The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

The Clickocracy

Tea Parties a Test of Conservative Online Organizing


Some activists wear Boston tea party themed costimes as they gather to participate in a tax revolt rally in Santa Barbara, Calif., on April 4, 2009. (Phil McCarten/Reuters)

By Jose Antonio Vargas
In the world of online activism, a way to measure how unorganized a movement is by how many organizations claim credit for its actions.

And so it goes with today's Tax Day Tea Parties, which harken back to the Boston Tea Party when Americans rebelled against British rule. Then, the impetus for the protest was for unfair taxation. Now, the cause is what protesters say is wasteful federal spending, such as the bailout money offered to companies such as A.I.G. and G.M.

Though the protests are being billed as nonpartisan, the energy and buzz surrounding them has been building on conservative (and libertarian) Web sites for weeks, even before some 30,000 Americans took the streets in about 40 cities in the first nationwide tea parties in February, and before CNBC reporter Rick Santelli's now infamous rant on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Jason Norrett, a 34-year-old stay-at-home dad in Boise, Idaho, created his blog,Tea Party 2009, in late January. "I just had to do something to voice my frustration," Norrett, a Republican who voted for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in November, said in a phone interview.

You can find the protest-organizers on Facebook, where a group called Tea Party has nearly 1,800 members. This morning, a member from Phoenix wrote on the group's wall at 3:30 a.m.: "I went to college and got my degree and a good job. I am hip deep in debt from my college loans, which I am paying back. I live within my means and keep track of my budget so I can be responsible and pay all my bills on time. Why should I have to pay for someone else's complete and total lack of responsibility???" You can find them on Twitter, where the hash tag #teaparty will be used by Twitterers to signal the day's events. You can find them on YouTube, where you can watch a videoof a tea party where an attendee holds a poster that reads "Stop Marxism, Fight Obama."

For the online left, it's been far too easy to mock the tea party organizers. All the talk of socialism, Marxism and "tea-bagging," a slang reference for a sexual act made widely known by an episode of HBO's "Sex and the City," have been fodder for cable hosts and liberal bloggers. Some charge that the parties are actually organized by the usual suspects, big conservative groups such as FreedomWorks, headed by former house majority leader Dick Armey, and not by everyday Joes and Janes. Critics claim that the movement is AstroTurf -- fake grassroots.

But for the online right, many of whom have been energized by Obama's presidency in the same way President Bush galvanized the online left, today's tea parties are just one step in building a conservative grassroots movement. To conservative blogger Matt Lewis, who writes for PoliticsDaily.com, today's parties "are just one small step in the right direction."

"Look, the online conservative movement, if you compare it to what the liberals have with MoveOn and the like, is still in its infancy," Lewis said in an interview. "And there is no one person, or one organization, controlling it."

That movement flexes its new muscles today.

This is one in a series of online columns on our growing "clickocracy," in which we are one nation under Google, with e-mail and video for all. Please send suggestions, comments and tips to vargasj@washpost.com.

Posted at 10:36 AM ET on Apr 15, 2009  | Category:  The Clickocracy
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: On Tax Day, Tea Parties, Free Food and Calls for Reform | Next: Grover Norquist on Tea Parties, Today at 2


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Obviously most of the media got it wrong. The article says 30,000 Americans protested. There were over 20,000 in Kansas alone, 20,000 in Atlanta, 6,000 in Dayton Ohio and there were rallies in all 50 states. The 6 million number is much more accurate.

Why don't we know for sure how many people were there? The media wasn't there.

They and this administration have missed the point.

I'm tired of being slave labor working 60-70 hours/week to support my family and then to have our congress and president tell me I'm arrogant and selfish and because I work my arse, I should pay taxes so some unfortunate kid can go to college for free while mine need to take out loans.

We're also a little ticked because of our 4 children in college only our daughter gets a small scholarship. The boys with grade point averages of 3.95, 3.82 and 3.65 don't qualify for anything because we make too much money - ha ha and they are white males.

But our son's friend gets his education 100% paid because his family makes less money. Problem is, he doesn't like a class he drops it and takes it again next semester coz it's free. His been in school over 4 years and is only a sophomore and won't graduate for another 3 years!!!

Something is really wrong with this senario.

Posted by: debmries | April 17, 2009 12:08 AM

Yes, and "gay" used to mean "happy" once too.

Posted by: JakeD | April 16, 2009 2:33 PM

Tea bagging is our right!!! I'm a Tea bagger and I'm proud!!!

Posted by: Godhimself1 | April 16, 2009 1:19 PM

I'm having a tea bagging party out at the airport motel. Uninformed protesters are welcome. Tea bags not required.

Posted by: Godhimself1 | April 16, 2009 1:16 PM

...amendment to previous post....let me clarify before someone jumps to conclusions and puts a spin on what I've stated, the 'beast' in Washington, D.C. that I'm referring to is the Federal Government.

Posted by: sillyputty579 | April 16, 2009 12:41 PM

That's my rough (unofficial) count from those reporting crowd estimates so far -- there were upwards of 20K just at the Alamo -- take a look for yourself:

http://taxdayteaparty.com/

http://teaparties.wordpress.com/

Posted by: JakeD | April 16, 2009 12:27 PM

Nodebris,
There were plenty of us saying the same thing when Bush was President, just not enough to reach the level of awareness that we are beginning to obtain. I want to be clear, the problem is not with one political party, but both of the major parties. The problem is Progressives. Bush 41 and W, are progressives, not conservatives. Obama, Clinton..both progressives not liberals. The powers that be (mainly the mainstream media and the politicians, which are both backed, supported and financed by major corporations) want to keep us fighting and marginalized; Democrat vs. Republican, Conservative vs. Liberal, Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice...these are all distractions. The tea parties yesterday were not a protest of the Obama presidency or the Democratic congress, regardless of how hard the media and politicians are trying to dupe us into believing it was so (although certain individuals may have been protesting those two things). The tea parties were in protest of the massive expansion of the Federal Government which has reached an unprecidented level. We The People are sick of it. We just want to be left alone. But this beast in Washington will not be satisfied until it feeds on every area of our personal lives and dictates exactly how we should live, that my fellow American, is Tyranny! Just govern according to the Constitution and quit trying to rewrite it or act as though it is an inconvenience is all I ask of my elected officials.

Posted by: sillyputty579 | April 16, 2009 12:22 PM

Those like JRM2 and nodebris have posted (on other threads) that they have no intention of engaging me directly, so these questions are pure subterfuge.

Everyone else:

If you have any similar questions you really want to know about, please let me know. Back on the topic of "Tea Parties a Test of Conservative Online Organizing": There had to have been over 200,000 people coming out to the protests nationwide. Quite a success!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090416/ap_on_re_us/tax_day_protests

Posted by: JakeD | April 16, 2009 11:58 AM

Rick Perry is a truculent curmudgeon with a chip on his shoulder and muscle for brains. That's why he out there shooting off his mouth in the corporate fake tea party. Sixty one percent of the Texas electorate voted to replace him. He's a terrible governor who rejects help for those who need it so he can pamper the corporate thieves who caused this mess.

He's a punk, and if money had a penis, he'd be all over it.

Posted by: rooster54 | April 16, 2009 8:30 AM

JakeD: are you now or have you ever been a member of the American Independent Party?

Have you ever voted for Alan Keyes for President?

Do you not consistently describe yourself as a "registered Independent" on these boards? Why do you believe that is not a misleading formulation?

Have you ever posted the same comment as the first poster on more than three 44 stories in a row? More than five?

Are you currently taking any medications for your Obsessive Compulsive Disorder?

Do these medications interfere with your ratiocination and your ability to draw logical inferences?

Have you ever suggested that the Obama White House should use watermelons rather than eggs at the traditional Easter Egg roll?

Are you under the illusion that you are actually supporting the cause of conservatism with your posts about Obama's birth certificate?

Posted by: nodebris | April 15, 2009 11:42 PM

sillyputty579, where was your concern for spending over the last eight years? What woke you up, eh? Because it looks like your only problem is WHO is spending.

And you're right, Fox News wasn't behind it: it was way, way out in front.

Posted by: nodebris | April 15, 2009 11:26 PM

Fox News nor Rush Limbaugh was behind the tea parties. Hard working Americans were the responsible ones... Stop spending money we don't have...

Posted by: sillyputty579 | April 15, 2009 11:00 PM

These Fox News/Limbaugh Tea Parties have only served to convince most Americans just how crazy the rightwing nutjobs really are.

The majority of Americans know that these same neocon nutjob Republicans kept their mouths shut when Bush trampled the Constitution, ran up the Federal debt, and destroyed the American economy.

The Tea Party represents yet another failed attempt by the dead ender Republicans to prove themselves relevant. Like most everything else the conservative GOP touches, this too was pretty much a failure.

Even with Faux News beating the drum 24/7, the Tea Parties failed to attract even a tiny segment of the American people.

Posted by: Continuum | April 15, 2009 10:18 PM

Yeah, Rupert Murdock is really worried about wasteful government spending.
Time to pay up.

Posted by: seemstome | April 15, 2009 8:58 PM

From the article (above) that you are supposedly commenting on: "Now, the cause is what protesters say is wasteful federal spending, such as the bailout money offered to companies such as A.I.G. and G.M."

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 8:27 PM

seemstome:

It's also to protest the out-of-control spending by Obama and Congress.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 8:18 PM

The original tea party in Boston was to protest taxes being levied on the middle class and poor. This fiasco is to protest taxes being raised on the rich back to the levels during the Reagan administration. As for the bailout of the banks, that was orchestrated by the same people who financed and promoted these propaganda parties.
The real revolution was fought and won last November and those voters will not be fooled by the wealthy any longer.
Time to pay up.

Posted by: seemstome | April 15, 2009 8:16 PM

Seems to have passed this "test" (at least) as the protests were the lede story on the nightly news, not to mention the major topic here at WaPo.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 6:32 PM

it's the "bandwagon theory"....(a collective society thing)

if one presents a viable opportunity to another for "15 minutes of fame"---
the other will take it...

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 5:28 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how the mainstream media starts pounding the drum of partisanship and all the uninformed masses just fall right in line with whatever spin is placed before them like good, faithful little lemmings. The participants that I personally know involved in the tea parties are not protesting Democrats or Republicans. It has nothing to do with any party affiliation. The protest is with the massive growth of the Federal Government which has reached a point where intrusion into virtually every area of our personal lives is the norm. This massive growth of the Federal Government has been helped alone by both of the big two parties and George W. Bush was a major contributor to that growth. The Progressive movement is the root cause of this push leading to tyranny. The tyranny which is being slowly obtained by the Statists at a slow, albeit steady, rate. I, for one, am sick of it. Just leave us alone and govern according to the Constitution and there will be no problems from this movement. The Constitution is an inconvenient, out-dated document in the minds of most Progressives unfortunately.

Posted by: sillyputty579 | April 15, 2009 5:01 PM

That's right, marSF. Keep making fun of all those people who cling to guns or religion.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 4:38 PM

Posted by: marSF | April 15, 2009 4:28 PM

JakeD: I know that myself and everyone I know were in a much better financial situation during the Clinton administration, the housing market was good, unemployment rates were low.
Get over it -- this country is in a mess and it needs to be fixed. The only way to change it is through change itself. Change is scary, but good grief, I'm ready for it.

Posted by: Maureen53 | April 15, 2009 3:29 PM

now why should we blame barney frank and clinton? and what for now?

the clinton administration is 9 years old.

paulson himself said the problems of the current crisis began earlier in this decade, which would put it at 2000 ---

wasn't that when the supreme court elected the president by the name of bush.
or was that florida?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 3:08 PM

Maureen53:

Why no blame for Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barney Frank? Do you want to debate this issue or not?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 2:56 PM

Hey, LABC! Where have you been hiding?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 2:55 PM

JakeDuh will be demonstrating the proper protest position to be in for teabaggin' on his FACEbook site - Alan Keyes will be narrating...

Posted by: LABC | April 15, 2009 2:51 PM

it's really a chance for everyone to get loaded, no?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 2:47 PM

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 2:37 PM

This is right on the money! Another phrase for this is "sour grapes".

The original "Tea Party" was a protest against taxation without representation. We just had an election, and are covered in the representation dept. What the Conservatives are protesting, is democracy, because they lost.

They are proudly displaying their unamericanism for all to see.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | April 15, 2009 1:28 PM

Posted by: Maureen53 | April 15, 2009 2:17 PM

well, i don't know about that.

been in revenue field before....
the "undocumenteds" are actually paying income tax.....(((hearty laughs))
but they ripped off the SSN of another to do it. !!!!

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 2:09 PM

jake--i know, it's rough...

and when the buck can't stop,
we drop bombs

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 2:02 PM

my family will be participating in our city's "tea party" this evening. Government accountability of the bailout
money and flaky liberal spending are the reasons we're attending, along with Pelosi
supporting illegal immigrants (who, by the
way, benefit from our taxdollars without paying income taxes).

Posted by: ohioan | April 15, 2009 1:59 PM

bsimon1:

You haven't seen "Borat" have you?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:56 PM

TheBabeNemo:

I actually remember a time when a man in Washington, D.C. once said "The Buck Stops Here". Maybe, someday, your man will come to that truth.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:56 PM

"Very funny (NOT!)"

Your sense of humor is functioning normally, as the post was not intended to be funny.

As the income disparity has grown between the "have mores" and "have nots", so has the tax burden on the "have mores" grown. Curiously, their tax burden has not grown as fast as their wealth. We should fix that.

Posted by: bsimon1 | April 15, 2009 1:55 PM

For the record, there is no general "Independent" party in California. As of April 2009, there are only six (6) political parties that Californians can register with (or they can decline to state" a party affiliation). I am also not OCD, nor do I have any other mental disease or disorder. If anyone else wants to discuss any of that, please let me know.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:54 PM

yes jakey..
economic stabilization came in 2 parts (alot of people think HR1 was the second part of ESA2008).
it was not.
TARP was 2nd half of bush's ESA.
he did not want to release TARP funds.
why?
because he knew the AIG and ceo problem would surface.... (the fine print of the ESA bill)....
so Prez Obama repeatedly asked for the TARP monies to be released starting something in december 2008 or jan 2009.
---bush couldn't go back and re-write the ESAct. Release the TARP monies and see the downfall in earnest.
thing is jakey....bush knew it all along.

it's called sabotaging the next administration...and wash dc is GREAT at it.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 1:49 PM

P.S. to thomasmc1957 -- did you similarly denounce the illegal immigrant marches as "proudly displaying their unamericanism for all to see"?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:46 PM

jaked: "I'm registered Independent"

[rolling eyes] There you go again!

He's a registered member of California's far right-wing Independent Party of America. Alan Keyes. George Wallace. A fun bunch. Not what you'd consider a swing voter.

Posted by: nodebris | April 15, 2009 1:44 PM

morningglory51:

Welcome aboard! To be fair, though, the headline reads "Conservative" not Republican. Most liberals I know are supporting Obama on this one, not protesting.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:44 PM

Can't believe the massive ignorance this story represents.
People protesting taxes are Republicans, Democrats AND Independants.
Is WaPo resorting to letting 5 years write their articles now?

Today, I'm changing my party status from Democrat to Independant.
The Democratic party no longer has more than 2 brain cells to rub together.

Posted by: morningglory51 | April 15, 2009 1:36 PM

thomasmc1957:

Look up the meaning of "TEA" (taxed enough already). Also, from the United States Constitution (First Amendment):

"... the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:35 PM

The original "Tea Party" was a protest against taxation without representation. We just had an election, and are covered in the representation dept. What the Conservatives are protesting, is democracy, because they lost.

They are proudly displaying their unamericanism for all to see.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | April 15, 2009 1:28 PM

Crucialitis:

As long as you aren't forgetting the Democrats are in power now (I'm registered Independent ; )

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:16 PM

NomoStew and TheBabeNemo:

[Then President-Elect] Obama Asks Bush to Seek TARP Funds From Congress

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aXTl_q8nIqk8&refer=home

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:15 PM

From this perspective, the same mouths that praise free market, bail out AIG. Both parties.

Posted by: Crucialitis | April 15, 2009 1:13 PM

Crucialitis:

A "free market" would have let AIG go under and homeowners who couldn't afford mortgages rent instead.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:09 PM

"

"The Top TEN-percent pay 72.4% of all Income taxes.
And, the bottom 50% pay less than 3½% to IRS."

Sounds like the top 10% should be paying the bottom 50% higher salaries so they can bear more of the tax burden.

Posted by: bsimon1 | April 15, 2009 12:46 PM "

Hey, it comes with the territory of making 10x+ more than your average worker for more perks, more leverage, and less direct labor.

Posted by: Crucialitis | April 15, 2009 1:05 PM

NomoStew and TheBabeNemo:

Perhaps you've already forgotten that Bush signed the TARP Bill into law after CLOSE CONSULTATION with Obama?

bsimon1:

Very funny (NOT!)

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 1:05 PM

From "I want a free market!" to "Boo hoo! there's no oversight and now the government is spending all of my money to fix it!"

Posted by: Crucialitis | April 15, 2009 1:03 PM


nomo:
valid.
bush's economic stabilization act of 2008 was a set up for President Obama....

bush family is like that.
make sure my buddies (AIG, ceo(s), banks) get their money before i split office.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 1:00 PM

To rbradmorgan: You nailed it buddy!

rharring, yes, I did actually complain against Bush, and have voted for Ron Paul in the last 2 elections. Did Bush give away too much money? Yes. Yes he did. But, will it do me any good to protest against Bush today? No. So I protest Obamaman. Who, by the way, is giving away WAY more than Bush. So, I agree with you. Bush was a moron, but Obamaman is a bigger moron. Happy now?

Posted by: rbradmorgan | April 15, 2009 12:11 PM

Posted by: Bubbette1 | April 15, 2009 12:59 PM

hold the phone:
bush tried funding healthcare programs at the state level through the social security act.... from 2005 to 2008.
to get "universal".
it failed, of course,--however, it failed at the state level. they all wanted 87,000 area rugs.

what did he do with SS money for the housing market?

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 12:52 PM

Those pesky facts, and what rightists do with them. Such fun.

Reagan ran up huge deficits. Most Teabaggers probably still think of him as a hero.

Clinton moved the budget back toward balance. Most teabaggers probably wanted him impeached.

Gingrich and company ran on a "contract" that included a balanced budget amendment; but once they got their hands on the pork-strings, somehow that promise disappeared.

Then Bush and congressional Republicans ran up huger deficits. Teabaggers were nowhere to be found. Heck, even after the legislature went Democrat, teabaggers were nowhere to be found

Bush designed and passed the major bailout legislation that Obama is administering, and Bush policies created the need for government stimulus. But somehow to teabaggers this is all Obama's doing now, and teabaggers are out in force.

There's a pretty clear pattern, isn't there? It's not the deficits that matter to teabaggers. It's just which party has the presidency.

Posted by: NomoStew | April 15, 2009 12:50 PM


hey jakey, i'll bite
mortgage companies, banks, leasing companies, loan officers -
not following regulatory requirements
for something like 8 years

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 12:49 PM

"The Top TEN-percent pay 72.4% of all Income taxes.
And, the bottom 50% pay less than 3½% to IRS."

Sounds like the top 10% should be paying the bottom 50% higher salaries so they can bear more of the tax burden.

Posted by: bsimon1 | April 15, 2009 12:46 PM

you want organization to a "protest"

no one can beat Rev Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
peaceful and meaningful...

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | April 15, 2009 12:46 PM

Maureen53:

Do YOU want to discuss the issue in a civil debate?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:34 PM

The CBO said last month that Obama deficits are unsustainable. He is kicking the can down the road, but the rotting pork in his can prevents it from moving past your children's generation. Visit my site for the story.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/270986

Posted by: lclifton | April 15, 2009 12:29 PM

If anyone else wants to politely discuss the origins of the housing mess (and blocking of efforts to address it) please let me know.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:28 PM

JakeD: "when Bush tried to address this, Social Security, etc., he was blocked at every turn?"

It was mighty cruel of the Republican majority in both houses of Congress and in the Supreme Court to block Bush at every turn.

What's the use of a party that can't even get what it wants when it has complete control of government?

Posted by: nodebris | April 15, 2009 12:23 PM

rbradmorgan:

You can't reason with them.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:19 PM

Maureen53:

Why no blame for Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barney Frank for creating this housing mess, when Bush tried to address this, Social Security, etc., he was blocked at every turn?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:17 PM

Maureen53, you're right, you can't have it both ways. But part of freedom is the freedom to fail.

Posted by: rbradmorgan | April 15, 2009 12:16 PM

True that Jake D. And I thank God for that.

Posted by: rbradmorgan | April 15, 2009 12:15 PM

Am I the only one that feels that if Bush and his cronies hadn't gotten this country into the financial mess we're in, that the bailouts wouldn't be necessary? I don't like the idea of bailing out these CEO's either, but I also don't want to see half of the currently employed auto industry folks and others in the unemployment lines. You can't have it both ways folks.

Posted by: Maureen53 | April 15, 2009 12:14 PM

rbradmorgan:

At least Bush thwarted any subsequent terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 2001.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:13 PM

rharring:

Obama is proposing much more than Bush ever dreamed of giving away and, as Obama keeps pointing out, we are in an economic CRISIS right now. See the difference?

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:11 PM

rharring, yes, I did actually complain against Bush, and have voted for Ron Paul in the last 2 elections. Did Bush give away too much money? Yes. Yes he did. But, will it do me any good to protest against Bush today? No. So I protest Obamaman. Who, by the way, is giving away WAY more than Bush. So, I agree with you. Bush was a moron, but Obamaman is a bigger moron. Happy now?

Posted by: rbradmorgan | April 15, 2009 12:11 PM

JakeD wrote: "The Top TEN-percent pay 72.4% of all Income taxes."

What percent of all income do they receive? (Gross and adjusted, for extra points.)

This observation is along the lines of "larger objects cast bigger shadows" or "heavy things are harder to carry."

JakeD: "most real conservatives are WORKING today"

Preemptively excusing the poor turn out, eh?

Posted by: nodebris | April 15, 2009 12:11 PM

Conservatives and Libertarians just don't do demonstrations very well. Those are more the domain of fascists, socialists, communists and other so-called progressives. Every university campus seems to have about a dozen or so regulars who always appear under various "Coalition of [...] Against [...]" banners at such functions. They're well organized; they do it frequently and they're good at it.

Conservatives and Libertarians, on the other hand, simply want to be left alone. Spending time on public protests takes them away from their jobs, which is why these "tea parties" are so unusual. They reflect a very high level of frustration. Politicians would be well advised to pay attention.

Posted by: owlcreekobserver | April 15, 2009 12:09 PM

rbradmorgan,

Did you ever think that this protest may have made since if it happened a few times in the last 8 years? Its funny how you come to blame Obama for giving away billions as you state but kept your mouth closed when Bush did the same. Can you say HYPOCRITE....

Posted by: rharring | April 15, 2009 12:06 PM

The Top TEN-percent pay 72.4% of all Income taxes.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 12:02 PM

To "srcewyou" at 11:52. Thanks for your failed attempt to "interject reality." I think that many, many people (inlcuding "screwyou") are missing the boat with regard to why so many people are upset. It's not the tax code. It's the fact that Obamaman and company are giving away BILLIONS of dollars to people who have a demonstrable history of poor financial management. Why wouldn't the nation be upset that they are paying "taxes" which are then converted to pay salaries for morons? That's the point, "screwyou," not paying taxes, but the fiscal irresponsibility of Obamaman. Giving billions of dollars in bailouts is akin to trying to "fix" a pedophile's issues by giving them a job in a gov't run day care center. Wake up, people.

Posted by: rbradmorgan | April 15, 2009 12:02 PM

http://operationpitchfork.com/
it's no tea party; but still on mark...

Posted by: abnoctos | April 15, 2009 11:59 AM

Umm, not to interject facts or reality or whatever in the non-stop teabagging party, but today's tax deadline is for 2008 returns, right? Bush's tax code? Next year most of the working class protesters will pay much less (if anything at all) under Obama's proposed tax code, so this just makes no sense.

Soooo, has the far-right turned against Bush's economic agenda now? I'm kinda confused, does that make them pro-Obama or have they moved so far right that there's no longer even a name for it???? Or are they just unwitting volunteer muscle for a handful of billionaires seeking relevance?

Someone? Anyone?

Posted by: screwyou | April 15, 2009 11:52 AM

If Republicans commit to becoming a new "Grand Tea Party," this week's demonstrations could be as consequential as the events in Boston that inspired them.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | April 15, 2009 11:47 AM

Rupert Murdoch needs to be tried for conspiring against the government. His tax revolt already looks like a failure and embarrassment, just like everything else the republicans attempt.

Posted by: blarsen1 | April 15, 2009 11:45 AM

longwalksinparis and willandjansdad1:

Obama "won" but he is not legally President if he is not a "natural born" citizen. In addition, most real conservatives are WORKING today in order to support the massive tax burden on the top 10% of taxpayers.

Posted by: JakeD | April 15, 2009 11:43 AM

The New American Tea party was promoting a non-partisan event. Dems and Repubs are all invited. now this Tea Party concept has morphed into a conservative REPUBLICAN event rather than a fiscal conservative event (yes - I am a registered democrat but am fiscally conservative).
So where was the Tea Party when the Bush admin was spending us into oblivion on Iraq? Where are they when ALL the legislators are earmarking pork at unbelievable levels.
I want to be FREE... that means less reliance on all these folks making a living off my hard work.

Posted by: spamnomore1 | April 15, 2009 11:42 AM

Americans had the real "Tea Party" last November... guess who won ?

Posted by: longwalksinparis | April 15, 2009 11:35 AM

The Liberals go on-line and elect a President. The ditto-heads go on line at the urging of an AM Radio (circa 1929) crank and fling tea-bags in parking lots.

How quaint.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | April 15, 2009 11:08 AM

Speaking of "Clickocracy"...


SUSPECT BIG BROTHER INTERNET / TELECOM SPYING AND MALICIOUS INTERFERENCE...

...USING YOUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS TO HARASS AND CENSOR YOU?


Can't seem to access, or post to, certain web sites -- especially, political sites?

When you do post, are typos, spelling errors and other anomalies appearing in your comments -- even though you carefully proofread the submission?

You could be the unwitting victim of government "fusion centers" that apparently are using internet "filtering" technology to censor and maliciously tamper with the telecommunications of "targeted" persons.

Please see this running account of an apparently "targeted" journalist and his quest to exercise his First Amendment right of free speech, and his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures of telecommunications.

http://blog.aclu.org/2009/01/26/internet-filters-voluntary-ok-not-government-mandate

Then demand that American Civil Liberties Union renew its fight against warrantless government spying by filing a class-action suit against unconstitutional interference with personal and business telecommunications.

Recently, while reading the ACLU blog, this reporter learned of the Bush-Cheney "doctrine" of "ideological exclusion" -- apparently used to bar political "activists" from abroad from visiting the United States.

Could authoritarian bureaucrats be using this doctrine as a justification to censor political speech in this country?

If you suspect the answer is "yes," please add your account to the free speech thread cited above!

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-fusion-center-spying-pretext-harass-and-censor

OR:

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | April 15, 2009 10:46 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company