Tea Parties, what do they all mean?

Today, hundreds of cities held Tea Parties to protest the massive spending increases championed by Liberals and to protest high taxes, which promise to get worse to pay for at least some of the spending.

Nearly simultaneously, the Department of Homeland Security is labeling anyone who opposes the government from the right as "Rightwing extremists," CNN's Susan Roper badgers Tea Party attendees and pretty much acts as a shill of the Obama administration,


and Anderson Cooper (appropriately) informs that teabagging usually makes it difficult to speak.


What are we to make of all this?

1. I have seen no reports of vandalism, looting, or rioting. Clearly these people are not professional protesters.
2. Fiscal responsibility is back in vogue. Maybe Republicans will take up the mantle, and, maybe they'll rediscover some other conservative principles to stand on.
3. CNN really, really, really hates Fox.
4. The people are smarter than the pundits give them credit for being. They recognize that to fund everything this administration wants to do, is going to require higher taxes on more than just the top 5%.

I was pleased and gratified to see so many people pissed off about the uncontrolled orgy of spending that is going on. Maybe this will translate into real change in Washington.

end...

My "Neighborly" Tax Plan

0bama speaking to O'Reilly really hit the skids talking about socialism and "neighborliness" and telling the rich they need to give more to waitresses (I didn't realize the rich were such poor tippers!). See the video




I have been pondering this tax idea for a while, but, since 0bama thinks we should be more "neighborly" I want to propose this modification to our tax tables to make them more "neighborly:"

Whatever the tax bracket you're in, take the last 1/3 of the taxes you pay, and, instead of paying them to the Federal Government to redistribute, let the taxpayers themselves decide how to distribute them to charities of their choice.

I suggest the United Way administer this program. That way, in our neighborliness, we could target the final 1/3 of our taxes to organizations that want to receive them, can receive them, and would put them to good use, frequently even in our own "neighborhoods." And, they would get more of the money to people who could use it than the redistributionists in Congress, and we might feel better about sending in our money to be redistributed, if we had some say in it.

And, for those liberals, who feel that the Feds are the best positioned to apportion their money, they can choose the government, instead of the charity(ies) of their choice.

The rich might not feel so bad giving all that extra money that way, since they do it anyway.

Come on, 0bama, don't you think that is pretty darn neighborly?

I even have a name for my bill: "The Mr. Rogers Tax Reform of 2009"