There are multiple photos of the guy with the Obama's Ovens sign.
Who is doing the PS? Maybe some rabid left-wingers surgically re-imaging the tea-baggers to make them appear outrageous? Given the current situation that would seem to be an unnecessary bit of work.
And while we're at it:
Down with roads, sewers, electrical grids, food inspections nad anything else paid for by taxes (except he military?).
Let the People do it on their own.
We did it before that way (didn't we?) when we were Free.
We can do it again.
Yes We Can!
Except, up with the government getting involved in our reproductive choices, and by all means keep the family from choosing whether or not to unplug mom from the life support machine.
“Let’s be very honest about what this is about,” Garofalo began [on MSNBC's Countdown]. “It’s not about bashing Democrats. It’s not about taxes. … This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. It is nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging rednecks and there is no way around that.”
“I didn’t know there were so many racists left,” she continued. “The Republican-hyphen-conservative movement has now crystallized into the white power movement. … The Republican Party now depends upon immigrant-bashing and hating the black guy in the White House.”
An example of racism masquerading as criticism of Obama's (fascist?) central planning tendencies.
"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds . . . [we will] have no time to think, no means of calling our mis-managers to account to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers . . . . And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for [another] till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automotons of misery . . . . And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."
--July 12, 1816 letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval
And we all know Tommy was right in all his ideas and decisions?
The Truths Behind the Tea Parties
April 19, 2009 | by Steve Chapman
The banking collapse and the economic meltdown have prompted many Americans to turn to the federal government as indispensable savior, telling Congress and the president: We hope you can fix it; we want you to do whatever is necessary to fix it; and we don't care what it costs.
That was not the sentiment in evidence at the tea party protests held on Tax Day.
There, the message was one of great skepticism about the efficacy of the government's remedies and great apprehension about the expense (along with some of the extremist lunacy that accompanies any mass movement). The scale of the federal response to the crises has come as a frightening surprise to many Americans, who suspect the cure will be worse, and less transitory, than the disease.
Since last September, a federal budget that was already growing steadily suddenly accelerated out of control. The ride began in the winter of 2008, when Congress and President Bush agreed on a fiscal stimulus package of $170 billion in tax rebates and incentives. It picked up speed in the fall, when the Treasury spent $85 billion to take over insurance giant AIG and Congress approved $700 billion to rescue failing financial institutions.
By the time Barack Obama took office in January, projected federal outlays for this year had soared by nearly $1 trillion over last year, and the budget deficit had nearly quadrupled. But was that enough? Not nearly. Obama saw Bush and raised him, immediately pushing through another fiscal stimulus program with a price tag of $787 billion.
Fiscal hawks thought the budget was out of control before. Now they look back on the pre-2008 profligacy as a golden age of budgetary restraint.
The amount of money involved in all this would be staggering to anyone not benumbed by the incessant torrent of bad news. But judging from the tea party protests, the numbness is not universal. No matter what the state of the economy, some Americans are still capable of being shocked to see trillions of federal dollars pouring out like water rushing over a broken dam. And like many reputable economists, they suspect most of it will be wasted.
The invocations of the Boston Tea Party -- on April 15, no less -- suggested that the protests stemmed from anger about taxes under Obama. But Obama has not actually increased income taxes -- only the federal tax on tobacco, which the majority of people don't pay. His tax plan calls for cutting income taxes for most Americans, and not raising them on the rest until 2011.
So why did people rally across the country when they should have been planning how to spend their tax refunds? Because their true dismay is about the mushrooming of federal outlays, which the demonstrators regard as a future tax increase in the making. Which, of course, it is.
The problem is not just the spending supposedly needed for the current economic emergency. Obama claims that he will cut the deficit in half, to $533 billion, by the end of his first term. Two problems: 1) The Congressional Budget Office says the more likely number is $672 billion, and 2) that is 46 percent more than the deficit in 2008. Worse yet, the CBO says the deficit will then resume its upward trajectory, reaching $1 trillion by 2018 and nearly doubling the national debt over the next decade.
The realism about expenditures is the encouraging thing about the protests. It's easy to convince people that the government should take less of their money. It's harder to persuade them that the government should provide them less in the way of benefits and services. Yet the teabaggers took the view that whatever Washington plans to provide, they don't want -- not at this price, anyway.
The country has gotten into a painful fiscal predicament because both parties have let us believe we can have more and more goodies from Washington at no additional cost. The recent explosion of federal spending has succeeded in one way: It has exposed that assumption for the fiction it was.
Like Bernie Madoff's investors, we now face the bleak truth that the comfortable future we expected is gone. Everything the federal government is doing will be forcibly extracted from our future earnings. The tea party protesters see that and are angry. Can the rest of the country be far behind?
Copyright 2009, Creators Syndicate Inc.
Is that really what the protesters see, or what Chapman thinks they should see?The tea party protesters see that and are angry. Can the rest of the country be far behind?
Why are like 99% of the people who see these truths white?
Why didn't these people see these truths a few years ago; have we reached some mathematical threshold that makes these truths self evident?
Sometimes things are just the way they look.
Must be a Liberal Republican.But was that enough? Not nearly. Obama saw Bush and raised him....
Actually saw something wrong in what Bush was doing, and still had to say what Obama was doing is worse.
Yep, like the Duke lacrosse "rapists" and the O.J. verdict.Sometimes things are just the way they look.
Did you check Chapman's skin color before you judged his opinions?Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
Total apologist for racism I guess.Originally Posted by Chapman
Many have expressed this very dismay -- not about white people as you apparently have -- but about so called conservatives and other "limited government" types.Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
A few examples:
The Tea Parties: We’ve Seen It All Before by Ryan McMaken
Are You Kidding Me? by Don Cooper
RACIST PROVOCATEUR EXPOSED AT SAN ANTONIO TEA PARTY By Harold Gray
In Knoxville and in other sites, participants in the movement were quick to note that the tea parties were not aimed at one president more than another. Co-organizer Wendy Stephens of Kingsport provided a good answer for the tea party as a nonpartisan event: "It doesn't mean we weren't upset when Bush was in office," she said "We've just reached a breaking point."
knoxnews.com"This is a nonparty thing," Resseguie said Wednesday. "This is an American thing. We have to stop tax-money waste and abuse."
"As a father and a nontraditional college student, I think government spending is ridiculous," Lake said. "Politicians across the board don't listen to the people."
Lake said when he talked to people about the $1.7 trillion national budget deficit, he found a lot of people were uneducated.
"I love the idea of having people gather and discuss things," Maiurano said. "It shows people are interested in government, and it's good to see people show their interest because if people got more involved, we would see change.
"This protest is about excess spending," Maiurano continued. "And this mess we are in didn't happen overnight.
They are doing the right thing by trying to find solutions. It's nice to see people making government aware that they are aware."
The check has come to the table and no-one wants to pay.
Problem is, the restaurant does not need any more dishwashers, even though half of them have quit and left the country!
Tea and Sympathy
April 18, 2009
Roderick T. Long
Whichever party is out of power always begins to emphasise its libertarian-sounding side in order to divert anti-government sentiment toward support of that party rather than toward genuine radical opposition to the entire establishment.
By the same token, the party that’s in power employs alarmist rhetoric about the other side’s supposed anti-government radicalism in order to drum up support for its own policies.
Thus events like the Tea Parties serve the interests of both parties; people with libertarian leanings get diverted into supporting one half of the bipartisan duopoly, the antistate message getting diluted by mixture with (in this case) right-wing statist crap about war and immigration and the Kulturkampf. Those turned off by this creepy right-wing stew get diverted into supporting the other half of the bipartisan duopoly, with any libertarian sentiments likewise getting diluted into (in this case) left-wing statist crap about gun control and the need to impose regulation on some imaginary laissez-faire economy. And so the whole power structure ends up being reinforced.
I saw this game under Clinton, I saw (almost) everyone switch teams under Bush, and now they’re all switching back again. And so we get Republican pundits and politicians suddenly howling about Obama’s fascism when they’ve never supported anything but fascism in their entire lives; and on the other side we get Democrats ridiculing the very sorts of concerns about oppression and civil liberties violations that they pretended to take seriously under Dubya’s reign.
Is it worth libertarians’ and/or anarchists’ while to participate in such events? Sure; because while the voices at the podium tend to be statist apparatchiks, the crowds will tend to be a mixture of statist yahoos and genuinely libertarian-leaning folks, and outreach to the latter is always worth a try – in Kierkegaard’s words, “to split up the crowd, or to talk to it, not to form a crowd, but so that one or another individual might go home from the assembly and become a single individual.” But of course the organisers of such events are on the lookout for us and always do their best to try to narrow the boundaries of discussion.
About "white people" or just those that can't accept a colored guy in the White House. Or a Muslim in the White House. Or a foreigner in the White House. Or maybe all of that rolled into one Antichrist in the White House.Many have expressed this very dismay -- not about white people as you apparently have
That's the way I saw this protest. The culture-wars repackaged - been there, done that.
America today ...