Here are the three biggest problems from my perspective:
- The Boston Tea Party was a revolt in response to paying taxes to England, a form of "Taxation without representation." We currently have elected representation in America.
- As of tomorrow, revolting against taxes will actually be revolting against the George W. Bush tax structure as no federal tax (save cigs *argh*) has been enacted by President Obama.
- UrbanDictionary.com defines Teabagging as: To have a man insert his scrotum into another person's mouth in the fashion of a teabag into a mug with an up/down (in/out) motion.
Some days I just want to jump up and down and shout in wonder: How can you be so lame?
Where were the revolts when Bush killed thousands of Americans? Where were the revolts when he spent billions and billions of our dollars on Iraq - and didn't find it necessary to put it on the books?
If you look at the pictures on the teevee concerning tomorrow, you've got a bunch of assclowns holding up signs about Obama being a socialist, blah blah Wilkow/Hannity/Beck/Limbaugh juice. So apparently they're really protesting money that they pay in taxes that they do not get back in equal share? Not quite sure as the answers can range from confused to unintelligible.
So let's put it this way: I will take these people seriously as soon as they sign a federal, legally-binding document stating that they will never touch one dollar from Unemployment, Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid for the rest of their lives. And if they do, we will toss them into Boston Harbor. Teabagging is optional on the deportation boat.
Posts
5 comments:
Wow, you're easy. Republicans this, Republicans that. The Tea Parties you refer to as "Teabagging" are to protest the Statist control of our governmnt. (Yes, I got the "Statist" term frm Mark Levin. So what?)
Yes, the Boston Tea Party was a protest against taxes. "We currently have elected representation in America." That is true, to an extent. But tomorrow's peaceful protest is not going to be a protest against unfair taxes. That will come later, in November of 2010.
Tomorrow's protest will be against the Statist government and its never-ending hunger for more government, more government programs, more entitlement, more welfare recipients, and more control and intrusion into the individual's life and business affairs.
You like to bash George W. Bush because he was a "Republican" president. In your ideology, "Republican" = "conservative." It is not always so. Conservatives opposed Bush on nearly every issue; he was really more like a centrist Democrat.
The taxes you believe we are "revolting" against are not necssarily those of the Bush administration. They are what will have to be levied against the taxPAYERS to fund the massive government leviathan passed by Congress, and signed into law by President Obama.
Polymath,
Obviously you are not one of the convenient box-livers, just as I, in some small way, still listen to Levin and Wilkow despite my disagreements. I'm a liberal, but still disagree with many generalized ideas, such as any attempt towards the fairness doctrine (BAD!).
My point in the post is that the people participating, for the most part, are either following the rantings of some talk radio host or simply need another reason to publicly denounce Obama because...there's just somethin' about him.
Oh, and I would never refer to such protests as "Teabagging" if the right hadn't already done it for me. Wouldn't have been as funny or served the point of how distanced conservapublicans are from what is actually going on in the world.
I'm really confused. The only time I ever heard any "right winger" refer to the Tea Party's as "Tea-baggin' party's," etc was when they were quoting Rachel Madow, and numerous others on MSNBC. You know, the last bastion of "real" news.
Here's a little link for you...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/09/rachel-maddow-ana-marie-c_n_185445.html
I believe your hypothesis is incorrect. The people whom I spoke with at our local rally were not what one might refer to as "talk radio sheep." Nor did they feel animosity towards Obama because there is just somethin' differ'nt about him.
I found people concerned about the direction our governmet is taking us - away from the Constitution and the Declaration, and towards a Statist collective.
If that makes me a sheep, then, BAA!
You are correct, sir! I misspoke on my preliminary review of the TEA Event. As it was actively pushed and promoted by FOX News, that would make the attendees FOX Sheep.
I don't begrudge anyone their right to peaceably assemble. I just think there was a little confusion - even amongst attendees - as to why people were attending. The event was named for being taxed enough already, but there weren't any new Obama taxes to protest. But then it was about the direction the country is being taken. But that means something different to every person. And in most of the coverage I saw, it was flaunting the "red" (hehe) herring of Obama as a communist. And as I stated earlier: I will take any one of those "socialist" protesters seriously as soon as they denounce social security, medicare, and medicaid.
Our current society is (moderately) successfully built upon the grounds that include a little bit o' mix of what most would consider socialism. And that's at the national and local level. Do we accept that or disband it alltogether?
Post a Comment