There are many anti-tea party talking points going on out there, let me go ahead and tackle a few:
Talking Point: Obama has only been in office 86 days. How can you protest him? He hasn’t been in office long enough to have even done any damage.
A: Under Obama’s watch we’ve seen a $797 billion Stimulus bill that’s a Pork-filled Christmas Tree to the left. In addition, his budget has come out and scorers at the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office say it will run up $9.6 Trillion in National Debt over 10 years.
TP: You idiots! Obama hasn’t raised your taxes! He hasn’t even raised taxes on the top 5%, you cretins! He’s cut your taxes.
A: I noticed the extra money on my pay stub and will send it to Republican causes.
In all seriousness, Senate Democrats are suggesting that Obama’s meager $12 a week tax cut be axed after 2010. In addition, Obama has already raised taxes on tobacco in order to pay for his S-Chip expansion. This hits working and middle income folks the hardest, as they make up the largest percent of smokers. Of course, it will be noted that they could and perhaps should quit, but you better pray they don’t because then your whole SCHIP program collapses like a house of cards if they do.
In addition, Obama’s proposals are full of expenses to the average American worker. His Cap and Trade deal will cost thousands to the average U.S. family in higher utilities. More importantly, is the future taxes Obama is bringing on us through his reckless and unprecedented deficit spending that will increase future taxes exponentially, as well as devaluing our currency through incessant inflation.This will shrink the value of everyone’s savings and retirement.
Plus, on top of that, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) is talking about implementing higher taxes next year, rather than in 2011. Either way, when higher taxes are implemented it will have the effect of driving investment and capital out of the country. Do you think we can handle that?
TP: Oh yeah, where were all you deficit hawks during the Bush Administration?
A: As someone who personally spent 40 minutes scraping the Bush/Cheney 2004 Bumper Sticker off the back of my car-Shut up!
Conservatives were plenty ticked off under Bush. That’s why you had groups like Club for Growth challenging big spending Congressmen. You had the Porkbusters effort. Perhaps, the more common response though was a passive aggressive one. Republican campaign funds dried up, conservative voters didn’t show up at the polls in 2006, or to a large degree in 2008 either.
Of course, there were some people who chose to forget deficit spending during the Bush years. They usually defended this by stating we were in a War and pointed to the fact that deficits were at a sustainable level of under 3% of GDP, Obama’s deficits are in a much higher range that most economists say are completely unsustainable.
TP: Oh yeah, if you weren’t happy with Bush, why did most of you guys vote Republican?
A: Well, a lot of people did stay home or give “Blue Dog” Democrats who talked like Republicans a chance to govern. The vast majority of these Blue Dogs turned out to be lapdogs that went along with the President’s irresponsible spending programs.
Others did stay home, but for those who voted for Republican, either: 1) they supported someone who was doing good work in Washington or 2) voted Republican because they had a sense of how bad the Democrats would do if given the chance.
TP: Hey Genius, I don’t see you raising any solutions.
A:
TP: Ha! There are way too many Democrats in Congress for you to get any of that passed.
A: Not for long.
TP: Oh come on, America is laughing at you. Yesterday was the day conservatism died and the Republican Party ceased being a serious contender for winning elections.
A: The left is laughing, but America isn’t. Americans are concerned about this Administration’s run-away spending. If you find an example of a political movement that suffered doomsday as a result of hundreds of thousands marching for its causes, please let me know.
April 16th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Good job i’m wondering what moron would be opposed to a Balanced Budget Amendment? Talk about a jumpstart for fiscal conservatism. What would be the consequences for not balancing the budget? Government shuts down til they do? Hey I sure won’t be complaining about that.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
A balanced budget Amendment is only moderately worse economically than run-away spending.
A small stable deficit that can balloon to moderate levels when recessions hit and tax dollars fall is perfectly sound economic policy.
Bush gave us a stable moderate siaed deficit in a good economy and we’ve seen it grow out of control.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
I wouldn’t push the FAIR tax to the opposition as a solution to excess government spending and taxation. It just is not well understood. Many ignorantly think its a flat tax on income and don’t understand its a sales tax.
Most folks who live in sales tax states have already seen their taxes go up to cover state deficits. California now has the highest state sales tax. No one wants to see that increase even more. Nor do they want to see sales tax charged on items currently exempt in their states.
This idea of a tax-prebate to offset the FAIR tax hit on lower income people in an attempt to make it more progressive will seem like a government hand out. Government takes your money and then decides to give it to someone else.
For these reasons and more, even if you happen to love the idea, it has zero chance of passing.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
I would add to your term limits that the POTUS can only serve one 5 or 6 year term, which could eliminate any notion of a lame duck President and cause the POTUS to not have to worry about returning favors. Perhaps they could serve two terms, just not consecutively.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
So let’s talk about how it’s Torture Memo Day, in which nearly every political blog worth its salt, not to mention every major news outlet, has a major story on the torture memos. Today’s R408 front-page posts concern tea parties, Palin, tea parties, Specter, Palin, Tancredo, and Crist.
I’m kind of disappointed, especially since some other conservative blogs follow this trend (Really, Hot Air?). We could at least talk about it.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Will, I’d be more than happy to talk about it. I can’t believe they tortured that guy by putting a caterpillar in a box and then they put that box in his cell…if that’s torture then my older brother broke the Geneva Convention about 20 times when we were kids. This is an obvious ploy by Obama to cozy up to his left wing supporters since they are having a little bit of a falling out.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
#5
Nah. Sarah Palin’s speech is waaaay bigger news than the torture memos.
April 16th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
#5:
Tell you what. You want to talk Torture? I’ll post a video of Billy Ray Cyrus singing, “Achy Breaky Heart.” Now, that’s torture.
April 17th, 2009 at 12:29 am
The President Ties His Own Hands on Terror
The point of interrogation is intelligence, not confession.
By MICHAEL HAYDEN and MICHAEL B. MUKASEY
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123993446103128041.html
April 17th, 2009 at 1:15 am
How about you reply to this one:
Assertion: By inviting nuts like Alan Keyes to keynote your tea tantrums, you marginalize yourself.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:48 am
Absolutely true. The thing about Keyes is that he’s an incredibly valuable asset for any Republican willing to loudly and publicly tell him off. So why doesn’t anyone do it?
April 17th, 2009 at 4:53 am
Alex, if you hate Mr. Keyes and other Tea Partyers so much, why do not you do something to promote lower taxes instead hanging around the train station the last few days trashing fiscal Conservatism and lower taxes. We the tax-payers are fed up with this shenanigans and the train is leaving you behind.
April 17th, 2009 at 8:38 am
Will:
“Torture memo”? Done.
But what’s the fascination with ancient history? Your man has come out every day with the next gee-whiz liberal item for some time now. All the proposals share the properties that they have been tried elsewhere and have failed/are failing and that they will raise everyone’s share of the public debt at a breathtaking rate.
Perhaps we should talk about “hockey sticks” here. It seems to be something your side can grasp at least.
April 17th, 2009 at 9:27 am
There’s always – we voted and these issues were raised – guess who won?
Elections matter. Incidentally, Obama is studying tax reform and sends
his thanks for your support of that endeavor. Your only response to that
one has to be AAAUUUGGHHHHHH!
April 17th, 2009 at 10:01 am
“Studying tax reform”? His econ go-to guy Goolsby has mentioned having IRS agents or software take over the onerous task of filing returns for everyone who would normally file a 1040A-EZ. Eligible would be anyone with a single source of income from a W-2-filing employer and only one bank account that produces interest income.
He has also signaled to his fellow Democrats in Congress and the broader Dem donor base that he will not demand any reforms in the tax code’s byzantine rules for subsidies and write-offs.
This is a predictable pattern under one-party government.
Prospects for any meaningful reduction in tax code complexity are negligible.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Ohio: Keys is a nutjob, plain and simple. I hardly see how pointing out that painfully obvious fact constitutes a condemnation of the entire tea party movement. To the contrary, ignore and/or tolerate Keys his association with tea party groups will be used to taint the entire movement to an extent ANSWER’s association with anti-war groups never did on the left.
April 18th, 2009 at 12:43 am
[...] she writes: Some have suggested that I was recently laughing at the solidarity of Republican “tea parties” as a [...]
April 18th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
[...] she writes: Some have suggested that I was recently laughing at the solidarity of Republican “tea parties” as a [...]