believe that citizens should be more self-reliant and they disapprove of the nanny state. Above all else, they believe in lower taxes.
After the Republicans threw away their handbook of core beliefs, the tea party found it and made it the fundamental core of its beliefs. The tea party is not afraid to defend its principles.
ObamaCare is an Obamination. It is a complete failure. It is true that the tea party is gloating about it. And why not — the party tried to warn us.
The reason the tea party opposes ObamaCare is simple: The party is against new taxes.
The individual mandate clause of ObamaCare was challenged and when it went before the U.S. Supreme Court, the court ruled it was a constitutional tax on young, healthy, productive workers. That tax will pay for insurance for the chronically ill and the poor.
The IRS will be the collective arm of ObamaCare. It will withhold or seize your federal refund check if you don't sign up for insurance or pay your fine.
Don't believe the lies and propaganda of the Democrats and the media. Instead, do your own research.
Base your opinion of ObamaCare and the tea party on facts.
Show commenting policy
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.
- Corbett is the honest choice
- Corbett over Wolf I
- Corbett over Wolf II
- Watson in 33rd
- Barbour sentence shameful
- Gross in 45th
- Positive promise
- Inconsistent Wolf
- Gun questions for mayor I
- Deepening divide
- Ebola: No worries, right?