Home › Blogs › kmorrison's blog ›

Obama on "People Who Wave Tea Bags Around"

Submitted by kmorrison on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 14:57
in

The basic reason for the Tea Party protests is the concern about government spending and wasteful practices, and that many feel their concerns about government spending and bailouts are not being heard. A interesting element of the Tea Parties is the make up of the participants. They were a rather diverse group of fiscal conservatives. Some in the media used the protests to promote their own brand of conservatism, or on the other extreme, some in the media dismissed the protesters as 'radical right' crazies. However, if you look at local news coverage of the Tea Parties you can see that they represented a wide range of people who have a legitimate concern about how the government spends money. President Obama would likely have been better served by ignoring the protesters, as was the White House's first reaction to the Tea Parties. Belittling these people was politically unwise, and pretending that his administration has addressed any of the concerns of fiscal conservatives was less than honest.

H/T Flaps Blog and RedState

 

Obama on "People Who Wave Tea Bags Around"

3
Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

Comments

It's debt or debt

Submitted by skayne on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 15:29.

By diverse, I guess you mean some thought he was a fascist, others a dictator, others a muslim, and yet others believed he wasn't born in the US so they wouldn't acknowledge him as President. But I digress.

He's explained it before. Debt is assured. We can either be in debt having rebuilt our infrastructure, established a new energy economy, healthcare reform, and reinvestment in scientific and technological research.

Or we can be in debt because he didn't do anything, so we descend into a depression and the plunging tax receipts put us in even worse debt. Even in a depression, we're still going to be paying for our 2 wars, defense, and other government domestic spending.

FEAR OF DEPRESSION>fear of debt

A tad melodramatic?

Submitted by kmorrison on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 15:40.

Watch the local coverage of these event.  Some people were clearly over the top as shown on the national news, but there were a good number of libertarian there, there were a good number of families atending, there were a good number of business people.  Government spending is a legitimate issue that's being largely ignored.  Disagree with the position if you like, but this sort of condescending remark does nothing but fuel the anger people felt at being ignored.

you guys want to pour gas on the fire.

Submitted by RisingTide on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 15:52.

Might as well own up to it.

Me? I favor the ticking time bomb of a jet engine.

As do even th intelligent repubklican strategists

 

... you don't seriously think you woudln't have seen Keynesian stim under John Mccain, do ya?

Keynesian stimulus

Submitted by chemjeff on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 21:49.

... you don't seriously think you woudln't have seen Keynesian stim under John Mccain, do ya?

Yes, I do.  Too bad we didn't get Keynesian stimulus under the guy who actually won.

you don't think so?

Submitted by RisingTide on Thu, 04/30/2009 - 09:02.

I do. Extending unemployment ALONE gives a huge boost to consumer spending... (no, I am not kidding, I can track this in my own budget. With the unemployment and with the COBRA subsidy, I estimate I will be spending at least 20% and up to 30% more than without them.

I keep a good budget, but not having to make a choice between $1000 a month health insurance and no health insurance at all, makes things a lot easier.

I'm very glad that we're coming in under budget in a lot of places, in terms of transportation stimulus... the important thing is to get people working, not line the pockets of contractors.

Us guys

Submitted by kmorrison on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 16:09.

Actually I'm a fiscally conservative independent, so I may not fit the 'you guys' category.  However, there was a Republican stimulus alternative that Sen. McCain participated in and it was almost half the size of the one passed.  While I would have prefered that bill, many think there should be no bailouts and no stimulus.  That's a completely reasonable position, and fiscal conservatives have had a tough time being heard in the last several months.  The Tea Parties were an effective way of getting a concern heard and hopefully addressed.

no bailouts means support for martial law.

Submitted by RisingTide on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 16:13.

period. that would have been the conseuqnece if Paulson hadn't gotten down on his knees, white a s a sheet, and begged Pelosi to get him out of his mess.

I don't think that anyone who follows UAE lobbyist Dick Armey

Submitted by NextRightNando on Wed, 04/29/2009 - 18:13.

Tea baggers? A "grassroots" movement led by Dick Armey, who is paid to lobby for the UAE to get nukes? Who is planning a protest march in Washington DC on September 11 and 12?  I don't think they deserve much respect either. Especially when their focus seems to be as much about guns and Obama (first one good, second one bad) as it is about anything else.