Dunno. Maybe when it doesn't exist? Like, say, maybe we shouldn't take to the streets threatening insurrection just to complain about trifling tax increases on only the wealthiest of the wealthiest Americans?
I say, if these folks want to protest like the libpigs, they should face the same obstacles as we did.
This country was founded on tax insurrection. However, that aside, try to expand your thinking. Read more than MSNBC and the New York Times. Tea partiers as a whole aren't advocating insurrection. If fact, if you read my post to Batman Jones, you would discover that I advocate working within the system to effect change. If you opened your eyes to project the tax increases that are being proposed, you would discover the tax hikes affect everybody who works for a living -- not just the wealthy. Some taxes are good and necessary, but there is a point to where taxes become oppressive. I urge you to work in the system to influence your representatives in determining what is fair or unfair. For example, I am an active proponent of uncapping FICA taxes on earned income as well as a graduated flat tax. The nation does need more money, but the stewards of our nation do not need to waste it.
While there is no doubt a point at which taxes become oppressive, are we really near or at that point now? Are you being taxed at a dramatically higher rate now than during the Bush years? Was the taxes in the GWBush years "oppressive"? Where were the tax oppression protestors from 2001 to 2008? I'm fine with people demonstrating, but it's kind of ridiculous to use rhetorics of revolution when better/easier solution would be to just elect some officials who favor the same tax policies that you support. Ask New Gingrich, it can be done.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
Again, what is that point, exactly? 'Cause history really isn't on your side. You do realize that tax rates proposed by the Obama administration are still lower than those under Reagan, and are considerably, considerably lower than what we had on the wealthy during pretty much the entirety of the 20th century. Matt Yglesias: "Top Marginal Tax Rates Over Time" Take a look at that chart. Why on earth, given our history of taxation, is "Don't Tread on Me" warranted now (especially given the tax cuts to the great majority of Americans, middle-income citizens, under Obama's proposals). Don't pigeon-hole me. Like Sarah Palin, I read everything, everything you put in front of me. I tend to watch MSNBC, FNC, CNN, but you got me, I prefer NPR. And I try to read at least the front page of the New York Times and Washington Post daily, but like to think I sample quite liberally from a whole host of publications, left, right, and center.
Because they're idiots. They're protesting against tax increases when their taxes have been lowered. They're ignorant suckers who don't even know what they're pissed off about. Yeah, let's get them to take over the political system. Great idea.
As Americans, they have a right to be idiots and to express their idiocy. What I take offense to is the thinly veiled threat of armed insurrection. Should you have a group of wackos take their guns to Washington, a nasty scene is what you are bound to have. You'd essentially have to send in a tank or two in order to avoid the needless death of peace officers.
I am saddened that you rank me as an idiot. But, I can accept your evaluation, just as I hope that you understand my evaluation of the tea partiers and our objectives is quite the opposite.
The thing that puzzles me is that right now taxes are even lower than they were for most of America under Bush. They are lower over all than they were under Reagan. So it's odd to me that this level of outrage suddenly rears its head during Obama's first few months, after he gave almost everyone a tax cut.
Both statements bravely spoken -- but obviously from those who have not worked within the movement. These are sentiments influenced by a hostile media but not grounded in substance. These are statements by symbolically blind men judging the elephant by his tail rather than his body.
While it may be good that they aren't apathetic, it's too bad that they arguing against things that don't exist such as the them being overly taxed, when they are actually taxed less. Arguing against socialism that isn't socialism. Arguing against a citizen of the United STates claiming he wasn't born in the United States. I'm actually not sure it is good that imaginary issues based on lies that were told to them, and they were too eager to believe is really a good thing. I don't know maybe it's better to sit on the sidelines, than to go in the game and tackle your own guys who are trying to score the ball. Honestly, a lot of the signs here aren't really peaceful. They are threatening. Is that how the civil rights protests were so effective? One of the best posts in this thread is the one of the real civil rights posters vs. the tea party version posed underneath it. Do you honestly think any of those people at the march would have been supportive if war opponents marched on Washington with signs that said We want you to get out of Iraq now, next time we'll be carrying weapons when we march on Washington? I'm happy to see people get involved but sad to see them protest against boogey men that are pure imagination.
To be fair, for the much much much much much much bigger anti-war protest, there were idiots with signs like "bomb the terrorist in the white house" and their own Bush as Hitler posters and effigys.
That is fair, and equally as idiotic. I wonder if these protesters supported those kinds of signs from the anti-war protesters. We already know that they didn't like armed New Black Panther PArty members near polling places, yet they feel its legitimate to bring their weapons to town halls where the President is, and where the congressmen are.
You didn't get a tax cut. You got a refund. Bush gave you the same type of refund. IIRC, the Bush refund was bigger. The whole tea party movement is predicated on preventing overly burdensome taxation and debt. These are people concerned for America's future. For example, tea partiers want health care reform but don't want what they fear is a bad plan.
Again, why the outrage all of a sudden when tax rates are lower than they were under Reagan, and Obama gave them an additional tax cut (of if you want an additional tax refund). Why is that only now do they need to threaten to march with arms next time? The timing of this only happening once Obama takes office is strange. As far as health care, why haven't they been active for health care reform before now? It appears much of what they fear in the health care reform bill isn't even really in the health care reform bill. It's just strange that all of this outrage suddenly spilled over only when Obama takes over as President despite his moving the nation closer to what these people state are their goals as far as taxation.
