If the Tea Party was a group made up largely of people who merely wanted to limit taxes, limit government, and promote personal responsibility in America, I could understand your frustration. After all, I had a lot of respect for the tea party initially.

Unfortunately, for a long time now that has not been true. The tea party has been co-opted by mainstream republicans and others whose goals really aren't to limit government, taxes, or increasing personal responsibility. Case in point: Sarah Palin as keynote speaker at the national tea party convention a few months ago. Under the latest republican leadership the size of the government has grown just as much, if not more than under democrats. And though Clinton was helped along by the dot com boom, he did at least have a balanced budget at the end of his 8 years.

The problem is that many people see the tea party as a "conservative" movement, but their definition of conservative is one that means something more like "republican party follower." The tea party was started as a true conservative movement, but many people who have joined it have tacked on things like religious issues and bring illogical arguments (see "Keep the government out of my medicare!") that come from ignorance into the mix.

Personally, that is the only reason why I don't like the tea party. People who are ignorant, people who feel that because something works for them or for their small town that it should also work for the federal government, people who feel that the government should force people to conform to christian or other religious values, people who hate the government just for the purposes of hating and who refuse to accept that there are certain roles that can only be fulfilled successfully by the government and people who think the tea party movement is something that should be used as a means to further the policies of the republican party are what turn others off of the tea party.

(Look familiar?)

If you don't want/need insurance - well I guess you "win" (I could not make those quotes big enough).

Go get em tiger!

This is a country that re-elected Bush in 2004. Obama just needs to be able to breath and say 'freedom' and 'terrorism' to win in 2012.

So the GOP are NOW against Executive Orders!?

Seriously, there must be an "Irony Gene", and these people lack it.

Rewarding people would be buying them a new television. Giving people a yearly physical isn't a reward! It's a preventative measure that actually results in money saved by early detection of chronic preventable illnesses that tax dollars end up treating anyway. Those said illnesses often cost exponentially more the later they are finally diagnosed.

Furthermore countries like Japan and the UK, not only prove it's plausible. They do so at less cost per capita with longer life expectancies and better results than we do! The new America, we settle for second best, or third or fourth and so on. It's a matter of national pride to try and do it better. Most can agree we are currently not doing it better.

Just saying.

The Republicans lost the health care fight because they made it about Obama and not doing the right thing. There were many times Obama was willing to cut a deal with the Republicans, willing to make health care reform basically a few minor changes, but the GOP simply refused any compromise. So the political cost to the Democrats was the same for passing a small bill as the big one.

When the GOP stopped doing their job and started making obstructionism a means of attacking the president, that's when they lost. And make no mistake, it was a huge loss. And the Republicans were the architects of their own defeat. Arrogance and avarice that led to a fatal strategic blunder. Turning to the profane teabaggers for support was another big mistake, but that was just the icing on the cake.

According to David Frum, former speechwriter to President George W. Bush:

"Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s... This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? ... We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat... So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours."

Brittany was really sick, didn't get treatment and by self-medicating it pushed her over the line. The late actress’ friends claim that she got hooked on the same prescription drugs that killed Michael Jackson — including Vicodin — after undergoing a series of cosmetic procedures.

Just because it was prescription, does NOT mean she wasn't "abusing" them.

I appreciate your view, but religion should not enter into this decision as nobody on earth can prove their religion as fact anymore than anyone can disprove it. Yes execution often costs more than a life sentence, however this statistic takes a lot for granted by factoring in the appeals of a death row inmate while failing to do the same for a similar life sentence inmate. The execution itself is actually cheaper, it the numerous appeals that eat up funds which is done in order to prevent one of your other concerns, wrongful conviction.

There is a possibility for error, but that is a flaw of the justice system more than the punishment itself. In any financial crime restitution is sought equal to damages, why should murder be immune to the same philosophy.

I take this view as someone who is very socially liberal. I am convinced the death penalty should be passed in cases like this and the Troy Bllake case in recent memory.

Why do people oppose the death penalty? Clearly everyone should see a crime as heinous as this and agree that a fatal punishment is just.