pageok
pageok
pageok
Scrappleface--"Obama requires tea party protests to use government-funded leaf":

Here.

Public_Defender (mail):
At least it will save Fox News a few bucks. Does Fox know how much tea comes from China? I guess Fox and Obama are working together to fund the Chinese government.
4.14.2009 8:21am
John Armstrong (mail) (www):
Now, P_D, you wouldn't be saying anything against this bunch of teabaggers, would you?
4.14.2009 8:30am
ruuffles (mail) (www):
Loose leaf tea is just as easy to purchase as bagged tea so its unfortunate that the protestors went the easy route. Bags weren't used until the early 1900s so had they been faithful to history they would have avoided using a term with a new modern meaning.
4.14.2009 9:16am
RPT (mail):
FreedomWorks=FoxNews=TeabagsParty. Another astroturf event.
4.14.2009 9:24am
Arkady:
Of course, the account is incomplete:

"[T]he gatherings protest out-of-control federal spending, public-sector control of private enterprise, and what many see as a lurch toward socialism at all levels of government."

These items need to be added:

evolution; Area 51 alien landing coverup; government-faked moon landing; rising price of Reynolds Wrap; gay marriage; gay holding hands in public; gay; noncitizenship of Obama; nonChristian religion of Obama; Obama's dog Bo (why not an American breed? You damned well know why); etc., etc., etc.
4.14.2009 9:31am
rick.felt:
RPT:

Astroturf? No. No one is being paid to protest. This ain't ANSWER or Acorn.
4.14.2009 9:44am
Han Solo:
Foxnews has zero to do with the Tea Parties. They were mostly started by The Campaign For Liberty.


What your seeing is the fact that the Republican party is scared shitless that so many people are doing things without them that they SHOULD have been doing all along...and now the Republicans are trying to look like they have been involved all along.

But that is BS... The republicans are just as much for massive big federal government as the democrats...the only difference is the two parties want to do slightly different things with their massive federal governments and power.
4.14.2009 10:02am
loki13 (mail):

Astroturf? No. No one is being paid to protest. This ain't ANSWER or Acorn.


True dat. Just a bunch of voluntary teabaggers.
4.14.2009 10:05am
Monty:
Examiner columnist Scott Ott is editor in chief of ScrappleFace.com, the family-friendly news satire site, and anchor of ScrappleFace Network News (SNN), seen on YouTube.

Never having heard of scrappleface, it was not immediatly clear to me that this was satire. Should be careful that someone doesn't spread the quote thinking its real...
4.14.2009 10:24am
Amused, Confused, Infused:
God save their innocence if they're ignorant of "teabagging."
4.14.2009 10:39am
Sarcastro (www):
Yeah, Fox News and Clear channel haven't hardly urged people to all go out and teabag at all! They have nothing to do with the "Fox News Tea Parties!"
4.14.2009 11:23am
rick.felt:
"Teabagging." Yuk-yuk!

I like juvenile humor as much as the next Beavis, but this is a stretch. It's not like the organizers are calling this "the Great Teabagging of '09," or are calling on people to "Teabag Obama." It's a Tea Party, boys and girls.
4.14.2009 11:24am
Tony Tutins (mail):
I don't get it. I thought the basis for the Boston Tea Party was taxation without representation. Were Republicans somehow prohibited from voting in the 2008 election? (Perhaps small government types refused on principle to apply for government ID in states like Indiana. Or fundamentalists refused to apply for the Mark of the Beast.)

The voters rejected Republicans and conservatives in November. Vox populi, vox Dei. In modern terms, Get Over It.
4.14.2009 11:38am
Ortsacras:
The voters rejected Republicans and conservatives in November. Vox populi, vox Dei. In modern terms, Get Over It.

Yeah, seriously. Those who belong to political groups that only garnered 47% of the vote in the most recent presidential election need to shut up and not protest anything that the government does!
4.14.2009 11:57am
Federal Dog:
"In modern terms, Get Over It."

Yeah. People must just shut up, do what they're told, and keep footing the tax bill for the roughly half of the country that pays no income tax and is clamoring for more government handouts.
4.14.2009 12:08pm
RPT (mail):
"rick.felt:

RPT:

Astroturf? No. No one is being paid to protest. This ain't ANSWER or Acorn."

ACORN organizers (the all purpose villain) may be paid, but certainly much less than the Fox News on air promoters, Dick Armey's staff and so on. There is no ground up citizen activity here. It is all top down partisan silliness.
4.14.2009 12:37pm
Tony Tutins (mail):
Protest, sure. But the "tea parties" are crossing the line into drama queendom. Here's what the protestors are comparing themselves to:

The [Boston] Tea Party was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout British America against the Tea Act, which had been passed by the British Parliament in 1773. Colonists objected to the Tea Act for a variety of reasons, especially because they believed that it violated their constitutional right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives. (Wikipedia)

I guess I could say my backache was my own personal Calvary, but I wouldn't expect anyone else to agree.
4.14.2009 12:42pm
RPT (mail):
Ron Paul's group is not the organizer:

"[T]he principle organizers of the local events are actually the lobbyist-run think tanks Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works. The two groups are heavily staffed and well funded, and are providing all the logistical and public relations work necessary for planning coast-to-coast protests:

-- Freedom Works staffers coordinate conference calls among protesters, contacting conservative activists to give them "sign ideas, sample press releases, and a map of events around the country."

-- Freedom Works staffers apparently moved to "take over" the planning of local events in Florida.

-- Freedom Works provides how-to guides for delivering a "clear message" to the public and media.

-- Freedom Works has several domain addresses — some of them made to look like they were set up by amateurs — to promote the protests.

-- Americans for Prosperity is writing press releases and planning the events in New Jersey, Arizona, New Hampshire, Missouri, Kansas, and several other states."
4.14.2009 12:50pm
the_pathogen (mail) (www):
Someone is going to read that article and think it's true. It's amazing what "unnamed sources" can do.

I'm excited for the protests tomorrow. I live in a very liberal city, and will be handing out marijuana regulation and taxation fliers to a bunch of fiscally concerned neighbors - the exact group I'm trying to target. The most extreme liberal news outlets have been "concerned" about event, claiming sponsorship by Fox News and calling for counter-protests (protests fix everything in the mind of a liberal, I guess). It's about time the conservative groups come out of their homes and engage with their community, if they have something meaningful to say, lets here it.

I hope the protests spill over into a riot and we loot some banks, we find Obama's birth certificate, and then ice cream is free on Sundays.
4.14.2009 12:51pm
rick.felt:
But the "tea parties" are crossing the line into drama queendom.

...says a member of the portion of the political spectrum whose protests consist of die-ins, bearing floppy post-menopausal breasts, endless pubic-hair puns, carrying gigantic papier mache heads, and chants involving some variation on "hey hey, ho ho."
4.14.2009 12:52pm
A. Zarkov (mail):
Tony Tutins:

"The voters rejected Republicans and conservatives in November. Vox populi, vox Dei. In modern terms, Get Over It."

Did you say "get over it" to the Iraq war protesters? How about Gulf War I protesters who screamed "no blood for oil" on the steps of the San Francisco Stock Exchange in the early 1990s. Would you have said that to Civil Rights protesters?

As far as I know the Tea Party protesters don't engage in violence. I can't say the same for war protesters, who will break your arm if they don't like what you say. Exactly that happened to a friend of mine in Berkeley. Have you ever experienced the climate of intimidation and threatening behavior prevalent at a left wing protest?

Your model of citizenry seems to be: go vote in an election and then shut up if your sides loses.
4.14.2009 12:54pm
Federal Dog:
"Your model of citizenry seems to be: go vote in an election and then shut up if your sides loses."

Actually, his position seems to be that if his side wins, the other side must shut up and obey; if his side loses, however, dissent suddenly becomes patriotic.
4.14.2009 1:18pm
Bruce Hayden (mail):
ACORN organizers (the all purpose villain) may be paid, but certainly much less than the Fox News on air promoters, Dick Armey's staff and so on. There is no ground up citizen activity here. It is all top down partisan silliness.
You wish.

What is interesting about this movement is that there are a lot of people who have never protested anything in their lives, have never even been to a protest, now angerly participating in these tea parties.
4.14.2009 1:26pm
Piano_JAM (mail):
Get Over It

Excuse my NY accent, but EF YOU! My 1040 shows i paid over $40,000 in taxes in 2008, not including sales tax. I got no stimulus check, no mortgage help, nothing but tax increases as far as the eye can see. I am not going down without a fight!
4.14.2009 1:29pm
Bruce Hayden (mail):
One reason that you know that Fox News is not involved in organizing these protests is that they were caught by surprise too. The difference though that instead of trying to dismiss them, they showed them. But they were happening all over the country well before they really hit the Fox radar.
4.14.2009 1:34pm
Sarcastro (www):
Piano_JAM is right to complain about Bush's unconscionable tax increases! These protests are about ISSUES not sour grapes!
4.14.2009 1:37pm
Sarcastro (www):
Bruce Hayden is right. I know there were literally dozens of people showing up to tea parties well before FOX caught on! That means the current fiesta is totally grass roots, cause of those initial heroes!
4.14.2009 1:45pm
Steve:
Actually, his position seems to be that if his side wins, the other side must shut up and obey; if his side loses, however, dissent suddenly becomes patriotic.

That seems to be everyone's position.
4.14.2009 2:05pm
geokstr:

RPT:

ACORN organizers (the all purpose villain) may be paid, but certainly much less than the Fox News on air promoters, Dick Armey's staff and so on. There is no ground up citizen activity here. It is all top down partisan silliness.

Oh really?

Plugging in any one of the lines about Freedom Works from your comments gets nearly 170 hits, from what I can tell all from commenters on other blogs, who just copy/pasted all this from, where exactly? Media Matters?

This sounds like one of those "astroturfing" things you railed about, a technique mastered by David Axelrod and effectively used to help smear any critics of Obama during this last election.

Let's suppose for a minute that you are correct in that this org is helping with the protests. The first "tea party" I can recall happened right after Rick Santorelli took on Obama on CNBC(?). There wasn't time for anybody to "organize" anything and the initial response was quite spontaneous. Once it started to take hold, I think it is quite natural that like-minded orgs would jump on the band wagon.

Doesn't happen on the left though, I suppose. Those professionally done placards all saying the same things about Chimpy McBusHitler must be just a coincidence.
4.14.2009 2:08pm
Michelle Dulak Thomson (mail):
geokstr,

Plugging in any one of the lines about Freedom Works from [RPT's] comments gets nearly 170 hits, from what I can tell all from commenters on other blogs, who just copy/pasted all this from, where exactly?

You're quite right; I just tried it.
4.14.2009 2:16pm
SeaLawyer:
RPT,
Repeating the same lie over and over again does not make it true.
4.14.2009 2:20pm
SeaLawyer:

-- Freedom Works staffers apparently moved to "take over" the planning of local events in Florida.


If Freedom Works is behind all the protests why would they need to "take over" the planning?
4.14.2009 2:23pm
Bruce Hayden (mail):
Let's suppose for a minute that you are correct in that this org is helping with the protests. The first "tea party" I can recall happened right after Rick Santorelli took on Obama on CNBC(?). There wasn't time for anybody to "organize" anything and the initial response was quite spontaneous. Once it started to take hold, I think it is quite natural that like-minded orgs would jump on the band wagon.
This got things moving, though there were protests before that. One place that has been following this from almost the start was the much reviled Instapundit.
4.14.2009 2:36pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

nothing but tax increases as far as the eye can see. I am not going down without a fight!

Fine. But because you can't use "No Taxation Without Representation," you'll have to use something like, "No Three Percentage Point Increase in Marginal Tax Rate for AGIs Exceeding $250,000!"
4.14.2009 2:43pm
Bruce Hayden (mail):
What must be kept in mind here is that at least part of the movement is a result of the Republican Party NOT being sufficiently in opposition to the Democrats when it comes to taxing and spending. They had become Democrats Lite. Massive spending, just not as massive as the Democrats wanted. In maybe twelve years of power in Congress, they managed to sell themselves out.

Sure, a lot of Republican politicians are jumping on board. And their Congressional votes against the "stimulus" porkfest and appropriations bills may be partially a result of this movement. But that, I will suggest, is just the result that those who have joined this movement wanted.

There is a fight right now going on for the soul of the Republican Party. Their elites, some of whom voted for Obama, still want to be Democrats Lite. But many believe that that is no way back to power. Last time, they talked the talk, but many of the Republican politicians failed to walk the walk, starting at President Bush (43), and continuing down through Tom Delay and Trent Lott, to many in Congress. This time, they need to walk the walk too.
4.14.2009 2:46pm
levisbaby:
Welcome to the republican party!

And, I'd like to thank the VC for the (small and accidental) role it has played in making "conservatives" and "libertarians" a punchline in American politics.
4.14.2009 2:47pm
RPT (mail):
To all of the grass roots supporters here, RS's rant was not spontaneous. The relevant websites were up within hours. Let's keep this thread open through tomorrow to see what actually happens.
4.14.2009 3:45pm
24AheadDotCom (mail) (www):
Tea party supporters and opponents might find my coverage useful.

Opponents should stress the Koch link, the strong objectivist/"greed is good" undercurrent, and the fact that the leaders of the party support something that their useful idiot followers most likely oppose.

Supporters should wise up and do #3 on my list instead.
4.14.2009 3:51pm
Joseph Slater (mail):
Fine. But because you can't use "No Taxation Without Representation," you'll have to use something like, "No Three Percentage Point Increase in Marginal Tax Rate for AGIs Exceeding $250,000!"

Not to mention the whole, "losing an election is not the same as 'without representation'" thing.

But hey, I believe in dissent from both parties, so why not? Although -- and maybe this does make me immature -- I do get a kick out of the name being similar to / the same as a gay male sex act.
4.14.2009 4:06pm
Sarcastro (www):
Joseph Slater why's it gotta be a gay sex act, huh?
4.14.2009 4:20pm
Joseph Slater (mail):
Sarcastro:

Hmm, my wife told me it was exclusively a gay male act. Why would she lie to me?

[just kidding, honey]
4.14.2009 4:22pm
Owen Hutchins (mail):
I can only imagine the rightious indignation FOX and the GOP would have expressed, complete with wailing and gnashing of teeth, had CNN or any other "MSM" network spent so much time and effort not merely covering things like anti-war protests, but writing articles on how to run one successfully, etc. Astroturf, indeed.
4.14.2009 5:06pm
NickM (mail) (www):
JosephSlater's 4:22 comment wins the thread.

Oh, and Public_Defender, now we know what this has to do with the price of tea in China.

Nick
4.14.2009 5:08pm
BCN:
Tony Tutins,
I agree that the protestors should not use "No Taxation Without Representation", I don't want them to steal from the DC license plate.
Maybe they can use "No Representation Without Taxation". I like the sound of this a lot better. What do you think??
BCN
4.14.2009 5:14pm
Federal Dog:
"Maybe they can use "No Representation Without Taxation".

Exactly. Three reforms would completely change the way people think about the proper role of government in the life of the individual:

(1) Everyone pays income taxes (at a flat rate);

(2) End withholding so that everyone must write a check for annual taxes due; and

(3) Make tax payment day the same day as election day.
4.14.2009 5:30pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

Maybe they can use "No Representation Without Taxation". I like the sound of this a lot better. What do you think??

Sounds unconstitutional to me. But we might be able to sell immigrants the right to vote -- I think there's a loophole here:

Amendment XXIV
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
4.14.2009 6:45pm
Bruce Hayden (mail):
Maybe they can use "No Representation Without Taxation". I like the sound of this a lot better. What do you think
Sounds unconstitutional to me.
But should it be?

As we near 50% of the population not paying income taxes, there is a real possibility of getting to a place (if we aren't there already) where a majority of the voters are voting to fill their own pockets at the expense of those who pay taxes. Well, maybe not fill their pockets, but rather succeed in voting for bread and circuses at the expense of others.
4.14.2009 8:34pm
Arkady:

As we near 50% of the population not paying income taxes


I see that claim a lot. However, since, for many, many years, if I'm not mistaken, payroll taxes have been rolled into general revenue, just like income taxes, shouldn't we just consider the payroll tax another element of the income tax? If so, the 50% figure would go down quite a bit, no?
4.14.2009 8:43pm
rick.felt:
I'm not mistaken, payroll taxes have been rolled into general revenue, just like income taxes, shouldn't we just consider the payroll tax another element of the income tax? If so, the 50% figure would go down quite a bit, no?

Payroll "taxes" aren't really taxes if they're buying you the right to future payments with interest. They're forced savings. If you don't look at how the sausage is made, Social Security looks much like a savings account: you put in x dollars today, and in a couple of decades you get x + interest back. A dollar paid to the government through FICA doesn't make the government richer; it creates a future liability that cancels out the value of the dollar.

With income taxes, however, once you pay a dollar, it's gone. It's the government's dollar. You might see it spent on yourself directly or indirectly, but paying a dollar in income tax doesn't put a liability on the government's books.

So no, payroll taxes and income taxes aren't the same. People who only pay payroll taxes aren't actually paying any tax over their lifetimes.
4.14.2009 10:24pm
PC:
I like juvenile humor as much as the next Beavis, but this is a stretch. It's not like the organizers are calling this "the Great Teabagging of '09," or are calling on people to "Teabag Obama." It's a Tea Party, boys and girls.

Ahem.
4.14.2009 10:31pm
PC:
As for organizers and tea bagging: Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.
4.14.2009 10:47pm
PC:
An hey, even the RNC is getting in on the act. Virtual tea baggings for everyone!
4.14.2009 10:50pm
Random Commenter:
""No Three Percentage Point Increase in Marginal Tax Rate for AGIs Exceeding $250,000!""

If you think this is what's ahead, and that it will pay for Mr Obama's megalithic government ambitions, then you're delusional.
4.15.2009 2:04am
Owen Hutchins (mail):


Excuse my NY accent, but EF YOU! My 1040 shows i paid over $40,000 in taxes in 2008, not including sales tax. I got no stimulus check, no mortgage help, nothing but tax increases as far as the eye can see. I am not going down without a fight!


I'm sorry, I'm supposed to feel sympathy for the financial plight of someone that paid more in taxes than I earned?

Seems to me that all too many of these "tea baggers" weren't nearly so concerned over deficits and debt when it was Bush and a Republican Congress running it up. I guess it isn't the money but how it was spent, and possibly the fact that then it was going to be our children that got stuck with the bill, and now we're going to have to pay for what we want ourselves.
4.15.2009 6:34am
Michelle Dulak Thomson (mail):
Owen Hutchins,

I guess it isn't the money but how it was spent, and possibly the fact that then it was going to be our children that got stuck with the bill, and now we're going to have to pay for what we want ourselves.

But ... but ... didn't Obama say that 95% of Americans were getting a tax cut? Surely that means that we aren't "pay[ing] for what we want ourselves" — or, at any rate, 19/20ths of us aren't.

And say what you like about the Bush deficits (which I think were irresponsible); Obama's are in a different league.
4.15.2009 11:34am
Tony Tutins (mail):

say what you like about the Bush deficits (which I think were irresponsible); Obama's are in a different league.

The RMBS bust is proving to be far greater than the dot-com bust. If only Phil Gramm had not piggybacked non-regulation of credit derivatives into the 11,000 page long Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2001(Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill) (H.R. 4577).
4.15.2009 2:25pm
Piano_JAM (mail):
I'm sorry, I'm supposed to feel sympathy for the financial plight of someone that paid more in taxes than I earned?

Sorry. I am not a liberal, but a libertarian. I want no sympathy from you. In fact, I don't want a damn thing from you. I want to be responsible and accountable to myself. I am fortunate and not complaining about my financial plight. I am concerned about those behind me. Unfortunately for you, at the rate things are going, you'll never make more than $40K. You can live in your subsidized housing, ride a subsidized train to your barrista job, take some subsidized classes to learn your 'green' skills.
Me, I'll still have my nice house, my mercedes and my Glock.
This is not about 'taxation without representation'. We are letting our representatives know we are pissed. Don't think for a minute they will not notice.
4.15.2009 2:51pm
Federal Dog:
"I'm sorry, I'm supposed to feel sympathy for the financial plight of someone that paid more in taxes than I earned?"

This is the gist of it all: Anger born of envy. Instead of indulging those base feelings, do what the rest of us have done and find a profession that will cure you of them.
4.15.2009 5:22pm
Owen Hutchins (mail):

I guess it isn't the money but how it was spent, and possibly the fact that then it was going to be our children that got stuck with the bill, and now we're going to have to pay for what we want ourselves.


That's pretty much my objection to how Bush ran things. At least I'm honest about it, unlike the majority of tea baggers.
4.15.2009 6:49pm
Owen Hutchins (mail):


Sorry. I am not a liberal, but a libertarian. I want no sympathy from you. In fact, I don't want a damn thing from you. I want to be responsible and accountable to myself. I am fortunate and not complaining about my financial plight. I am concerned about those behind me. Unfortunately for you, at the rate things are going, you'll never make more than $40K. You can live in your subsidized housing, ride a subsidized train to your barrista job, take some subsidized classes to learn your 'green' skills.


You're also not a very good judge of what people do. As it happens, I am a technician. I work for a living. I own my home. I also hate coffee, but that's irrelevant, as is much of your post.
4.15.2009 6:51pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.

Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.

We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.

And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.