UpDATED: Open Thread - Teabaggers Anonymous

You got it all wrong (0.00 / 0)

I would ask for Indigo Journal readers to not look at this through the prism of MSNBC but for what it really is.  First, it is called the "Tea Party" movement and not "tea bagging".  That is something Rachel Maddow came up with.  Second, it is not even mainly about Obama's tax policies but rather the excessive spending in Washington that started under Republicans watch and is balloning with Obama and the Democratic Congress.  And finally, I don't care how smart people think Paul Krugman is, but he is dead wrong that this is "AstroTurf".  Just look around at all the tea parties happening in SC this week and you will see that it is regular folks organizing these.  The first one was held over a month ago in Greenville--organized by three young guys, and they got 2,000 to show up.  

---

by: upstater26 @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 11:33:56 AM CDT

And I'll continue... (4.00 / 3)

...to believe that most of these people are reactionaries who don't like the fact that we have a black president and that they are in an increasingly irrelevant minority. This isn't some mass movement. It's the same fringe crowd that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have been peddling their crap to for years.

Is a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it.

---

by: Tim Kelly @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 11:39:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Find It Hard To Believe (4.00 / 2)

That the impetus behind these popular events is some growing outrage over tax policies and excessive spending. These rallies have been held for some years on Tax Day, but suddenly they have the support of a major media outlet and the bigger talking heads are pumping them up and you expect us to believe these are grassroots movements? Hardly.  

And these aren't just partisan attacks on Obama, right? I mean, surely the organizers wouldn't want any distraction from their message of opposing tax policies and excessive spending. For example, they wouldn't want to post anti-Obama propaganda labeling our president an illegal immigrant and Muslim, would they?  

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/photo.php?pid=2213197&o=all&op=1&view=all&subj=70864434195&aid=-1&id=614937889&oid=70864434195  

Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to watching these crowds, but it's impossible to take them seriously. Like Beck and Limbaugh, this is nothing but bad entertainment.

---

by: Snead @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 12:21:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And Joey "Fatty Arbuckle" Millwood is putting on a clinic right now (4.00 / 1)

On his Twitter account, railing against Obama.

So make up your mind, tea baggers. Are these rallies about the growth of government and tax policies or are they just a reaction to the vocal, progressive majority who elected Obama president in November?

---

by: Snead @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 10:12:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ok Upstater26 (4.00 / 1)

1)Even if I were to find the underlying premise of the Tea Parties valid, I cannot countenance why Republicans think the best way to protest excess is by wasting food (and money) by dumping it into large bodies of water. The irony is killing me.

2)Why are Republicans/Conservatives/Libertarians/Etc. reactive rather than proactive? They could have and should have protested years ago. Instead, now that a Democrat is in office, excess spending is terrible and treated like a new phenomenon. Why critics protest a bank or securities firm? I've seen a few branches around SC.

3)Bush created our debt after squandering a surplus.  Unfortunately, unless President Obama spends $0 dollars, any budget will increase the debt significantly. Exclude the stimulus, and we still have to pay the salaries for government employees and social services we all enjoy (postal delivery, police officers, street lights, an army, navy, marines, air force, FBI, CIA, CDC, FDA, etc.).

4) We have to spend money (borrowed from China if we must) and extend credit to keep our economy going. That's how the system works. If we don't spend money, excess or otherwise, people will lose their jobs and social services like the ones mentioned in point 3.

5)Provide an alternative. Either recommend that President Obama spend $0 dollars so the country can implode, provide an alternative budget that will not increase the debt, or discover more gold in the foothills California.

6)What is your threshold for excessive spending? I Republicans complain about this a lot, but what dollar amount is too much? $1 million, $1 billion, a googol? Was the money Bush spent just below excessive? Please clarify.

---

by: Atlas @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 17:02:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Liberal talking points? (0.00 / 0)

Wow Atlas.  Looks like you put a lot of thought into that one.  That certainly is an argument for economic policy, although a typical liberal one.  You should realize that economic theory is not as simple as you make it and there are alternatives to more spending.  And just beause Obama wants to spend more money doesn't mean you have to automaically accept his plan as gospel.

Why don't you come out to a tea party and listen to someone like DeMint or Sanford articulate a conservative economic vision?

---

by: scskyman @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 21:16:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Heard it already (4.00 / 2)

Sanford and DeMint's "conservative economic vision" consists of laying off teachers to save the children (?) and refusing help from Washington for our unemployed because someday, years from now, it might cost businesses more money.

If the teabaggers had protested Bush's off-the-books spending for an illegal, unnecessary and totally botched invasion and occupation, they might have a leg to stand on protesting now.

Obama campaigned saying "If elected, I will do X, Y and Z."  He was elected by a majority of Americans who wanted X, Y and Z, and now he is in fact taking steps (some too small and too slow, but steps nonetheless) toward X, Y and Z.  Keeping campaign promises is a novel idea to Republicans, but give it a chance, it may grow on you.

Glenn Beck and his sycophants have, as Jon Stewart said, confused "tyranny" with "losing".

---

by: Donkeyxote @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 00:39:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't walk across the street... (0.00 / 0)

...to, um, pour tea, on Jim Demint if he was on fire.

Is a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it.

---

by: Tim Kelly @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 06:52:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK Scskyman (0.00 / 0)

In true conservative fashion you have:

1) failed to engage my points on a substantive manner through counterpoints or questions of clarification

2) failed to realize that calling them liberal is not an insult to me

3) failed to list the alternative to spending that you thinly reference

4) made an unsubstantiated assertion that I take President Obama's plan as gospel and accept it in full

5)assumed that I haven't been listening to DeMint or Sanford - which, if you read this blog on a regular basis, you would know that I pay quite a bit of attention to what they say

6) ultimately dismissed my comments because you disagree with them

Obviously, I've thought a lot about this, as you noted. Now, it's your turn.

---

by: Atlas @ Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:02:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Because Sanford and DeMint will be there, we should be too. (4.00 / 1)

President Barack Obama has called upon us all to be post-partisan and to engage in debate with each other across party lines.  Often, people on the left or on the right can be quite insular (I would say that it's much more true of the people on the right, and maybe they would disagree). Tomorrow's "Tea Party" in Columbia is a rare chance for us ordinary people to see Governor Sanford at the State House, and I think we should take advantage of this opportunity to engage Governor Sanford and whoever else is there on the issues.  Our ideas are better, so when we engage in a debate of ideas on the issues, we can move our state and our country forward.

---

by: michaelrodgers @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 12:01:42 PM CDT

seeing Sanford (0.00 / 0)

Seeing Sanford isn't difficult. He spends most of his time posing and posturing in public. The difficulty is getting him to listen, and "engage on the issues." That won't happen. He repeatedly says that the people he hears from support his position. That means he is efficiently filtering out everyone but his Club for Growth buddies. Plenty of people have voiced contrary opinions, but he doesn't hear them. I don't often sympathize with the Republican leadership in the S. C. Legislature, but trying to deal with this man for eight years is probably overkill as punishment for their many sins.  

---

by: L Teague @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 08:14:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Irony (0.00 / 0)

When liberals protest they are hippies who need to get jobs and stop complaining. When neo-cons protest, they are protecting American from fascism and upholding the Constitution.

---

by: Snead @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 12:05:11 PM CDT

Tea Party observation (4.00 / 1)

Several of us went to the Greenville one as observers, a lot of the crowd seemed to be clad in confederate flag gear, or waiving the same.  Sessionists in abundance. Definately not the most diverse crowd.

---

by: UpstateGirl @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 14:17:35 PM CDT

My point exactly (4.00 / 1)

These are the same wingnuts the GOPhers have always attracted, it's just with their dwindling numbers among sane people, the squirrels are increasingly visible.

Is a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it.

---

by: Tim Kelly @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 14:48:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

my thoughts exactly (4.00 / 1)

The majority of these people in SC would not be motivated to attend were it not for the fact that they can't accept the fact that we have a popular black President who is twice as intelligent and three times as articulate as the guy we just got rid of.
About 20% of the people in this country will do anything the Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity/O'Reilly gang tells them to do. They are a diminishing group with a discredited policy and pose a very real threat (opportunity?) of turning the Republican Party into an irrelevant party of the deep south and a handful of western states.

---

by: SCantiGOP @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 09:51:49 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I forgot to add (0.00 / 0)

That they are still very angry that we lost that war 150 years ago (was it that long, it seems like just yesterday) and that the Yankees went and elected a black President.
My office is across the street from the State House. Crowd looks like maybe a 15-25% of the crowd for the King Day protest against the flag a few years ago, and that was estimated at about 40,000.

---

by: SCantiGOP @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 12:50:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

bad estimate on my part (0.00 / 0)

thestate.com estimated the crowd at 1,500, which would be less than 4% of the King Day crowd.

---

by: SCantiGOP @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 15:40:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Off Subject (0.00 / 0)

Can someone pretend I'm dumb and explain the "special order" that was issued for payday lending and 10th Amendment bills in the Senate today?

---

by: Snead @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 15:40:09 PM CDT

Answering My Own Question... Sort Of (0.00 / 0)

Any legislative instrument which has been placed in Special Order shall be called by the President during that order of business on the day named. If it is not acted upon by the Senate on that day during the order of business of Special Order, the matter shall be returned to the calendar, subject to call, under the order of business to which it otherwise was last advanced, unless the Special Order is postponed by the vote of a majority of the members present and voting.

When two or more legislative instruments have been fixed as Special Orders for the same day, they shall take precedence according to the order established for their consideration by the Senate. However, if no order for consideration of such instruments has been established, the instrument first assigned for that day shall take precedence, and the other instruments fixed for the same day shall be called and acted upon in the order in which they were fixed as Special Order until disposition has been made of all instruments in Special Order for that day.

Any instrument fixed as Special Order which is returned to the calendar, subject to call, may be called from the calendar on the same day, while the Senate is in the order of business of Special Order, after disposition has been made of all other instruments fixed as Special Order for that day. If it is not called from the calendar on the same day while the Senate is in Special Order, it shall be returned to the calendar, subject to call, under the order of business to which it otherwise was last advanced.

http://senate.legis.state.la.u...

So I don't know if this means they are doing something on these bills ASAP, or just whenever they want.

---

by: Snead @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 15:47:29 PM CDT

Teabagger's 10th Amd. Resolution is a top priority for the SCGOP (0.00 / 0)

Dems called the wingnut's bluff today and voted to set this bill (crap) for special order. We can have a debate about how the GOPer's want to waste time with bullshit resolutions while Sen. Sheheen's plan to start spending our stimulus dollars is shelved.

---

by: pbailey @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 20:21:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Making it a special order lets them get around an objection (0.00 / 0)

I'm trying to find out what Special Order means.  

As for the Senate's "Sovereignty Resolution," S.424, according to the Senate Journal for today,

"S. 424 (Word version) -- Senators Bright, S. Martin, Alexander, Campbell, Fair, Knotts, Cromer, Mulvaney, Verdin, L. Martin, Shoopman, Rose, McConnell, Thomas, Cleary, Courson, Coleman, Davis, Reese, Campsen, Grooms, Ryberg, Peeler, O'Dell, Bryant and Massey: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AFFIRM SOUTH CAROLINA'S SOVEREIGNTY UNDER THE TENTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OVER ALL POWERS NOT ENUMERATED AND GRANTED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

Senator HUTTO objected to further consideration of the Concurrent Resolution."

My understanding is that Senator Hutto's heroic objection makes the resolution a contested resolution, which delays the Senate in considering it.  And my understanding is that when 2/3 of the Senate vote for the resolution to be a special order, that gets around the objection and lets President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell schedule a floor debate and vote for S.424 right away.

Note that the Senate Journal for today shows that the resolution S.424 is sponsored by 26 of the 46 senators and that they were able to get the 2/3 vote to make S.424 a special order; Senators Anderson, Leventis, Lourie, Malloy, and Sheheen are the only ones who voted against making S.424 a Special Order.

---

by: michaelrodgers @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 16:16:57 PM CDT

Thanks (0.00 / 0)

I see that both these are now on the calendar for tomorrow http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sc... so I guess the special orders just moved them up the list...

---

by: Snead @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 16:41:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Now Tim... (4.00 / 1)

these people are not mentally unstable regardless of what you and I may think of things like this upstate website someone sent me earlier today: http://www.upstateupdate.com/b...

That chick with the gun is running for Mayor of Spartanburg. Or she was a few weeks ago. I have a Xmas card at home with her and a dog on it from her running for Mayor days...that was like...last week or something. Whoever knows what these people are doing.  

But, I wouldn't call them crazy or nothing. I prefer to call it helping OUR movement. :)

---

by: tammy @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 16:32:12 PM CDT

Wow! (0.00 / 0)

http://www.votedonnahicks.com/

---

by: pbailey @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 21:37:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Taking Tammy to task (1.00 / 1)

Tammy I disagree with you.  These right wing nuts are mentally unstable and CRAZY!  I mean, why anyone would own a legal gun is beyond me.  And why these reactionaries aren't actually glad to pay taxes raises some red flags.  I mean, in this country we are supposed to give our money to the federal government and let them spend it on what the politicians want--I mean, its not like they can't print up more money if we run out!  Plus all these "tea baggers" hold on to ancient ideas like marriage is something that involves a man and a woman--where do they get these weird ideas--and they actually think that we are "blessed" to live in America (haven't they ever heard of seperation of church and state?)  I for one think that a protester who never protested a former president is not allowed to protest the current president or any future president for that matter.  And if they do protest Obama, it's because they are all racist.  All 1 million+ of them.

---

by: scskyman @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 21:44:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

LOL (0.00 / 0)

Hell, is that taking me to task? Well, it could be worse, I guess. I could have a nationwide report by homeland security telling my fellow citizens I'm a freaking kook.

---

by: tammy @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 23:02:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

DeMint: "Freedom will work if we let it" (0.00 / 0)

A snippet from his op-ed in today's Greenville News:

Today, the first tax day of Barack Obama's administration, it is time for conservatives to remember the one thing we most want to conserve: freedom.

Everything wrong with our economy is attributable to some misguided effort in Washington that infringed on our freedom: some tax or regulation or new, "compassionate" spending program. These things don't work.

Every time politicians grow government to solve a problem, they create three new ones. Then government must grow again to solve those three, and on and on the cycle goes. But every time Congress sets its mind to "do something," it has to take a little bit more of our money, and a little bit more of our personal and economic freedom to do it.

And before you know it, every baby in America is born with a $34,000 share in the national debt. That is simply immoral. It is a crime, a $20 trillion theft perpetrated by politicians against our children, and if we allow it continue, we will deserve history's condemnation.

History's lessons could not be clearer: everywhere socialism has been tried, it has failed. Inevitably, jobs are lost, opportunities stifled, businesses shuttered, economies stagnated, health care rationed; government increases and freedom decreases.

We cannot spend our way out of a deficit, tax our way out of a recession, or borrow our way out of debt. The only economic system that works is one based on free people making free decisions. It was 200 years of economic freedom that made America the world's greatest superpower, not Washington control.

Obama was indeed right that America needs sweeping change, but all he's given us are "the failed policies of the past." We don't need tax increases, but tax reform and simplification. We don't need an energy policy based on global politics, but one based on national economics. We don't need federally controlled education, we need family-controlled education. We don't need a health-care system run by politicians and bureaucrats, but one run by patients and their doctors.

Freedom can and will solve our economic problems. It did for most of our national life, and it will again.

But only if we let it.

---

by: Jennifer Read @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 07:25:52 AM CDT

DeMint's argument is half an argument. (0.00 / 0)

The issue is the relationship between individual and community.  This issue has been explored in all kinds of writing, far too numerous to list here, from the bible (both old and new testament), Magna Carta, Rousseau's Social Contract, The Declaration of Independence, The Declaration of the Rights of Man, The Federalist Papers, The Gettysburg Address, The Tragedy of the Commons, Watership Down, and, most recently, the writings of Clay Shirky and the policies of Ebay, Wikipedia and IndigoJournal.

See "A group is its own worst enemy" and, especially,
"Group as User: Flaming and the Design of Social Software."

DeMint and others say that the individual is everything and the community is nothing. Communists say that the community is everything and the individual is nothing.  So first of all, DeMint is as crazy as a communist, just in the other direction.  

Second of all, DeMint's argument is half an argument -- the individual is important.  Duh. We know how strong market forces are and how powerful freedom is and how wonderful individuals are.  How about engaging in the discussion about how individuals and communities interact?!

Third of all, DeMint and others have absolutely no idea about the power of checks and balances.  If there are no business regulations from Congress, then courts will have to resolve many, many more disputes.  And then the executive will be completely unrestrained in deciding which court decision to enforce.  Our founding fathers gave Article I to Congress; Jim DeMint is giving Congress the teabag.

---

by: michaelrodgers @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 09:01:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Missing Out On The Fun Today (0.00 / 0)

I'm too busy helping the IRS collect taxes and distribute refunds to watch the festivities today, but I'd like to welcome our conservative brothers and sisters to the protest movement. You're a little late to the party, but have fun out there.

---

by: Snead @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 08:26:38 AM CDT

spontaneous uprising! (0.00 / 0)

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress....

Sigh.

Fix the roads. Especially the deadly ones.

---

by: Finx @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 09:28:49 AM CDT

The Politics of Fear (4.00 / 1)

I thought it was the dishonest legislators in the statehouse who were running around creating panic...

Governor Mark Sanford today issued the following statement on Tax Day:

"Today it's worth noting the fact that we are at a truly frightening tipping point with regard to federal spending, and the consequences it will have for every current - and especially future - taxpayer here in South Carolina," Gov. Sanford said.

http://sc.statehouseblogs.com/...

So now that there's a rally he agrees with, Sanford drops the claim that people's fears are just being stirred up by politicians eager to cash in.

---

by: Snead @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 09:58:16 AM CDT

COLA pics (0.00 / 0)

From Palmetto Scoop (click for larger image).

---

by: Jennifer Read @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 13:44:27 PM CDT

Did any of the teabaggers... (4.00 / 1)

...offer to send back the tax cut they just got in the stimulus package?

Is a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it.

---

by: Tim Kelly @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 14:26:29 PM CDT

stimulus (0.00 / 0)

Is Obama correct when he says 'economist on both sides agree a stimulus is necessary" ?  Atlas brings up some good points.

I also would like to know from the teabag- ok,ok- Tea Party Particpants what the proper course of action is here....shut down the Stimulus Package?...wait and hope for the best? Ok, Lord British, we have the tea..now Where's the Beef? Mmmmmmm..Beef Wellington.

Does anyone have a link to some cogent argument against the "23 million per child" debt estimate? Haven't other bailouts and loans for both large industries and countries worked in the past?

Can one of the THOUSANDS ;> in Columbia help me out here?

Fix the roads. Especially the deadly ones.

---

by: Finx @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 15:42:46 PM CDT

we must have the wealthiest Tea Party participants in SC! (0.00 / 0)

With Obama's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which started April 1st, we saw a tax cut for 95 percent of American workers.  A tax credit is appearing now in people's pay checks and a first-time homebuyers tax credit.
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

"The Obama administration ... endorsed legislation to crack down on offshore tax havens, raising the stakes in a showdown between the United States and bank-secrecy nations such as Switzerland...."
http://www.reuters.com/article...

A Senate report estimated in 2008, we lost about $100 billion a year in tax revenue to offshore tax havens (PDF) http://hsgac.senate.gov/public...  

U.S. Public Interest Research Group:
Tax Shell Game: The Taxpayer Cost of Offshore Corporate Havens
http://www.uspirg.org/home/rep...

In that report, the cost to  SC taxpayers of tax revenue lost is $748,331,466.

I would like the Tea Party participants to watch who balks the loudest about going after tax havens.  Will it be the Republicans and their think tanks, or the Democrats and theirs?
(remember who ran McCain's economic policy during his campaign? look up Phil Gramm and USB)

so far, i found this article -- and it is a think tank supported by Dick Armey (R):

How to Defend Offshore Tax Havens From Obama
http://washingtonindependent.c...

---

by: PCinSC @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 16:02:39 PM CDT

thousands in Columbia? (0.00 / 0)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...

From the article:

" There is no such thing as so-called free money and that includes stimulus," Sanford told several thousand people outside the statehouse in Columbia, S.C. "Paying down debt is an old American theme and never a bad thing."

Fix the roads. Especially the deadly ones.

---

by: Finx @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 18:36:32 PM CDT

oh those kids! (0.00 / 0)

here's a new definition from the Urban Dictionary for Teabagger:

2. n. A conservative activist who is so ignorant that they protest against tax cuts (that benefit them) by throwing tea into a river.

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

---

by: PCinSC @ Wed Apr 15, 2009 at 19:34:31 PM CDT

Tee shirt offer still good? (0.00 / 0)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/s...

---

by: Atlas @ Fri Apr 17, 2009 at 14:04:48 PM CDT

here's a better shot (0.00 / 0)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/s...

---

by: Atlas @ Fri Apr 17, 2009 at 14:12:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And this one, too! (0.00 / 0)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/s...

---

by: Atlas @ Fri Apr 17, 2009 at 14:14:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We have a winner! (0.00 / 0)

Pick your prize, A: http://www.cafepress.com/indig...

---

by: Jennifer Read @ Sun Apr 19, 2009 at 11:00:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

DeMint (0.00 / 0)

Unfortunately Senator DeMint has decided to take on the role of an obstructionist. If the vote has a very small nunber of senators against a bill you can bet Demint will be in that group. I have stopped listening to his illogical
statements about most things.

---

by: cardinal113 @ Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:54:31 AM CDT