By E. Thomas McClanahan, Kansas city Star Editorial Page columnist
Democrats and other skeptics are desperate to dismiss the tea parties that popped up across the country today. Kansas City political consultant Steve Glorioso told The Star they were being staged by the "same far right fringe characters driven in large part by talk radio."
This eagerness to explain away this movement is telling, suggesting the skeptics see these gatherings as a real threat. Certainly the tea parties have an anti-Obama slant, but what we're seeing is something outside the normal dynamics of Democrat-Republican tension.
In fact, as Glenn Reynolds writes, in some cases established politicians haven't been allowed to speak at all.
The good news for Republicans is that, while the Republican Party flounders in its response to the Obama presidency and its programs, millions of Americans are getting organized on their own. The bad news is that those Americans, despite their opposition to President Obama's policies, aren't especially friendly to the GOP. When Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele asked to speak at the Chicago tea party, his request was politely refused by the organizers: "With regards to stage time, we respectfully must inform Chairman Steele that RNC officials are welcome to participate in the rally itself, but we prefer to limit stage time to those who are not elected officials, both in Government as well as political parties. This is an opportunity for Americans to speak, and elected officials to listen, not the other way around."
Likewise, I spoke to an organizer for the Knoxville tea party who said that no "professional politicians" were going to be allowed to speak, and he made a big point of saying that the protest wasn't an anti-Obama protest, it was an anti-establishment protest. I've heard similar things from tea-party organizers in other cities, too. Though critics will probably try to write the tea parties off as partisan publicity stunts, they're really a post-partisan expression of outrage.
This is a genuine grassroots phenomenom. Various facets of the GOP coalition and conservative movement are trying to leverage this movement, but the movement was there first, and it took off after Rick Santelli's famous rant in Chicago. It isn't clear yet what the tea party movement is all about, but it can't be dismissed as something that simply arose from shadowy GOP organizers.
Delicious
Digg
The approach of Czechs to
The approach of Czechs to the U.S. and its foreign policy has markedly improved in the past three years, according to a poll the CVVM agency conducted in October and released now. Twenty-seven percent of those polled. dutch masters
If you love fashion,you must
If you love fashion,you must konw abercrombie and fitch
and you are a abercrombie manor
abercrombie womensand
hollister clothingis also very fashion.
And you know RuehlNo.925
I also like abercrombie outlet,and you?
“Dissent is patriotic”
What happened to “Dissent is patriotic”?
What the Democrats and liberals fail to see is they have spent the last eight years defining the standards by which a President should be judged.
If Bush is to be held accountable for the things he did, we need to be vigilant to insure that Obama is held accountable if he does the same.
So look back at the news coverage of GWB to see how the President should be covered.seo
links london
At present, linkslondon4lover.com provides the best Links London jewelry and most excellent services to our customers at the lowest prices possible.
links of london
Links of london jewelry store provide you floweriness and quality links of London jewelry at a affordable price. Partnering with esteemed distributors and trading facilitators across the world, the company can meet the needs of all national and international customers.
ugg boots
Good ! I like it ! Welcome to read following news: ugg boots,Nike dunk sb,discount ugg boots, uggs ,nike dunk low,ugg boots sale,UGG Bailey Button boots,new nike sb,UGG Classic short boots,UGG Nightfall boots,cheap nike dunks,UGG Classic tall boots.
That depends entirely on
That depends entirely on where on the Laffer Curve you are when you cut taxes. Of course if you cut taxes to a low enough point, receipts decline. Similarly, you can not raise taxes to any rate you want either, since very high tax rates would choke off the economy and thus kill the tax base. Certainly my original post could have been less glib and more carefully worded.
auto insurance
It is a genuine grass roots movement
The only real solution to the financial meltdown is private investment, but the new administration is successfully frightening away any and all players. With all the spending, taxes are certain to rise and the brunt of the burden will fall on the shoulders of job-creating small businesses. Government over-spending is not the answer. Those who are reacting with genuine protests of the tea party variety have a right to voice their concerns. The constant blather and blame of the Bush administration from the left is insipid. The last time the budget was balanced and the US had no debt was when Andrew Jackson was president. The only way the Obama administration will succeed is to create a climate that encourages private investment and to forego the introduction of any new entitlement packages. The Democrats in charge need a wake up call. The Federal Government is already too big. Right-wing extremist conservative Republicans, Huzzah. Tea, anyone? I prefer oolong.
chazzy, chazzy, chazzy
I keep correcting you and correcting you, and all you do is chew on the erasers.
1. RONALD REAGAN tripled the national debt.
2. George W. Bush doubled the national debt.
3. Barack Obama, if the stimulus doesn't work at all, will have tripled the annual DEFICIT, which is a radically different notion than tripling the national debt. Some might say that's due to his inheriting an economy that was wrecked by the side of the road.
And you're not a libertarian, chazzy. A libertarian's head would have long ago exploded over the savagery the Republicans, who've had the Presidency twenty yearrs of the past twenty-eight, have wreaked on the concept of fiscal responsbility: spend, spend, spend, enlarge government like there's no tomorrow, and multiply the national debt like it was cute li'l bunny rabbits in heat.
edith edith edith....welcome back, Internut has missed you
And you're not a libertarian, chazzy. A libertarian's head would have long ago exploded over the savagery the Republicans.... have wreaked on the concept of fiscal responsbility
I am so amazed by your mystical ability to mis read my voter registration card from wherever you are hiding today. I did indeed abandon the republican party a bit over 21 years ago over Mr Reagan's profligate spending....after a brief ten year membership inspired by the well intentioned, misguided, incompetent peanut prince.
Sad
So your position is that you have no true principles -- That whatever the majority wants to do is fine. I somehow suspect that if the majority wanted to become a theocracy, you would have a problem with that, but I digress.
I've got news for you: Even if it were moral, and even if it didn't violate the spirit of liberty which animated this nation from its beginning, taking too much from the most productive citizens is a road to ruin. Whatever you tax you get less of; whatever you subsidize you get more of. Subsidizing sucking off the government teat while taxing productivity is a great way to get more of the former and less of the latter. And then who will be left to fund your largess?
But again, you refuse to address my main point. Even if you go with the full-blown socialism model, you still have to pay for it all. We are deeply in the red right now, getting much, much more in the red by the day, and have no capacity to pay it off. You can't just stick your hand in the sand and hope that Uncle Sam has a rich granddaddy who is about to kick the bucket.
OK then you agree..
we'll all pay our taxes! Get out your check book. I'm all for paying for what we do. It's the deadbeats (read republicans) that want to spend and spend without raising the loot to pay for it, then using the silly supply side voo doo economic theory to rationalize the whole thing.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Please
Radicalizedmoderate: Oh, I've already paid my taxes, thank you. But funny thing about those Republicans who "want to spend and spend without raising the loot to pay for it"... every time they cut taxes, tax receipts mysteriously go up. How is that possible? Please don't let your head explode.
But once again, you have refused to address the issue of how we actually pay for the stuff you want. Get your head out of the sand.
edith: You are either ill-informed or a propagandist. Yes, the national debt doubled under Bush from around $5 trillion to about $10 trillion. According to Obama's ten-year plan using his own fudged numbers, the debt would double again to $20 trillion. But a GAO analysis revealed that if Obama gets all the new social programs he wants, the national debt will actually increase to somewhere north of $30 trillion. Hope and change, indeed.
well
'tain't.
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html
It Depends
That depends entirely on where on the Laffer Curve you are when you cut taxes. Of course if you cut taxes to a low enough point, receipts decline. Similarly, you can not raise taxes to any rate you want either, since very high tax rates would choke off the economy and thus kill the tax base. Certainly my original post could have been less glib and more carefully worded.
Laffer curve, because it's a joke...
If it only works on paper, it doesn't work.
Gee I don't know how I can be more clear about funding the government, I pay taxes. According to voo doo logic if you put money into the economy via tax cuts it's supposed to stimulate the economy and increase the GDP. (Of course when that happens the repubs want to cut taxes again and so we never get the increase in revenue.) If, on the other hand we put money into the economy via federal spending that ends up as wages as a stimilus that won't grow GDP (this is where the voo doo kicks in)because the economy, in voo doo theory, knows that this increase in the money supply and velocity is just different.....yeah
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Can't disagree with that
And then when we factor in graduated taxation, that adds a whole 'nuther wrinkle to the equation, too -- because clearly if you have a stipulated 70% highest tax rate (as it was when Reagan came on), the impact of that highest rate will differ if it kicks in for incomes over $5,000,000 versus, say, $300,000.
Workers of the World
Radicalizedmoderate: You do realize, of course, that your sentiments directly echo Marx, right? Have you never heard of the "tyranny of the majority"? What happens when 51% of the population, in its collective wisdom, decides to confiscate the property of the remaining 49%? That's not a society I want any part of.
good, I guess
Because it ain't happenin' son. You're spouting nonsense.
No, it's called democracy...
Actually in our case we're a republic but you get the meaning. We elect them, they do our bidding. It's not perfect and your criticism is well taken but it's what we have to work with. You just need to go out and persuade another 50.9% of America to vote with you, or are you an anarchist?
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Hmmm....
Interface: It seems to me that there are plenty of expert climatologists who do not subscribe to the theory of anthropogenic global warming. But the fact that you would jump to that subject without offering even a hint of a substantive comment on the subject at hand demonstrates your lack of seriousness.
Whatever
Radicalizedmoderate: You have an interesting definition of "deadbeat." Apparently, it means someone who will not blithely let you confiscate his property to be put to use as you see fit.
But that's beside the point. I don't know why you keep changing the subject and wandering off into the ether. I have never said that I believe in no taxes or that I do not want the government to do anything. Quite to the contrary. The point is that we have to balance our books and live on what we make, no matter what we do. Right now, we are hideously in debt, and folks like you are so blinkered by your ideology that you are unwilling to even discuss this reality or what we need to do to fix it.
I think it's safe to say
I think it's safe to say that Friedman has been discredited.
I think it's safe to say you are clueless. Friedman believed in liberty -- letting people make decisions about their own lives. In the absence of that, someone has to make your decisions for you. Tell me, where are these benevolent geniuses who have it within them to expertly direct the economy of the entire nation?
That's an easy answer...
I think it's safe to say you are clueless. Friedman believed in liberty -- letting people make decisions about their own lives. In the absence of that, someone has to make your decisions for you. Tell me, where are these benevolent geniuses who have it within them to expertly direct the economy of the entire nation?
It is we, us, you and I and our collective wisdom when we make our voices heard in elections and even these blogs. We elect the goverment, we create it. It is an extension of ourselves and reflects our will. If you can persuade enough people you and they will elect a goverment that reflects your wishes. For now, be content to make you voice heard here as I and others like me, have had to the past eight years.
As far as Friedman? Go ask Allan Greenspan to explain it to you.. when he figures it ut himself.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Misleading
Interface,
That article you posted is a favorite of lefties, but it's bunk and has been thoroughly discredited by knowledgeable economists. Yes, private banks made most of the bad loans, but only after Fannie and Freddie lowered their lending standards and started buying those loans. No, most of the private banks making subprime loans were not subject to the CRA, but that is irrelevant: Fannie and Freddie's reckless behavior was spurred by the fallout from the 90s CRA revision. Banks like Countrywide were given a financial incentive to originate bad loans, so they did so with gusto. And yes, other investment banks (Bear Stearns, for one) also bought subprime loans on the secondary market, but this was because their competition -- Fannie and Freddie -- were eating their lunch and raking in huge profits.
Spin it all you want, but the massive involvement of the government in the mortgage market is the primary cause for the housing bubble and the massive numbers of foreclosures in the aftermath of its collapse. All other causes are secondary to that original sin.
all right, then
That article you posted is a favorite of lefties, but it's bunk and has been thoroughly discredited by knowledgeable economists.
Let's see some of these "knowledgeable economists" of whom you speak. I wonder if they're the same folks who keep getting cited as saying global warming is bunk, despite having little to know relevant experience in climatology.
Speaking of Delusions
gembull: The slicing of dicing of mortgages into securities only gained major steam once it was needed to "spread around" the risk associated with loans to unqualified borrowers. By itself, the securitization would not have been fatal if lending standards had not been lowered by the government. Properly-sized mortgages to qualified buyers are a pretty safe bet, even in an economic downturn. For you to try and pretend that lowering lending standards had nothing whatsoever to do with the mess we're in takes some major intellectual dishonesty. Plus, you have a really difficult time explaining why the heavily-regulated banks of Europe are in much worse shape than our own.
Radicalizedmoderate: You just don't seem to get it, sport. As I mentioned before, plenty of conservatives were critical of Bush's spending. This isn't about Democrats and Republicans -- it's about fiscal sanity. You claim that "there are plenty of models where government provides services competently and efficiently," but that's bogus. You are no doubt referring to Europe, but given that they are heavily in debt, have almost no defense expenses (since they long ago outsourced that to us), and have resorted to importing millions of Asians just to keep the economy afloat, I would hardly call that a successful model. Europe is dying and following them is suicidal stupidity.
Here's a hard truth for you: There is no free lunch. Every government "service" has to be paid for by someone else's labor. But when you get to the point where many people spend half or more of their life as either dependents or retirees, and when you get to the point where half the population pays no income taxes but demands cradle-to-grave "services" from the other half, you by definition have an unsustainable system.
So, you ask, what should the country look like? My answer: When a family makes out a budget, they sit down with a blank sheet of paper and first write down their income. Then they take care of the basics: food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. Then they go to the secondary needs, and so forth, until the money is all gone. That's what the country has to do. Prioritize, make tough choices, and live on what we make. Instead, we are like the family that keeps charging stuff to the credit cards and hoping the debt will just magically disappear one day. Hope is not a plan.
The difference is...
Here's a hard truth for you: There is no free lunch. Every government "service" has to be paid for by someone else's labor.
So, you ask, what should the country look like? My answer: When a family makes out a budget, they sit down with a blank sheet of paper and first write down their income. Then they take care of the basics: food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. Then they go to the secondary needs, and so forth, until the money is all gone. That's what the country has to do. Prioritize, make tough choices, and live on what we make. Instead, we are like the family that keeps charging stuff to the credit cards and hoping the debt will just magically disappear one day.
unlike you and the republicans I'm willing to pay my taxes. I'll pay for the services and benefits I receive from the government because I believe that there are things we can do collectively better than we can individually. You are just a bunch of deadbeats.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
nothing changes
wrong, the crisis was brought on by mit mathmaticians that created the financial tools (SWAPS) so convoluted they would become a house of cards. deregulation and greed are the two obvious culprits...
Nothing Changes
Looking over the comments this morning, I still see the same crap being repeated by the lefties. Lots of talk about how Bush ruined the country, but not a word about Obama's tripling the national debt. Lots of talk about loose regulation, but no admission that government underwriting of bad mortgages was the single leading cause of the bubble and inevitable collapse. Lots of petty partisan taunts, but no substance. Lots of talk about stuff we want -- national health care, social programs, etc. -- but no thought whatsoever to how to pay for it.
Again, our current entitlement obligations total over $50 trillion. Under Obama, the national debt will rise to almost $30 trillion. How are we going to pay for that?
The days of acting like spoiled five-year-olds have to end. It's time for some reality, folks.
Delusions of austerity...
The days of acting like spoiled five-year-olds have to end. It's time for some reality, folks.
Precisely, we need ideas not complaints. Nobody will come foreward with a picture of what they want America to be and what it will look like after we've done away with taxes. Nobody will step up and show us a country they want us to emulate. The world is just too complex to go back to the pioneer days, not if we want America to be the major influence in global business, politics, society, etc.
There are plenty of models where government provides services competently and efficiently but I can't think of one that operates the way the the tax protesters want it to. We cannot have our cake and eat it too. Our current mess is a product of their philospohy, The dems tax and spend but the republican party just spends and spends.
And what's this "get back to their roots"? What roots? There hasn't been a republican that controlled spending and shrank the size of government since Hoover. Even the Gipper raised taxes in six of his eight years in office and spent like there was no tomorrow.
There is simply no example of this philosophy that worked on any scale.
Good grief, I've never seen
Good grief, I've never seen liberals so ready to blow a blood vessel as they are over the tea parties. If they were of no consequence, why are you finding it so necessary to insult them and the people who attended? I think maybe they may have hit a nerve.
apop?
should't that be apoop?
desperate?
yes, desperate is an adjective that describes best the situation the repubican party currently finds itself. it says volumes that mr. cheney actually hopes the united states is attacked by terrorists to prove that the previous administration was right to throw the constitution out the window... they are a pathetic lot that would do well to read up on history... selah
America will be at least a
America will be at least a center-left nation by the end of Obama's eight years as President.
Tea-bagging
I'd wager my last dollar that the pro-American, pro-Constitutional, Democratic left is the voice of the vast majority of voters in 2009.
Bush and the Republicans were given eight years to continue the success of the Clinton era and failed to the point of national bankruptcy. So now comes a fresh approach to problem-solving and economic rescue and a few leaderless Republican hold-outs muster modest rallies around the country sponsored by Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey's PACs.
I challenge the Tea-baggers to dueling rallies on the Fourth of July 2009 all over the country and we'll see where America's sentiment lies.
Bring it on Tripton...
Actually, America is a center-right country, not center-left. The Democrats won in 2006 and 2008 precisely because the Republican politicians abandoned their principles and the voters abandoned them.
My wife was one of the organizers of the San Francisco Tea Party (a more hostile environment you could not find). My wife is a Democrat, by the way. The GOP and Dick Armey had no part in it whatsoever. It was purely grass-roots, organized through meetup.com and twitter, paid for by private citizens and dominated by people who had never been involved in organized politics before. Most had never been to a protest before. There were Democrats, Republicans, independents, libertarians and people with no strong political leaning. We let anyone who wanted a chance to speak. Dozens did so.
In Sacramento, the head of the California GOP was invited onto the stage to say "Hi", then absolutely reamed by Mark Meckler to the crowd's utter delight. In Chicago, Michael Steele, the national head of the GOP, was not allowed to speak. The Tea Parties are NOT run by the Republicans.
Some Republican politicians have tried to jump on the bandwagon, but they are too late. This thing has taken off without them.
Tripton, we accept your July 4th challenge.
Yesterday, around 1 million people showed up for Tea Parties at over 700 events. We were told there would be counter-protests. A few showed up here and there. In San Francisco, we got a lot of nasty emails saying they would bring a lot more people than we would. We had 500 people show up at noon on a workday (not bad for such a hostile place). The counter-protesters didn't show.
Around the Bay Area (the heart of Obama country, where leftists will protest at the drop of a hat), we had "over 1000" in Pleasanton (no counter-protesters noted). Santa Cruz reported that "hundreds" showed up and the counter-protest was a "dispirited handful". San Jose had "over 1000" and no counter-protest. Hundreds of people showed up at smaller events in San Mateo, the East Bay and another evening protest in San Francisco. Again, no counter-protest was apparent.
So, bring it on Tripton. If you weren't scared of the Tea Parties and what they represent, you wouldn't have to resort to juvenile name-calling.
The Crux of the Problem
Quite correct. On one hand, we the voters can choose the Democrats, who actually balanced the budget under Clinton, or we can choose the Republicans, who actually ran the country into the ground for the last years while "abandoning their principles." And I might add, as recently as October 2008 were in favor of the same bailouts promoted by Bush that are now roundly criticized.
Actions speak louder than words. On what basis are we now to believe that the party that abandoned their principles now suddenly has them back? Have the Republicans changed since October 2008? I think not.
A well intentioned posit ....just factually misleading
Quite correct. On one hand, we the voters can choose the Democrats, who actually balanced the budget under Clinton, or we can choose the Republicans, who actually ran the country into the ground for the last years while "abandoning their principles." And I might add, as recently as October 2008 were in favor of the same bailouts promoted by Bush that are now roundly criticized.
Actions speak louder than words. On what basis are we now to believe that the party that abandoned their principles now suddenly has them back? Have the Republicans changed since October 2008? I think not.
The Gingrich inspired "contract with America" of 1994 is what lead directly to the balanced budgets you ascribe to the dems. Clinton, ever the shrewd politician, embraced it and, of course now takes credit for it....& that's ok. Their is no question that Bush lead the GOP down the wrong path ...but many resisted the journey.
As a social progressive/fiscal conservative (libertarian) I acknowledge viewing things through a different lens.....but hold no trust of the dems....I was verbal on this blog in opposition of the first TARP 7 months ago as well as the auto bailouts.....but dumb and dumber (reid and pelosi) and The Obama are tripling the national debt with the biggest bucket of pork in our history after campaigning on the promise of "line by line" review of every spending bill to make certain that Pork earmarks were a thing of the past......So ...
Who do you trust?......no obvious answer I fear.....except no politcians
Newt Gingrich raised my taxes?!
The Gingrich inspired "contract with America" of 1994 is what lead directly to the balanced budgets you ascribe to the dems...Bush lead the GOP down the wrong path ...but many resisted the journey.
So, if I'm reading you right Gingrich and the repubs were responsible for raising the taxes to balance the budget....Cool!
And who resisted Bush? How did he get those budgets passed? The last year of the Bush administration and the repubs was like being in a room where someone has farted, everybody knows there's a stink in the air but nobody wants to mention it.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
figures a tad exaggerated?
Christian Science Monitor has it at perhaps 100,000 nationwide:
"With protests in more than 700 US cities Wednesday, and perhaps over 100,000 Americans taking part,"
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/04/16/tea-party-protests-could-they-rally-change-in-government/
You might try educating yourself
My wife was one of the organizers of the San Francisco Tea Party (a more hostile environment you could not find). My wife is a Democrat, by the way. The GOP and Dick Armey had no part in it whatsoever. It was purely grass-roots, organized through meetup.com and twitter, paid for by private citizens and dominated by people who had never been involved in organized politics before. Most had never been to a protest before. There were Democrats, Republicans, independents, libertarians and people with no strong political leaning. We let anyone who wanted a chance to speak. Dozens did so.
In Sacramento, the head of the California GOP was invited onto the stage to say "Hi", then absolutely reamed by Mark Meckler to the crowd's utter delight. In Chicago, Michael Steele, the national head of the GOP, was not allowed to speak. The Tea Parties are NOT run by the Republicans.
Some Republican politicians have tried to jump on the bandwagon, but they are too late. This thing has taken off without them.
Tripton, we accept your July 4th challenge.
Yesterday, around 1 million people showed up for Tea Parties at over 700 events. We were told there would be counter-protests. A few showed up here and there. In San Francisco, we got a lot of nasty emails saying they would bring a lot more people than we would. We had 500 people show up at noon on a workday (not bad for such a hostile place). The counter-protesters didn't show.
Around the Bay Area (the heart of Obama country, where leftists will protest at the drop of a hat), we had "over 1000" in Pleasanton (no counter-protesters noted). Santa Cruz reported that "hundreds" showed up and the counter-protest was a "dispirited handful". San Jose had "over 1000" and no counter-protest. Hundreds of people showed up at smaller events in San Mateo, the East Bay and another evening protest in San Francisco. Again, no counter-protest was apparent.
So, bring it on Tripton. If you weren't scared of the Tea Parties and what they represent, you wouldn't have to resort to juvenile name-calling.
I guess you were too busy watching your wife and her phony grassroots rally to understand this was definitely NOT a grassroots movement. Dick Armey and a couple other groups who funded the swift boat liars bought the websites used to promote these teabag parties last July.
FOX began promoting the teabag parties the day Santelli did that rant on CNBC. So did Michelle Malkin and Sean Hannity. And how convenient that there was already a website up and running!
In case you don't realize, a movement started by political operatives and promoted by a TV network and far right pundits is far from 'grassroots'.
Also here in red state he!! Kansas, Sam Brownback traveled across the state and spoke at 3 teabag parties yesterday. He was so proud to be invited that he sent out a rare email to his constituents to invite us to attend. Lynn Jenkins, another republican rep, spoke at another one. So this idea that these rallies were not promoted or organized by the GOP is just nonsense.
Say what you want about the left but we at least appear to be smarter about using the internets than you all do. Research BEFORE you post. Amazing what you can learn.
feduptaxpayer, I'm looking
feduptaxpayer,
I'm looking over my post and can't find the alleged "juvenile name-calling."
So you are saying the most noble of Republicans, with America's best interests at heart, voted Democrat in 2006 and 2008 rather than prop-up the last vestiges of a pathetic out-of-touch Republican party? We may actually agree on something there.
BTW, I have lived in San Francisco all my life and I can tell you the last Republican has left the building and turned-out the light about the time George Bush began disgracing the country in 2001. Truth be told, Republicans represent less than 13% of all registered voters in SF.
Etymology of astro-turfing
Tripton, if you "have lived in San Francisco all my life", why are you posting on the Kansas City Star website? What is your interest in Kansas City?
I've lived in the Bay Area for a long time, but I grew up in Kansas (Rock Chalk Jayhawk!) and maintain an interest in what goes on back there.
I suspect you're one of the DailyKOS/Obama "minders" for the Kansas City Star. I suspect your "job" is to make sure that any thought which wanders off the left-wing plantation is instantly countered and that, otherwise, you have no interest in what happens in Kansas City.
This is called "astro-turfing" (as in, fake "grass-roots") and David Axelrod is a master at it. He even ran a company in Chicago which specialized in "astro-turfing". Every newspaper in the country has "minders" whose sole interest is in making sure that left-wing memes are promulgated vigorously.
When the Tea Parties first came to national attention, there was much discussion on DailyKOS, MoveOn.org and other left-wing websites about how to counter this very real grass-roots movement. They finally settled on the "its all backed by the GOP and Fox News" meme in an attempt to discredit it.
It's not working. There is a very pronounced "a pox on BOTH your houses" attitude at the Tea Parties that is apparent to anyone who is paying attention. And Rick Santelli works for CNBC, not Fox. The left is hoping that you are NOT paying attention. Please do.
The sneering contempt that the left shows for the Tea Parties is nothing more than a psychological projection of their own attitudes. They can't image a real grass-roots campaign that isn't "astro-turf", that isn't orchestrated and paid for by some shadowy figure in the background (e.g., George Soros).
The Tea Parties are different and they know it. They wouldn't be attacking it so viciously if they weren't scared.
San Franciscan with an interest in what people think
Dear feduptaxpayer,
I promise you that I was proudly born in San Francisco and have lived in the city and or its suburbs all my life except for a few months a year when I live in Sydney, Australia (as I am doing at the moment). I am a registered voter in San Francisco...proudly a Democrat. I have worked in local media (radio and print) for more than 40 years and have been an avid reader of on-line newspapers for the past five years. I enjoy engaging in debates on America's past and future. Participating in such forums as this is one of the things that makes America great.
I have never seen the Daily KOZ, though, as an avid viewer of Countdown with Keith Olbermann (via my Slingbox at 10am Tuesday thru Saturday), I am aware of it indirectly.
I know this response has given you plenty of fodder for reaction. Go 4 it. Or as your last president once said, foolishly, "Bring it on."
Etymology of "tea-bagging"
I'm looking over my post and can't find the alleged "juvenile name-calling."
For those of you who don't get your talking points from DailyKOS and aren't up on sexual slang, "tea-bagging" refers to "a man that squats on top of a womens face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex".
So, yes, your post was juvenile name-calling. That's the typical level of intellectual discourse you will get from the left.
All this whining is nothing
All this whining is nothing more then people who cannot fathom that conservatives are no longer in control of the government. This type of whining about massive government spending during the Bush Administration was labeled as "anti-American". Imagine how much less debt there would be if infrastructure spending came before spending on random wars that had nothing to do with anything outside of pipe dreams that originated in neoconservative think tanks.
Criticisms Lack Substance
First of all, those who say conservatives were just fine with profligate spending under the Bush administration are dead wrong. Go back and check issues of National Review. Go back and listen to Rush Limbaugh. Conservatives were plenty mad back then, but a good economy and the concentration on foreign threats kept the anger to a simmer. Recent events have only caused it to now boil over.
Radicalizedmoderate asks: What do you want America to be? Well, why don't we start with "solvent"? See, liberals constantly talk about what we "want" or what we "should have." Well hell, we ALL want free medical care, great Social Security benefits, and government freebies out the kazoo -- Who doesn't? But how are you going to pay for it?
We have been living on deficit spending for decades (with only a slight break during the tech boom). Now we have just taken a crazy level of spending and made it insane. On top of that, our entitlement obligations for the near future are astronomical -- we're something like $55 TRILLION in the hole on that stuff.
We have become a nation of spoiled five-year-olds who can't handle the word "No". It's time to stop talking about what we want, and start talking about what we can pay for. Our current track is going to bankrupt us, and that's not just a scare line -- it's the honest-to-God truth.
What I don't see in any of the protest....
is any sense of vision. OK, I get it, taxes= bad, government = bad but what do you wnat in lieu of what we have? Shall we all become subsistence farmers, go and hole up is a mountain fortress? Or do you want a government that gives you value for your tax dollar? Do you want a government that provides the services you need and can't do for yourself efficiently and conveniently?
We can eliminate taxes altogether if we revert to 3rd world status, eliminate the military, highway system, education, FDA,SEC, et al. We can eliminate social security if every family will care for it's aging parent, aunts, uncles, cousins etc. We can eliminate Medicare if Doc Smith will take produce in payment and can convince the hospital to do the same.
The question isn't taxes. The question is.. what do you want America to be? Stop whining, start thinking!
Ignorant of history
Radicalizedmoderate is ignorant of history. The US rose from 3rd world status to 1st world status when the government did NOT provide any of those things. In fact, economic history shows that EVERY country which achieved 1st world status did so when their governments did NOT do those things. Further, the fastest way to revert to 3rd world status is to insist that only the government can provide them. Have you been to the slums surrounding Paris recently?
With the exception of the military, police and the courts, ALL of those things can, and are, provided in a free market, but you have to pay for them.
I can afford to pay for my kids' education, my health care, my transportation needs, my retirement and everything else I need if I could just keep the money I earn. And I am quite capable of managing my own affairs to avoid shoddy medicines, fraudulent investments and bad businessmen.
In fact, our government-run educational system turns out functional illiterates who can't do simple arithmetic. Our government-run transportation system is dysfunctional and intent on herding us all into "public transportation". Our government-run retirement system faces a demographic collapse. Our government-run medical system is reminiscent of the DMV and kills people who could be saved (the FDA prevents the use of medicines available in other countries which could save 200,000 lives a year). Oh, and the SEC, they just presided over one of the more spectacular financial collapses in economic history!
Our manufacturing system has been regulated into non-existence. We fallen so far, we can't even compete with those 3rd world countries. Sarbanes-Oxley and mark-to-market accounting have destroyed Silicon Valley (you'll never see another large IPO until they're repealed). For God's sakes, my wife's software company is thinking of moving to Hong Kong, because the Chinese Communists understand the market better than our own government!
In the 18th century, a French minister of economics asked a prominent businessman what the government could do to help businesses. His answer was succinct and still true today: "Laissez nous faire". Leave us alone!