BluntPolitics.com

I enjoyed the Tea Party but came away with a conflicting emotions. My observations were that the tea party was eclectic. I saw Libertarians, Democrats, Ron Paulites, Republicans, Conservatives, old, young, black, white and families. I saw angry conservatives that are angry with Republicans who went to the spending trough and democrats who feel that progressives/regressives (left wing marxists that seek big government and Obama leans this way) are taking over the “party of the working man”. Having viewed this, my reflections troubled me but I was not sure why. I knew I had questions about how to coalesce this movement but I was not sure how to frame the question until I saw this article from politico.com. This article says exactly frames the question I had in this article.

I also believe there were about 60,000 participants because this is based on my conservsation with the Capitol Police Chief which  you can see in my pictures on facebook.

Protests present GOP with tricky task By: Kenneth P. Vogel and Alex Isenstadt September 12, 2009 08:14 PM EST

The “Taxpayer March on Washington” proved that conservatives can turn out in impressive numbers to protest the direction of the Democratic-led federal government, but it also presented Republicans with a tricky task in figuring out how to marshal the energy on display on the Mall Saturday.The ability to channel the wide-ranging frustrations expressed by speaker after speaker may determine whether beleaguered conservatives will be able to create a movement rivaling that which liberals used to help power Democrats back into the majority in the 2006 congressional elections and Barack Obama into the White House last year.The sentiments expressed Saturday, however, suggest Republicans can’t necessarily count on the tens of thousands of protesters who turned out in Washington – and at simultaneous rallies in Dallas, Denver, Quincy, Ill., and other cities and towns across the nation – to make inroads in the 2010 congressional midterm elections and, later, to mount a stiff challenge to President Obama’s 2012 reelection effort. Many marchers displayed little allegiance to Republicans, and some were openly hostile, contending that that when the party controlled Washington until 2006, the federal government spent recklessly. “When Republicans were in power, they acted like everyone else,” said marcher Debi Bohannon of Oklahoma City. “Personally, I don’t feel like [Republicans] are standing up and fighting hard enough,” said Jim Bryant, an aviation consultant from Trenton, Georgia. “I want them to stand up for truth, honesty, and personal freedoms.” The protestors, whose numbers were in the tens of thousands, though no definitive estimate was available Saturday evening, aired grievances on issues ranging from the bank and auto bailouts to Obama’s push to overhaul the nation’s health system to concerns about perceived erosion of First and Second Amendment rights. Still, most of their fire was aimed at Democrats, and some of their sentiments bordered on extremist rhetoric that could do the GOP more harm than good. As the march, which began at Freedom Plaza, a park close to the White House, neared the U.S. Capitol, it was difficult to miss the signs protesting Obama’s health plan, declaring “Bury Obamacare with Kennedy” or featuring grisly images of aborted fetuses. And there were widespread accusations from attendees that Obama isn’t American-born – a charge from which the mainstream of the Republican Party has sought to distance itself. But as the last of the protesters scattered Saturday evening, leaving the Mall silent, organizers expressed confidence that the march would help re-center the Republican Party around fiscally conservative themes with widespread appeal. “My message is: your roots are lower taxes, less government, and freedom. Why don’t you lead with those issues?” said Adam Brandon, a spokesman for FreedomWorks, the small-government, anti-tax organization chaired by former House Republican Leader Dick Armey that sponsored the protest. Brandon touted the text-messaging system FreedomWorks deployed on Saturday to gauge protestors’ top issues, explaining the group would use the information to organize activists around those issues by congressional district in the run-up to the 2010 election, a similar technique to one used by Obama’s own tech-savvy presidential campaign. After Saturday’s showing, the grassroots local activists who form the heart of the so-called Tea Party movement hold more of the cards than either the Republican Party or the conservative groups that bolster it, asserted GOP strategist Craig Shirley. “Could the Republican National Committee turn out 50,000 people on the mall?” asked Shirley, who has a forthcoming book, “Rendezvous with Destiny; Ronald Reagan and the Campaign that Changed America,” chronicles how Ronald Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign re-centered the GOP around a strong national defense and fiscal conservatism. “Really the tea party is in the position to dictate terms to the Republican Party. So the question for the Tea Party people is do they say, ‘A pox on all their houses,’ and possibly investigate starting a third party – a populist, anti-big government, anti-Wall Street party – or do they try to take over the Republican Party, starting at the county and state level?” Still, Shirley suggested that in order for the movement to have a lasting impact on American politics, it needs to embrace an agenda, rather than just oppose the Democratic one. “At some point, that will come,” he predicted.   Only a handful of GOP lawmakers were on the roster of rally speakers – and those that did were conservatives like South Carolina Sen. Sen. DeMint, and Reps. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Mike Pence of Indiana, and Tom Price of Georgia. The common thread among the speakers, both the politicians and the leaders of various conservative groups, many of them with a libertarian tilt, was an assertion of American decline, and that the assembled protesters were the nation’s best hope of correcting course and reconnecting with its traditional values. But the values varied from speaker to speaker, with many concerned about fiscal failings, while others stressed individual rights and others warned of a descent into Socialism and a loss of the “American way.” Most all of them, though, portrayed the assembled as the first line of defense against these varied national ailments. Rep. Blackburn told the crowd that “You have been called to serve liberty and to defend the futures of our children and grandchildren,” and Rep. Price told them that “”a new generation of patriots has emerged. You are those patriots.” Republican Party leaders seemed optimistic Saturday that they could harness the energy, which first emerged as widespread in February, when tens of thousands turned out to Tea Party protests around the country, leading to a larger turnout at Tax Day Tea Parties on April 15, and attracting even more attention this summer, when angry constituents turned out in droves to during the recently concluded congressional summer recess to voice their displeasure with their federal lawmakers.  “If the Republican Party will carry the banner for the people who are here today, I think the majority of Americans will come with us and I just hope the rest of the Republicans here in congress will be smart enough to see that,” Sen. DeMint told Fox News television host Glenn Beck – who has emerged as perhaps the star of the movement – during a special Saturday afternoon broadcast timed to coincide with the march. DeMint, whose political action committee was a co-sponsor of the march, told Beck before his speech, “I really do believe that in 2006 and 2008, Republicans didn’t just lose our right to govern, we lost our way. I mean, we lost those elections because we walked away from the principles that had drawn hundreds of thousands of people in the nation’s capitol, to the tea parties all across the country and town hall meetings.” But Beck seemed unconvinced, telling DeMint and Rep. Pence, who appeared with DeMint on Beck’s show via satellite before speaking to the rally – that the national Republican Party had yet to reach “a pivot point.” “I’m a recovering alcoholic,” said Beck, “and I can tell you the moment I said ‘enough. I have to change my life or I will die.’ And I have not seen that from the Republican Party.” Americans, Beck said, believe that Republicans have lost their way and that – even when they oppose Obama’s plans – they are doing so for political motivations, not philosophical ones. “I don’t care who you vote for. I really don’t,” Beck said in introducing DeMint and Pence. “Vote for Republicans, Vote for a Democrat. I think, quite frankly, you vote for either of them right now, and you still haven’t gotten it. And, they are both taking us into a land of gigantic government where they control everything through corruption and everything else.” Perhaps nothing better illustrates the difficulty Republicans will have in winning over the Tea Party activists than their adulation of Beck, whose fiery populist rhetoric often attracts controversy.  At Saturday’s rally, some waved “Glenn Beck for President” signs and many activists attribute the idea for – and energy behind – the marches to Beck. During a March broadcast, he unveiled what he called The 9-12 Project  in which he urged viewers to try to recreate the united America that emerged the day after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. “It’s not about politics,” Beck said during the March broadcast. “You actually believe in something. And you thought for a while there your politicians did as well. And now you kind of realize well, maybe they don’t.” As they marched today, the activists — who chanted, “We own the dome,” while pointing at the Capitol — sounded that same note. “We used to be Republicans,” said Helen Benson of Jacksonville, Florida. “We didn’t like John McCain. The media liked John McCain.” “They’re certainly not listening – Democrats or Republicans,” said Steve Cobb, who made it to Washington from Cordelle, Georgia with his wife, Sylvia.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

Yes. He hopes that by taxing the rich, and corporations that the job loss will trickle down to the rest of the country putting thousands out of work. Then he can put those people to work building bridges and roads thus keeping them enslaved to the government. Sound sarcastic? It is not meant to be because fear of Obama’s taxes and capitol gains increases is driving away investors to the market. These fears are only making a bad economy worse.

Read the article by Investors Business Daily today:

VIEWPOINT

Stocks Pay Price Of Coming Tax Increases

GROVER G. NORQUIST

   Some Americans are concerned that if Sen. Barack Obama is elected president, his plans for higher taxes on personal income, capital gains, dividends and corporations will damage the economy.
   It is a little late to be worrying about this. We are already in the midst of the Obama recession. But to be fair, we should give House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at least equal billing.
   Why has the stock market collapsed? Why wouldn’t it?
   In 2003, the Dow stood at about 8000. The then-Republican Congress and President Bush reduced the capital gains tax to 15% from 20% and the tax on dividends to 15% from 35%. In the next three years, the Dow rose 50% to 12,000, and household net worth rose to $56 trillion from $40 trillion.
   This is the “wealth effect” of taxation. If you own stock in a company and the tax on earnings by that company is reduced, the value of the stock increases. If taxation on the company is increased, you would pay less for the same stock.
   Microsoft stock is worth less if you attach the boat anchor of higher capital gains taxes, higher corporate income taxes and higher dividend taxes. But this is not what will happen if Obama is elected. It’s what already happened on Nov. 7, 2006, when Democrats won the majorities in the House and Senate.
   The tax cuts of 2003 that sparked the increase in national wealth are scheduled to end on Jan. 1, 2011. It does not require a President Obama to make those taxes increase. All it requires is for the Democrats to control either the House or the Senate with enough votes to stop legislation to extend the tax cuts.
   And the top individual tax rate, now at 35% but also paid by many small businesses, will snap back up to Bill Clinton’s 39.6% on Jan. 1, 2011.
   Pelosi and Reid both voted against the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. We know where they stand. Every Democrat in the House and Senate has voted repeatedly for higher taxes since that party became the majority in January 2007, and House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel has unveiled his “mother of all tax hikes” to increase taxes by $38 billion over 10 years.
   Presidents don’t cut taxes or raise taxes. They sign the bills sent to them by Congress.
   Obama originally campaigned for raising the dividend tax to 39.6% from 15%. Then, when his contributors from Wall Street pointed out how devastating that would be to the stock market, he changed his rhetoric to calling for an increase to “only” 20%. But if Congress does nothing, the dividend tax increases to 39.6% on Jan. 1, 2011.
   Americans for Tax Reform worked with John Rutledge to calculate how Obama’s and McCain’s tax policies would affect the stock market. The calculator appears at ATR’s Web site, www.atr.org.
   You can enter the size of your 401(k), and it will calculate its value under four different scenarios: if Obama’s tax increases pass; if McCain’s tax cuts are enacted; if Congress’ plans are enacted; and if Americans for Tax Reform’s fantasy tax cuts, including abolishing the capital gains tax, were made law.
   The Obama tax plan will reduce the value of the stock market and your 401(k) by 6%. The House Democrat plan will drop the market by 16%. Remember, Obama cannot impose his tax plan — he has to sign what Congress sends him, so Congress’ tax plans are more important than Obama’s campaign speeches.
   If Republicans won the House and Senate and McCain’s tax plans were enacted, the market and your 401(k) would increase by 46%. And if you pass the McCain plan and add ATR’s abolition of the capital gains and dividends tax, the market and your 401(k) would increase by 58%.
   But the market can read the newspapers and is aware that the Democrats control the House and Senate now and likely will for the next two years. This means the market gains since 2003 due to lower capital gains and dividend taxes will disappear.
   The market has already begun to drop in anticipation of the coming tax increases. The Pelosi-Reid-Obama recession has already started.
   Of course, if Obama and the Democrat leaders in Congress have tax hikes and regulatory burdens planned that they haven’t shared publicly, the market will drop even further. It can get worse.
   
Norquist

is president of Americans for Tax Reform and author of “Leave Us Alone: Getting the Government’s Hands Off Our Money, Our Guns, Our Lives.”

I remember when conservatives were deemed by the left… neo-cons. I had to research what this meant.

What do neoconservatives believe?

“Neo-cons” believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action. Source Christian Science Monitor downloaded today at 10:03pm http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

I have come up with the left wing Democrats version of neo con. Neo Comms aka Neo Communists.

What do Neo Comms believe:

“We want our country to be liked by Europe, and thus we want to model our society after the government-run societies of Europe which are built on fairness. Since Americans don’t really understand socialism we can create government programs that will “take care of people”, and make them beholden to us thus Americans will elect our philosophies, and thus move American toward communism instead of consumerism”.  Our tag line is: “You deserve more taxes because we say so.”

Scary…

By Ric Joyner

As I watched the debate it became clear to me that the election  is over. As Charles Krauthammer said tonight on Fox News, Obama was presidential, cool, calm and collected.

McCain went on the attack, but Obama deflected well. Obama tends to say a lot of words without much content which was boring.

Regardless, the game is over. Obama-3 wins, McCain 0. The headwinds are blowing against McCain. The wind is called “fed up” and fearful Americans.

Republicans/Bush lost their leadership in several areas.

They had control of the House and Senate and went to the trough to feed and accomplished little.

Started the war in Iraq that is prolonged and barely manageable.

Couldn’t handle a disaster correctly aka Katrina

Looked in the eyes of an X KGB and saw his soul. (Not good foreign policy)

Oversaw a growing economy and then allowed it to go bust through the housing crisis.

Proposed to bailout Wall Street (which is a misnomer)

Didn’t complete energy independence and allowed the average American to pay higher gas prices.

Created massive deficits fighting a war and other spending

Virtually nothing was done to help the 15% who are uninsured.

Did I mention a war?

As Charles Krauthammer said, “not even the great Ron Reagan could stand up against the economy collapsing…” And I will add the incredibly poor job the Republicans did when they had control.

Charles also said this was the year of the Democrats even though they played a major role in the housing crisis, prefer not to drill for energy independence and want higher taxes on the very people that create jobs.

Our country is headed for a form of socialism under Obama especially in light of a Democratically controlled Congress. Perhaps this is the leadership America is looking for…the Left sure thinks so.

But, the Republicans deserve the thrashing they have gotten and Americans are rightly seeking a change. Obama wants to deliver the change and I can’t fault him for that. His world view is not mine and vice versa.

I can’t vote for Obama because of my conservative roots.  And will still vote McCain.

I don’t respect President Bush any longer. The turmoil that has accompanied his administration is incredible.

I hope my fellow Republicans and Conservatives don’t blame the press, or that Obama cheated, but take a hard look in the mirror, and sees the problem for what it is. Lack of vision, lack of leadership and lack of integrity. The other helpful focus would be to stop the critique of the other party and keep our “side of the street clean”.

Only then can the party rebuild. But the vision has to be the American People, lower taxes, access to health care, lower spending and smaller government.

September 20, 2008
hp-1150

FACT SHEET:
Proposed Treasury Authority to Purchase Troubled Assets

Washington – The Treasury Department has submitted legislation to the Congress requesting authority to purchase troubled assets from financial institutions in order to promote market stability, and help protect American families and the US economy. This program is intended to fundamentally and comprehensively address the root cause of our financial system’s stresses by removing distressed assets from the financial system. When the financial system works as it should, money and capital flow to and from households and businesses to pay for home loans, school loans and investments that create jobs.  As illiquid mortgage assets block the system, the clogging of our financial markets has the potential to significantly damage our financial system and our economy, undermining job creation and income growth.  The following description reflects Treasury’s proposal as of Saturday afternoon.

Scale and Timing of Asset Purchases. Treasury will have authority to issue up to $700 billion of Treasury securities to finance the purchase of troubled assets. The purchases are intended to be residential and commercial mortgage-related assets, which may include mortgage-backed securities and whole loans. The Secretary will have the discretion, in consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, to purchase other assets, as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets.  Removing troubled assets will begin to restore the strength of our financial system so it can again finance economic growth. The timing and scale of any purchases will be at the discretion of Treasury and its agents, subject to this total cap. The price of assets purchases will be established through market mechanisms where possible, such as reverse auctions. The dollar cap will be measured by the purchase price of the assets. The authority to purchase expires two years from date of enactment.

Asset and Institutional Eligibility for the Program. To qualify for the program, assets must have been originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008. Participating financial institutions must have significant operations in the U.S., unless the Secretary makes a determination, in consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, that broader eligibility is necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets.

Management and Disposition of the Assets. The assets will be managed by private asset managers at the direction of Treasury to meet program objectives. Treasury will have full discretion over the management of the assets as well as the exercise of any rights received in connection with the purchase of the assets. Treasury may sell the assets at its discretion or may hold assets to maturity. Cash received from liquidating the assets, including any additional returns, will be returned to Treasury’s general fund for the benefit of American taxpayers.

Funding. Funding for the program will be provided directly by Treasury from its general fund.  Borrowing in support of this program will be subject to the debt limit, which will be increased by $700 billion accordingly.  As with other Treasury borrowing, information on any borrowing related to this program will be publicly reported at the end of the following day in the Daily Treasury Statement. (http://www.fms.treas.gov/dts/)

Reporting. Within three months of the first asset purchases under the program, and semi-annually thereafter, Treasury will provide the appropriate Congressional committees with regular updates on the program. 

"They" (pick a party) talk about 43,000,000 uninsured. (I don’t care the exact number so don’t argue with me…jeez that felt good saying that). We know that about 15,000,000 are illegal immigrants. BTW in Madison it is very difficult to see a doctor at night in the emergency room because it is filled up with indigent people. I have tried.
43,000,000- 15,000,000= 28,000,000 uninsured

Not good.

Ok there are about 220,000,000 Americans covered by some type of insurance. (I don’t care to break this down [government versus private] and again don’t argue with me because I will reach through this darn email and spank you…and that too felt good to say)

What is the ratio of actual uninsured then? 12.7% are not insured. Translated to glass half full….87.3 (or nearly 90%) are insured. WOW

Ok here is my question. Why do the democrats want to take an entire for-profit system (motive to provide excellence and efficiency) that works reasonably well for 90% of Americans and turn it over to the government as a non profit (no motive for excellence and no motive for efficiency thus the result is rationing (aka "guidelines to pay claims"). This is part of the democratic platform.

"and the government
33 should ensure that health insurance is affordable and provides meaningful coverage. As
34 affordable coverage is made available, individuals
35 should purchase health insurance and take steps to lead
36 healthy lives." DNC Platform Agenda (DNC Platform)

Why the government? Why not private sector? Is the private sector failing? Not when 90% of people are covered. When does the government need to take care of us from cradle to grave?

The republicans are not much better in their plans. But they don’t consider the government as a resource.

Our focus should be on covering the 12.7% people who are uninsured not destroying a system that works very well. And yes there are always exceptions! But lets focus on fixing the 12.7%.

My idea.

Sponsorship of Family or Single person without health care coverage. Why can’t a family register with a carrier and groups of employees purchase health insurance for a person in need? Or if they are between jobs someone can sponsor a short term medical plan.
The government was never intentioned to go this deeply into our lives and we should not let one party over the other turn our health care system over to the government. If anyone has any doubt about this look at Katrina and now look at Houston.

Focus on the issue. Fix the 13%.