Who went to the tea party in Charleston? (insurance, home)

[kookamus]

hey chako go back to acorn!

[NOVAmtneer82]

Originally Posted by harborlady

Sorry to rain on your parade but... they have many of their own agendas. If you can live with their agendas, it's all good.

Media Transparency: Recipient Grants: Institute for Policy Innovation

Institute for Policy Innovation - SourceWatch


Freedom of speech, so long as you agree with me. We heart Reagan. We heart NAFTA. Healthcare reform= Fascism. Deregulation so long as it permits monopoly, otherwise, regulate to favor proprietary rights only. We only want microsoft, no need for other OS. Lets only have one broadband, and one television station, that controls all 300 channels. Maybe this think tank didn't do enough thinking? Or maybe 1.5 million in 501 c donations is just enough to tell anyone, even your congressman, what they think they want to hear.

the latest in a series of attacks on Open Source by think tanks:
Deltoid: When Think Tanks Attack

Mary and Joseph were tax reform fans, you should be too! :
http://ipi.httpsvc.vitalstreamcdn.co.../Christmas.mp3

Exactly harborlady.

There is nothing wrong with freedom of speech and the right to protest (no gripes about that) it is just the sheer hypocrisy of this whole thing that really gets me upset. Saint Reagan drove this country into the pits of deficit and Daddy Bush followed suit. Bill Clinton, an evil Democrat managed in eight years to balance the budget only to have it completely destroyed by Dubya.

People obviously don't look at tax charts. Our country was indeed quite prosperous during the 1950s when top income tax levels were in the 90% range. I'm not proposing taxes be that high but obviously it didn't negatively impact innovation in our country or stifle economic growth.

And many of the protesters in these crowds went way beyond just speaking out about taxes. As I view various newspaper coverage the signs and statements echoed revolt and anarchy. Look at pictures of these rallies, including the one in Charleston. Many have signs up that are racist in nature such as "Obama don't make my child a slave to debt." Others talk about not having guns taken away, no healthcare for illegals, no amnesty, etc. Again, people have a right to protest but at least be clear on your agenda and it isn't just taxes. The Daily Mail article was the best where it mentioned an old woman being upset with bowing down to a foreign king. She said "her only king was Jesus Christ." Uhhhh...wow.

The fact is also that a large amount of the spending taking place is for the betterment of this country such as improving our decaying infrastructure, improving our horrific healthcare system, investing in education, investing in alternative energy, etc. Republicans don't seem to want to pay for any of that but I guess it's ok to open the pocket book to invade a foreign country and hand out wasteful no-bid defense contracts to the likes of Halliburton, KBR and others.

[vec101]

Perhaps reading these will give an understanding as to why people are protesting govt spending -
http://www.cbo.gov/
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10014 and
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10014/03-20-PresidentBudget.pdf
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/Summary_Tables2.pdf and
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/Corporation_for_National_and
_Community_Service.pdf

Cost of GIVE: Authorization Level: In FY 2007, service learning programs were funded at $37 million. This bill authorizes $97 million for fiscal year 2010 and such sums for subsequent years. This is a 262 percent proposed spending increase. http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr1388 CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1388 would cost $6 billion over 5 years. http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr1388 H.R. 1388 Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act Can read bill at: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1388
Study by Tax Policy Center in Feb - are they biased, I don't know:

Under the CBO’s baseline, the ratio of public debt to GDP declines from 50.5
percent in 2009 to 41.9 percent by 2019. Under the adjusted baseline, the
debt-to-GDP ratio rises to 59.1 percent in 2019, the highest share of GDP since
1954.
While it should be evident that our adjusted baseline presents a far more
pessimistic fiscal picture than CBO's baseline, it may not be evident that
fiscal outcomes could actually turn out to be significantly worse than even in
our adjusted baseline, for several reasons.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411843_economic_crisis.pdf

This is from early March - may have changed:
Obama's Loan Modification Plan: 7 Things You Need to Know
The White House releases fresh details on its plan to save the housing market

http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/real-estate/2009/03/04/obamas-loan-modif
ication-plan-7-things-you-need-to-know.html

Now here is a bill I could support...
Enumerated Powers Act - Requires each Act of Congress to contain a concise and
definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment
of each portion of that Act. Declares that failure to comply with this
requirement shall give rise to a point of order in either chamber of Congress.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR00450:@@@L&summ2=m&

See budget projections, look around on the net about what the US is spending
money on, look at our current economic situation, look at the unemployment -
ADP said on Wednesday that private employers cut 697,000 jobs in February versus
a revised 614,000 jobs lost in January.
In March, the number of unemployed persons increased by 694,000 .......

this is why people are upset with govt spending.
Don't think you will find anyone complaining about anything that helps increase
jobs.
People morally have no problem with "welfare" type programs to the US and other
countries but.... we just can't afford to keep handing out money.

[vec101]

Originally Posted by harborlady

Mary and Joseph were tax reform fans, you should be too! :
http://ipi.httpsvc.vitalstreamcdn.co.../Christmas.mp3

Do not be judgemental of me especially since you must not be reading what I have posted and where I stand.

I am against all the increased govt spending.
I think it is going to lead to tax increases for everyone who pays taxes.
I find it hard to believe that just the wealthy and businesses are going to be able to pay for all the govt spending.
Plus, I don't agree with dumping a huge chunk of taxes on business and depending on them to carry the tax load for the country -- where have the businesses been going the last few years? I think even more will bail out of the US if they are loaded up with exorbinate taxes.

Do I think tax changes are needed? Of course.
The uber-rich who don't pay their share and the mega-companies which don't pay their share should be made to pay.

2009 article:

Dionne Warwick, Burt Reynolds and Sinbad are among 250 people with the largest delinquent income tax bills, officials say. O.J. Simpson, now in prison, is taken off the list. 3 celebrities on list of California tax evaders - Los Angeles Times

2008 article:

National Treasure star Nicolas Cage is contesting the government's claim that he improperly wrote off $3.3 million in personal expenses. In April, a federal district court sentenced "tax protester" Wesley Snipes to three years for failing to pay taxes on $13.9 million in income from 1999 to 2001. <A href="http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/17/celebrity-tax-troubles-biz-cx_bw_0717celebtax.html" target=_blank>http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/17/celebrity-tax-troubles-biz-cx_bw_0717celebtax.html

Look how many Fed cabinet members (or proposed members) don't know how to pay their taxes: Another Obama Cabinet Official Makes Amends with the IRS - Political Punch
Guess IRS employees are pretty irked about Geither and the double standard:

"Our members are upset and angry," said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, referring to concern bubbling up within the IRS over unusually strict rules that can cost agents their jobs if they make a mistake.
In some cases, IRS employees have lost jobs for simply filing a late return or failing to report a few hundred dollars of interest income. IRS workers see double standard on tax errors -- chicagotribune.com

Guess people are also:

IRS employees have reported that taxpayers are occasionally citing the Geithner case when they are asked to pay their tax bills. "It's making the compliance conversation harder," Kelley said. IRS workers see double standard on tax errors -- chicagotribune.com

[NOVAmtneer82]

Originally Posted by vec101

Do not be judgemental of me especially since you must not be reading what I have posted and where I stand.

I am against all the increased govt spending.
I think it is going to lead to tax increases for everyone who pays taxes.
I find it hard to believe that just the wealthy and businesses are going to be able to pay for all the govt spending.
Plus, I don't agree with dumping a huge chunk of taxes on business and depending on them to carry the tax load for the country -- where have the businesses been going the last few years? I think even more will bail out of the US if they are loaded up with exorbinate taxes.

Do I think tax changes are needed? Of course.
The uber-rich who don't pay their share and the mega-companies which don't pay their share should be made to pay.

2009 article:
2008 article: [/url]
Look how many Fed cabinet members (or proposed members) don't know how to pay their taxes: Another Obama Cabinet Official Makes Amends with the IRS - Political Punch
Guess IRS employees are pretty irked about Geither and the double standard:
[/color]
[COLOR=#333333! important]Guess people are also:[/color]
[COLOR=#333333! important][/color]

Vec, you are completely missing the point.

If you are against all increases in government spending then where were you over the past eight years when George Bush drained our surplus and sent us into deep deficits in the name of national security and tax cuts for the wealthy. It doesn't make sense if you and many of the "tea party" protesters are so against deficit spending yet only chose to speak out now.

I have a finance/economics background and I think the higher income earners should be taxed more (at Clinton era levels), not to penalize but to ensure the government and the many programs that go along with it are well funded. I honestly don't think that you can tell me that an increase of only a few percent in taxes to the highest income earners is going to somehow smother our economy and make everyone poor. If upper bracket earners are that concerned then perhaps they should hire a better financial planner.

Back to the "tea party" subject...I don't really know you so I can't guarantee that you exhibit the same radical ideals that many of those at the protests displayed but it's hard to really tell one from the other. Many of these older protesters were so concerned at how socialist our country was becoming yet they receive Social Security, Medicare, Disability, etc. In case anyone missed that those are all SOCIAL PROGRAMS supported by our tax dollars.

The people in Charleston rallied against the state gas tax...where is a low income state like West Virginia going to find additional funding for roads? Surely you don't expect the private sector to foot the bill. They don't like the state income tax either. The cigarette tax is evil too..yet someone will need to pay for their healthcare when they get lung cancer or are diagnosed with other medical problems. I also heard many comments along the lines of "I'm tired of paying for deadbeats healthcare" as if whether a person works or not is reason to provide (or not provide) them with decent medical services. These are just a few of the many inconsistencies that seem to be occuring in these anti-tax arguments.

As much as conservatives don't want to admit this, we do need a sizable government to make sure things run properly. If anyone desires living in a nation with minimal (or no) government involvement then I hear Somalia is a nice place...they haven't had a government in 20 years and look how they turned out!

[tbailey1138]

I hate politics and don't typically discuss things like this on message boards, but read some of the quotes of Thomas Jefferson on what our government should be, what it was intended to be.

Jefferson on Politics & Government: Contents
Thomas Jefferson Quotes

Here are some notable quotes:

"When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. ME 15:332

"The greatest [calamity] which could befall [us would be] submission to a government of unlimited powers." --Thomas Jefferson: Declaration and Protest of Virginia, 1825. ME 17:445

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." Thomas Jefferson

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." Thomas Jefferson

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson


Note how far off course it seems we are going. Bigger government was not the intent of the framers of the Constitution. It's what they were trying to prevent us from having.

Also of note is that the Department of Homeland security has now labeled our returning war veterans and people who oppose abortion (among others) as potential terrorist threats to our country. Sad.

NEWS ANALYSIS: Nationwide Tax Day Tea Parties Often Have Similar Mantra to Campaign for Liberty - Huntington News Network

Only time will tell where our nation is headed. But we all had better be paying attention.

[NOVAmtneer82]

Yes Mr. Jefferson did indeed say those things but when exactly has our government ever exercised unlimited powers? They certainly haven't to my knowledge. How is investing in our country's infrastructure, education system and healthcare system "wasting the labors of people under the pretense of taking care of them?" How is raising taxes on the highest income earners a few percent (once again to Clinto era levels) and attempting to restore our economy "taking away from those who are willing to work and giving to those who would not?" How does one even define what is too much government?

My point is in such vague statements such as those often quoted by our founding fathers there is plenty of room for selective interpretation. Thomas Jefferson and many of our other founding fathers also spoke out against religion being intertwined with politics yet somehow we have become labeled as a "Christian Nation."

The same people (mostly Republican) are always championing for less government in everything, that is their solution..no big brother, let the people do their own thing. Yet they want to legislate what goes on in people's bedrooms, what a woman decides to do with her own body, ban a loving homosexual couple from getting married, tell me how to live based on THEIR bible, etc. It just doesn't add up in my opinion

[vec101]

Originally Posted by mtneeratheart

Vec, you are completely missing the point.

If you are against all increases in government spending then where were you over the past eight years when George Bush drained our surplus and sent us into deep deficits in the name of national security and tax cuts for the wealthy. It doesn't make sense if you and many of the "tea party" protesters are so against deficit spending yet only chose to speak out now.

Several factors including:
1. It may have continued to go on if it were not for the events over the last 3-6 months which woke up a sleeping giant. Actions by the govt really grabbed our attention and made a larger number of people pay closer attention.
2. Look at the chart on Post #9 - projections by the White House and the CBO. There is a big difference between then and now.
3. Why did someone not sooner begin an outcry?
4. There was no huge cry out in the last 8 years, so does that mean there should never be? Is it, well, if you did not do it at that point then you can never do it?

I'm not trying to "win" this arguement - I'm not even trying to argue. I am just trying to make you understand where I and many others are coming from.

I have a finance/economics background and I think the higher income earners should be taxed more (at Clinton era levels), not to penalize but to ensure the government and the many programs that go along with it are well funded. I honestly don't think that you can tell me that an increase of only a few percent in taxes to the highest income earners is going to somehow smother our economy and make everyone poor. If upper bracket earners are that concerned then perhaps they should hire a better financial planner.

Refer back to my earlier post.

Back to the "tea party" subject...I don't really know you so I can't guarantee that you exhibit the same radical ideals that many of those at the protests displayed but it's hard to really tell one from the other. Many of these older protesters were so concerned at how socialist our country was becoming yet they receive Social Security, Medicare, Disability, etc. In case anyone missed that those are all SOCIAL PROGRAMS supported by our tax dollars.

1. Those are quasi-social programs, are they not? People who work pay into them and then receive benefits.
2. However, and this is what really gets me fired up: My parents and people their age were "taught" that Soc Sec/etc. is your retirement plan.
Problem 1 - When the Feds acturial people set it up they did not correctly project the age at which people will now live (I read an article by one of the actuaries of SS - was quite interesting).
Problem 2 - (Setting aside the fact that there is not actually an account with all the $$ paid into SS over the years) Take the money which my parents paid into SS and compound it - at some point they exhaust the compounded $$ they paid in. From that point on, in my opinion at least, they are receiving welfare. I have NO problem with paying SS welfare to elderly in need. I do have a problem with continuing to pay welfare SS (the SS after they have exhausted what they paid in) to those who are not in need - in particular to the very wealthy.

Social Security is largely a "pay-as-you-go" system with today's taxpayers paying for the benefits of today's retirees. Money not needed to pay today's benefits is invested in special-issue Treasury bonds.

Yes. Presently, Social Security collects more in taxes than it pays in benefits. The excess is borrowed by the U.S. Treasury, which in turn issues special-issue Treasury bonds to Social Security. Social Security's Future - FAQs

Which, BTW, just discovered that you can pay into SocSec but that does not give you a contractual right to the monies.

The Supreme Court has established that no one has any legal right to Social Security benefits Social Security (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The people in Charleston rallied against the state gas tax...where is a low income state like West Virginia going to find additional funding for roads?

You and I agree on this.

The cigarette tax is evil too..yet someone will need to pay for their healthcare when they get lung cancer or are diagnosed with other medical problems.

Don't know what the state cig tax or previous fed tax is used for. Do know that the new/excess fed tax they put on cigarettes is NOT designated to the healthcare of smokers. It is earmarked for the S-CHIPS program. (State Children's Health Insurance Program)

I also heard many comments along the lines of "I'm tired of paying for deadbeats healthcare" as if whether a person works or not is reason to provide (or not provide) them with decent medical services.

I think if you ask the people you would find they are tired of paying for people who refuse to work, people who would rather be druggies, etc. Don't think anyone has a problem with helping those down on their luck.

Goes back to the old story - if 5 people were stranded on an island, 1 person refused to do anything but lay around. Should the other 4 provide him with food, water, etc.?

These are just a few of the many inconsistencies that seem to be occuring in these anti-tax arguments.

As much as conservatives don't want to admit this, we do need a sizable government to make sure things run properly.

That is indeed where many disagree - how much control should be over people/business/the states/etc. People have to agree to disagree on this one. Another reason why I really like bill HR 450.

Enumerated Powers Act - Requires each Act of Congress to contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act. Declares that failure to comply with this requirement shall give rise to a point of order in either chamber of Congress.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR00450:@@@L&summ2=m&

[vec101]

Originally Posted by mtneeratheart

Yes Mr. Jefferson did indeed say those things but when exactly has our government ever exercised unlimited powers? .........

I think you know how some of us would answer those questions and remarks so won't even go into it.

Can't say I often agree with the ACLU but guess we should be glad there are watchdogs such as it, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and others to fight for our rights. How has govt overstepped it's bounds? I'm sure these folks and others have their ideas, opinions, and facts.

It disturbs me that our President can coerce a private citizen to quit his job. Should he have been out on his ear - quite possibly. Has the auto companies been in a mess for ages - yes. (Bailouts go back at least as far as in the 1970's when Chrylser got one). I feel like the auto industry has thumbed it's nose at us for a long time. A little guy would come up with a new idea - they would run him out of business. Gas shortages/dependence on foreign oil over the last 30 years or more - it took the car industry a long time to do anything to assist the American people. I drive a foreign car because several years ago I wanted a car with traction control - I had a choice between 2 small really crappy American cars or a decent foreign car. Went with the foreign one and have stayed with the brand ever since. Sorry, I rant. My point is - I have issues with the US car industry but still do not think it right that a US President can coerce a private citizen into quitting his job.

I think this group has a valid point:

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American League of Lobbyists (ALL) urged the White House today to rewrite a restrictive new rule on registered lobbyists seeking Recovery Act bailout funds, saying it would not achieve the transparency and accountability the administration seeks.
........a memorandum, ............, which bans all phone calls and face-to-face conversations between registered lobbyists and executive branch officials involved in funding ..

..... groups said the directive was both too narrow .........and also too broad, ........
Additionally, the right to petition the government is one of the main tenets of our country’s
founding principles. To state that one class of individuals may not participate in the same manner as all others is clearly a violation of this principle.........

.....This action will not end lobbying, it will merely replace registered lobbyists -- who must abide by strict registration and disclosure requirements -- with corporate officials -- not subject to these strictures -- who will take on the task of lobbying. .......

Banning lobbyists from speaking with government officials, but not bank officers, corporate directors and other executives – many of whom may have made substantial campaign contributions, will do little to limit the influence of special interests.”

........ One better option would be to require disclosure of all communications -- by non-lobbyists as well as lobbyists. This would more effectively provide the transparency and accountability target the backroom deals that Americans are legitimately concerned about.

“If the aim of this provision is government transparency, the focus should not be on those who already disclose their activities publicly,” ......... “This directive wholly excludes the Goliaths of Wall Street from its applicability and instead restricts the speech rights of those who are dutifully filing quarterly reports of their contacts with the administration and Congress. All the while, powerful corporate titans can go on about their business with no new disclosure requirements.”

http://www.alldc.org/press/pr033109.pdf

[harborlady]

I'm glad people are taking an active involvement in critiquing how our government is operating. My problem with teabaggers- they're blaming the government for the government they requested. Pretty clueless about...
1. who/ what caused the problem
2. Offer no viable alternative solution beyond the one we're following now.
3. who they're in bed with (the actual cause of the problem) to make themselves feel artificially empowered with a bit of attention.
4. producing the net effect of biting the ankles of the firemen who are putting out the flames on their homes.

Would you take a vote among every citizen with a properly framed question... "do you believe your government has operated it's programs & created legislation in a way that's fair?", most would say no (regardless of party affiliation). The dysfunction is so huge that most of us wouldn't know where to begin trying to fix anything. The more you try to dig, the deeper down the rabbit hole you go.

I'm going to use an analogy here about the concept of deliberate misattribution of blame that perhaps you can see more clearly. Would a crooked commodities market tell WV coal companies that the the new fair market value of one ton of coal is 2 cents, what are they supposed to do about it when federal legislation was purchased to establish & defend crooked markets? Moreover, when those miners are told by their bosses we're going out of biz because we pay you too much, and miners raise hell by blaming the bosses with death threats... who is the true guilty party in this scenario? The guy you never met pulling the strings.

Meanwhile, everyone's going broke, even the state of WV who did live within it's means, because of that guy pulling the strings (who is now laughing all the way to the bank AND offering to bail out the state by purchasing coal fields for pennies on the dollar ). You characterize Obama as pulling strings with an ill thought out cap and trade proposal. He has it plain as day on the table with no sneaky agendas in the background. He spelled it out, and I disagree with his plan as you already know. This is a far cry from the weasels pulling the strings on the sly.

You, and many, haven't acknowleged how neocon economic policy has gravely damaged this country. You missed the irony about how this org facilitating tea parties is selling you political pitchforks in this moment, to go chase down Obama for attempting to fix what THEIR neocon philosophy inevitably produces. The guy actually pulling the strings in commodities market is in effect profitting again by selling pitchforks (to be cashed in later when they endorse a new candidate that tells people what they want to hear)!

Honest look at the big picture over the long view... massive government reform is long overdue. Any laws that are hacked at or created that obsolve our government from their responsibility of maintaining a solid basis for healthy capitalism to exist has a natural conclusion. You cite celeb figures... how about the swiss bank accounts of 5 layer corporations claiming to be doing business in cayman islands but living in florida? This guy never gets the spotlight. FOX doesn't put the spotlight on themselves when Rupert Murdoch inc. was guilty of the EXACT same tax evasion on multi billion scale. He used those 'profits' from tax evasion to undercut competitors. He also used those profits (aka THEFT via tax evasion) to start campaigns soliciting citizens to rail against their own government for taxing him.

The people who have been telling you that your government steals from you have been stealing. You don't want to see it for what it is. He, along with many others like Rove, destroyed the republican party. That party of fiscal responsibility was perverted to become the party of corporate welfare. Now we have fiscal liberals competing with fiscal liberals instead of checks and balances, and the middle class caught in the middle getting destroyed by the extremes of favoritism.

Do I have a problem with the way Obama has gone about this fiscal mgmt? Yes, I truly do, however, I'm empty handed with solutions to solve the magnitude of the problems. Here's what could have played out if Obama, Bush & congress didn't go down this bailout (loan) path. The american economy, and by proxy the global economy, could have siezed up entirely repeating the great depression spiral. Every factory and small biz operating on a credit economy would have locked it's doors virtually overnight once their cash reserves were depleted. This means farmers unable to get a line of credit would not be able to plant crops, scarcity driving up cost of living/ inflation sharply in supply/demand rules. No car could be sold without having cash in hand. No hospital could accept patients because the insurance companies might not be solvent, because hospitals are not in the business of scrutinizing solvency. Credit card companies could have denied every purchase at every register across the globe. The list of potential ramifications is endless. We've staved this off so far, but there is no way we can get out of this mess completely unscathed. Not having 2 million additional vacant units in real estate on the market all at once is making sure the market doesn't get warped to it's other extreme of under valuation. Making sure every bank doesn't fail all at once similar story. Whatever is not fiscally sound will inevitably die, but sorting wheat from chaff is where we've been and will continue to be for a while. We're paying for 30yrs of artificial wealth all at once via treasury & Fed.

No one on the right has offered an actual plan to deal with reality. They offer heckling and finger pointing away from themselves. They're goading people into anarchy which has a backlash effect of justifying a police state. They offer power plays and false flattery of joe the plumber. They offer me Al Sharpton representation making a mockery of my rights, my life and my $$$ by telling me I'm a victim of my own government when THEY have been the government facilitating theft by an elite protected class all along.

The so-called grass roots organization you think you belong to is a subsidiary of Rupert Murdochs empire. He told you to blame the fireman for the fire, and you're obliging him.
Jane Hamsher: The Corporate Lobbyists Behind the Tea Parties

FOXnews doesn't report the news. They MAKE the news. Iraq war is brought to you directly by FOXnews, aka, Rupert Murdoch. The same man who owns nearly all right leaning sources of information (so don't wonder where all the true conservatives went, they don't toe the corporate line). He decides what is fact and what will be ignored. So go ahead and pay the man, Vec. The same man who decided you'd pay for Iraq now has yet another fundraiser for you to donate to.

https://www.freedomworks.org/contribute?form=c3
They're selling Tshirts, promoted on foxnews website.
http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/ph...41109_tea6.jpg

Sympathy for the poor put upon troops overseas doesn't make anyone a patriot. Making sure those troops aren't over there in vain is a job american citizens failed at miserably, but they had more than a few corrupting that decision making process.

Talking heads on FOX are campaigning for republicans 24/7, 365 days a year and each talking head will be told who you should vote for come election day. The republican candidate will be given a script of buzz words & positions on issues to repeat that have been authored at FOX headquarters all along.
The Washington Independent » Scenes From the DC Tea Party: More Photos!

Who is freedomworks?
FreedomWorks - SourceWatch
Who is Dick Armey?
Dick Armey - SourceWatch
Hey!!! This is the same guy, majority leader, when critical deregulation- repealing glass steagal act, was pushed through???
http://seekingalpha.com/article/6904...overleveraging

Your so called grass roots organization is manned by career politicians and think tank manipulators. This isn't a coffee table discussion, or the people scrutizing facts to hammer out a better plan for self determination. They've shifted dependence upon a new set of 'expert' saviors who have their own agenda. When they say no big government they mean to go about it by abolishing social security insurance. The american people clearly voiced they do not want social security insurance ended, but neocon agenda has set forth to destroy it by any and all means necessary.

So whatever objectives you, or I, or anyone else might have, we must first ask the powers that be outside our government if they're willing to promote it/ pitch it to said government because ultimately it is THEY who control government through puppet strings connected to... Rupert Murdoch.

He appears to be willing to renounce his american citizenship to trade it in to turkey, where a new media conglomeration controlling middle eastern thought is in the drafting stage. He also attends these new world order conferences.