Tea Partying for Freedom
In his remarks on tax day, Obama asserted that taxes are "used as a wedge to scare people into supporting policies that actually increased the burden on working people instead of helping them live their dreams." Poppycock! Here is yet another example of the "wedge issue" fallacy being used as a political tool.
For those unfamiliar with the tactic, a "wedge issue" is a phenomenon wherein legitimate arguments are denounced by leftist politicos after it becomes evident that their positions diverge with those held by the general population. It is often used as a red herring to cloak areas of glaring Democratic Party deficiency, such as their shadowy patriotism, desire for unlimited immigration, lust for gay marriage, and confusing excessive taxation for fairness.
When the disparities between widespread opinion and proposals by the leftist elite become known, Democratic pols -- and their minions in the mainstream media -- insist that conservatives desist in alerting the citizens to their existence, and most Republican politicians comply with their command.
Systemic factors also catalyzed turnout on Wednesday. Specifically, the tax code is byzantine and treacherous. It benefits no one apart from the IRS, tax attorneys, and accountants. Many tea partiers would like to see the current system replaced "with a national sales tax or a flat tax" or a "fair tax."
In summation, the rationale for meeting up and speaking out was obvious, but the left and their journalist lackeys did not want to deal with our actual contentions, so they resorted instead to their time-tested strategy of burning strawmen.
The major networks attempted to morph the outpouring of dissatisfaction as being the product of astroturfing by wealthy and/or corporate interests. In my own case, I heard about these events separately and simultaneously from two libertarian clubs of which I am a member. Neither has any corporate sponsorship and the brethren appear to be about as light in the wallet as I am.
On CNN, Anderson Cooper attempted to ridicule the tea parties but ended up skewering himself. He effortlessly captured the day's "too much information" award. In a televised interview he observed, "It's hard to talk when you're teabagging." Anderson, we'll take your word on it.
Perhaps the "worst outrage ever" in regards to our shameless fourth estate transpired during the Chicago tea party, although I did not witness it firsthand. CNN reporter Susan Roesgen's behavior simply has to be seen in order to be believed. Roesgen's attitude towards her subjects was dismissive, condescending, hostile, and bizarre.
Any semblance of objectivity and professionalism was abandoned from her opening statement. She dubbed the convocation "a party for Obama bashers" and claimed that it was "organized by three different conservative groups."
Like a confined amazon battling both her captors and a chronic case of PMS, Roesgen sauntered about and verbally battled the rubes she met in one of our nation's toniest zip codes. Instead of listening to her interviewees, she spewed Democratic talking points. Roesgen continuously interrupted as a means of ensuring that their arguments could not be heard.
She defended President Obama to such an extent that it's hard to imagine James Carville acting any differently. Roesgen then disparaged Fox News, calling it "right-wing" and the "conservative network." Yet Fox has never displayed any bias approaching the debauched heights Ms. Roesgen breached on Wednesday.
Does anyone actually think that Shepard Smith, Bret Baier, Carl Cameron, Megyn Kelly, or Wendell Goler would (could?) ever treat ordinary Americans in such a contemptible fashion? Roesgen signed off by saying it was not "family viewing." Ah, but there she's wrong because the character of Cruella de Vil has been appreciated by children for decades.
Miscellaneous leftists contended that a recent USA Today/Gallup poll invalidates the concerns raised by the tea party social movement. As with every other statistical fact or measurement cited by the media, when one examines the figures closely the original claims become contestable.
The article itself was entitled "Most Americans OK with Big Government, at Least for Now," yet those "comfortable with big government" represented only 37 percent of the sample results. The 52 percent majority figure was derived by the journalist taking the 37 percent and throwing it in with 15 percent who approved "of current actions but view big government as a long-term threat."
Only in the details can the truth be discovered. Using those who fear the Leviathan as a way to validate the left's need for uber-government is highly misleading. The poll also found that 55 percent disapprove of the president's spending proposals, but that wasn't a figure USA Today saw fit to place above the writer's byline.
The right in America has entered its wilderness years, but the left comprehends that our essential arguments still resonate with the public. This undoubtedly was the motivation behind the release of a Department of Homeland Security report warning of increased right-wing extremism on the eve of the tea parties.
Allow me to pose an unanswerable question: what is the line between being a proponent of right-wing ideas and being a right-wing extremist? I guess it's up to conservatives to determine that on their own.
The network MSLSD had no doubts, however. When discussing the report they featured "the elephant logo of the GOP and the words, 'New Right-Wing Threat.'" The Obama administration may hope that the inherent ambiguity of its proclamation will intimidate the right. It won't and we proved that on Wednesday.
Our rank and file are a patriotic bunch who appreciate the country's history. These gatherings were a part of America's historical continuum. The tea parties are not the beginning of the end but they certainly are the end of the beginning.