Apr 19 2009
Little Old Tea Party Getting Attention?
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
— Saul Alinsky
I guess it’s a little bigger than being UN-REPORTED by the So-Called news: CNN, MSNBC, and Janeane Garafalo reporting. *Laugh Out Loud*
I thought this was the Take it to the Streets administration. You know grassroots, community organizing, Rules for Radicals—old school! Not when someone is using it against you—it seems…
****
Talk about misdirection: “this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people…” —David Axelrod Is he talking about the $13 a week? Economic stimulus package on track for final votes
Officials estimated it would mean about $13 a week more in people’s paychecks this year when withholding tables are adjusted in late spring. Next year, the measure could yield workers about $8 a week. Critics say that’s unlikely to do much to boost consumption. “The most highly touted tax cut in the original proposal now translates into $7.70 a week for middle-class workers,” said Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
Obama’s Tax Cut for 95 Percent of Workers: $13 a Week
**** Axelrod: Tea Party Anger is Misdirected. Obama senior adviser says frustration over spending and taxes is “unhealthy.”
WASHINGTON — Damn the tea bags. A top adviser to President Barack Obama takes a dim view of last week’s anti-tax “tea parties,” promoted by organizers in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party. “The thing that bewilders me is this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people. So I think the tea bags should be directed elsewhere because he certainly understands the burden that people face,” David Axelrod said Sunday.
The Million Taxpayer March By Michelle Malkin
***
Media Hacks Sandbag the Teabaggers Stephen Green
How the mainstream press takes its marching orders from radical rabble-rouser Saul Alinsky. (Also see Bill Whittle: “What Media Bias Really Costs the Republic.”)
Awww…Don’t be hatin’ on Matt Taibbe…he’s got serious neurological problems:
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=2802
Thank you Deb, for a little perspective and the IOwnTheWorld Website! He is seriously disturbed and looking for lots of attention by being outrageous…
I have one question for you.
If this whole teabagging thing is so transparent, non-partisan, and grassroots, please tell me who paid for the 1 MILLION teabags that the protesters in D.C. intended to dump into the Potomac, but wound up being dumped in the 12th floor conference room of a far right “think tank”?
I’ve been trying to find out, but no info seems to be available from your “transparent” movement.
By my calculations, 1 million teabags cost between $20000 and $25000. That is of course does not include the cost of trucking them to no less than 3 sites around the D.C. area, and their eventual disposal.
Carl,
why are you using the transparent term—it’s the Obama admin that’s claiming transparency as their motto—just not in reality.
As for you being surprised about partisanship and tying that into being anti grassroots, I’m not really following you. All of this is partisan. Grassroots are from people like me who am not formally part, but believe high taxes and out of control spending needs to END.
That’s the part your side is missing. Real people, not affiliated with organizations are speaking out—The reckless spending must stop. The over the top taxing must stop! they are both unsustainable.
You will probably admit that the George Soros crowd has no problem when it’s advancing your ideals. I’m sure you’re a Soros supporter, you don’t condemn what your side does only the other side. That’s the TRANSPARENT I keep talking about—it’s so obvious it’s see through…
You seem to be missing the point here.
I would like to know why the tea party people always stress that they have no political affiliation. They say people of all political stripes attended the tea parties, but after weeks of searching, I have been unable to find a single Democratic politician that spoke at a tea party, but I can provide you a list of Republican politicians who have spoken at these protests.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all in favor of peoples right to protest. My problem is why do these people feel the need to misrepresent (read “lie about”) the composition of people in attendance? Here is an example from a local newspaper letter to the editor:
“The events were peaceful, patriotic and non-partisan, involving Democrats, Republicans, and many who no longer associate with any political party. While the final numbers are still coming in, they are huge by any standards. At this time, the total number of participants will have exceeded 1,000,000.”
“Democrats and Republicans”???
“exceeded 1,000,000″???
If this movement is so noble, why the need to lie about the attendance.
It also seems extremely “odd” to me that people would choose to protest taxes, immediately after 95% of Americans got a tax cut, from the very guy that the protesters seem to actually be protesting (that would be the President).
If the protests are about the stimulus bill, why did the protesters wait until AFTER it was passed to protest? Don’t people usually protest things BEFORE they are passed?
In the end, it seems to me like the protesters are almost universally protesting one thing- losing an election. And that is fine too, just be open about it.