Tea Party candidate taken behind the woodshed by an old man asking a simple question

[Ryantology]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/19...iel-rally/

JACKSON, Miss. –A quiet morning campaign event erupted into a shouting match Thursday morning when a Democratic voter crashed a coffee klatch by State Sen. Chris McDaniel and got into an angry confrontation the conservative who is challenging six term Sen. Thad Cochran.

“How, with no seniority and a promise simply not to get along with anyone, will you accomplish any of the things you want to accomplish?” shouted John Davis, a 77-year-old retired teacher who was shopping at Kroger’s grocery when he noticed Mr. McDaniel about to begin a meet and greet session with about a dozen local retirees.


“What have they accomplished lately by putting us in debt?” shot back Mr. McDaniel, who outpolled Mr. Cochran in the June 3 primary but is facing in a June 24 run off because he did not break 50%.

Mr. Davis, with finger-wagging emphasis, retorted, “What have they accomplished? They have accomplished airports. They have accomplished roads. They have accomplished schools.’’

It looked like it would get really ugly when Mr. McDaniel snapped, “Get your finger out of my face.”

Mr. McDaniel responded to his support for federal spending by saying, “you do so by adding trillions on my children’s back, trillions of dollars we can’t recover from. Our country borrows 46 cents on every dollar.” Mr. Davis interrupted and said, “I don’t want this rote answer. I want to know how you will accomplish it.”

Mr. McDaniel backed away and sat down, and Mr. Davis was surrounded and eventually sent away by the octogenarians who had gathered to hear from the candidate.

The mainstream media is supposed to have a liberal bias, but when have you ever heard any MSM talking head ask a Tea Party lunatic a question as simple as "how will you accomplish cutting government spending without allowing everything we rely on to fall apart?" If there was a bias, they'd ask it all the time, because it would put on display the complete lack of value inherent in this ideology.

Now ask yourself how many corporate-owned MSM talking heads keep going on about Benghazi even though it's an obviously artificial 'scandal', and you'll know where the bias really lies.

Rock on, old dude.

[Heywood]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/19...iel-rally/

JACKSON, Miss. –A quiet morning campaign event erupted into a shouting match Thursday morning when a Democratic voter crashed a coffee klatch by State Sen. Chris McDaniel and got into an angry confrontation the conservative who is challenging six term Sen. Thad Cochran.

“How, with no seniority and a promise simply not to get along with anyone, will you accomplish any of the things you want to accomplish?” shouted John Davis, a 77-year-old retired teacher who was shopping at Kroger’s grocery when he noticed Mr. McDaniel about to begin a meet and greet session with about a dozen local retirees.


“What have they accomplished lately by putting us in debt?” shot back Mr. McDaniel, who outpolled Mr. Cochran in the June 3 primary but is facing in a June 24 run off because he did not break 50%.

Mr. Davis, with finger-wagging emphasis, retorted, “What have they accomplished? They have accomplished airports. They have accomplished roads. They have accomplished schools.’’

It looked like it would get really ugly when Mr. McDaniel snapped, “Get your finger out of my face.”

Mr. McDaniel responded to his support for federal spending by saying, “you do so by adding trillions on my children’s back, trillions of dollars we can’t recover from. Our country borrows 46 cents on every dollar.” Mr. Davis interrupted and said, “I don’t want this rote answer. I want to know how you will accomplish it.”

Mr. McDaniel backed away and sat down, and Mr. Davis was surrounded and eventually sent away by the octogenarians who had gathered to hear from the candidate.

The mainstream media is supposed to have a liberal bias, but when have you ever heard any MSM talking head ask a Tea Party lunatic a question as simple as "how will you accomplish cutting government spending without allowing everything we rely on to fall apart?" If there was a bias, they'd ask it all the time, because it would put on display the complete lack of value inherent in this ideology.

Now ask yourself how many corporate-owned MSM talking heads keep going on about Benghazi even though it's an obviously artificial 'scandal', and you'll know where the bias really lies.

Rock on, old dude.

Well from the exchange it seems McDaniel wants to curb government spending. He can help accomplish that goal by voting against government spending. He doesn't need to get along with anyone. He doesn't need to compromise. He just needs to vote "no" to appropriation bills.

[Tonus]

Mr. McDaniel responded to his support for federal spending by saying, “you do so by adding trillions on my children’s back, trillions of dollars we can’t recover from. Our country borrows 46 cents on every dollar.” Mr. Davis interrupted and said, “I don’t want this rote answer. I want to know how you will accomplish it.”

Mr. McDaniel backed away and sat down, and Mr. Davis was surrounded and eventually sent away by the octogenarians who had gathered to hear from the candidate.

Perhaps those octogenarians were curious as to how much of that reduction in federal spending would come at the expense of their medical care, and wanted Mr. Davis to leave so that Mr. McDaniel could in fact explain how he'd cut those federal dollars. And perhaps more importantly, where.

[Jaysyn]

Perhaps those octogenarians were curious as to how much of that reduction in federal spending would come at the expense of their medical care, and wanted Mr. Davis to leave so that Mr. McDaniel could in fact explain how he'd cut those federal dollars. And perhaps more importantly, where.

If McDaniel couldn't answer that question while Davis was there, why would you think he's going to answer it after he leaves?

[Rev. Rye]

Plus, fun fact: Republicans tried cutting spending in a lot of areas in the eighties. They called this "Starving the Beast." This failed because, to compensate, they started borrowing money from China, something that would, a quarter century later, help lead to the recession they keep crowing about.

[Ryantology]

Well from the exchange it seems McDaniel wants to curb government spending. He can help accomplish that goal by voting against government spending. He doesn't need to get along with anyone. He doesn't need to compromise. He just needs to vote "no" to appropriation bills.

And, like McDaniel, you just give the rote answer without explaining how we can gut the government while still keeping all those services like roads and schools and airports that are vital to the function of a first-world country.

Oh, I bet I know the answer: privatize! Turn the country into a deregulated hellhole where firefighters will be happy to put out your house fire for a reasonable down payment, assuming you pass the credit check.

[Heywood]

Plus, fun fact: Republicans tried cutting spending in a lot of areas in the eighties. They called this "Starving the Beast." This failed because, to compensate, they started borrowing money from China, something that would, a quarter century later, help lead to the recession they keep crowing about.

You've conflated cutting taxes with cutting spending. They are not the same thing. "Starving the beast" was about cutting taxes so the government would be forced to spend less. The republicans were successful in cutting taxes but the strategy did not work as spending continued to increase. They didn't try very hard at cutting spending as you seem to be suggesting.

Tea Party wants to curb government spending and McDaniel can help accomplish that by simply voting no on new appropriation bills. He doesn't have to compromise or get along with anyone. Mr. Davis question was stupid as the answer is obvious.

[popeyespappy]

Well from the exchange it seems McDaniel wants to curb government spending. He can help accomplish that goal by voting against government spending. He doesn't need to get along with anyone. He doesn't need to compromise. He just needs to vote "no" to appropriation bills.

Simply voting no to appropriation bills is not an acceptable answer. Some level of government spending is necessary to the continued existence of this country. If the answer is continued excessive funding of the military at the expense of the late life healthcare the retires he was talking to then hopefully the retirees tarred and feathered his ass.

[Heywood]

Well from the exchange it seems McDaniel wants to curb government spending. He can help accomplish that goal by voting against government spending. He doesn't need to get along with anyone. He doesn't need to compromise. He just needs to vote "no" to appropriation bills.

Simply voting no to appropriation bills is not an acceptable answer. Some level of government spending is necessary to the continued existence of this country. If the answer is continued excessive funding of the military at the expense of the late life healthcare the retires he was talking to then hopefully the retirees tarred and feathered his ass.

Its not acceptable to you...so don't vote for the guy. Others might find it acceptable. In the upcoming presidential election I would vote for the guy(or gal) who promises not to do anything except curb current government spending and torpedo new government spending. No bailouts, No stimulus, no new entitlements. I want cuts...cuts...cuts. If the candidate talks about "reaching across the aisle to get the people's work done"....that will make me a little skiddish.

[DeistPaladin]

No bailouts, No stimulus, no new entitlements. I want cuts...cuts...cuts.

How do you feel about:

* Cutting defense spending at least by half?
* Ending all corporate welfare, including oil subsidies?
* Ending indirect subsidies for religion by taxing churches?
* Ending the war on drugs?
* Raising taxes on the top 1% to the pre-Reagan levels?
* Ending indirect subsidies for corporate labor costs by taxing any corporation whose full-time employees must rely on food stamps to survive so the government can recoup the cost of said food stamps plus administrative costs? (Alternatively, raise the minimum wage so that all full time employees will rise above the eligibility line)?

Once all these cuts are implemented, then we can talk about education and food stamps.