Protesters whose taxes haven’t increased are upset that their taxes have increased.

Saturday, September 12th, 2009 @ 4:57 pm | Politics

The traveling circus goes to DC:

Participants in the demonstration spanned the spectrum of conservative anger at Obama, including opponents of his tax, spending and health-care plans and protesters who question Obama’s U.S. citizenship and liken his administration to the Nazi regime. By 11 a.m., the route between Freedom Plaza and the Capitol was a sea of demonstrators chanting “USA!” and carrying signs such as, “Taxed enough already,” “The audacity of dope” and, “Czars belong in Russia.”

None of these people’s taxes have gone up. And what’s with the “czars” chant all over the wingnut blogs lately? Is that a Glenn Beck thing?

26 Responses to “Protesters whose taxes haven’t increased are upset that their taxes have increased.”

  1. Zach Rock Says:

    I don’t understand the Czar’s thing, but my thought on it is it’s just another position that could be filled through a department instead of a person directly reporting to Obama and having huge power.

    Seems like Jackson’s Kitchen Cabinet to me. Except this time he gave them actual positions.

  2. Michael Says:

    Republicans have the old, white, disgruntled demo on lock down:

    http://gawker.com/5358099/teabagged-912-project-protest-brings-out-american-psychos/gallery/

    http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26741

    DougJ read my mind; kind of a meager turnout considering they had an entire cable network and every talk radio hot promoting this jamboree.

  3. Descent Says:

    It is absolutely a Glenn Beck thing. It’s part of their fervent belief that if you disagree with their right-wing theology you’re a commie traitor who deserves the gallows.

  4. mike g Says:

    They were outraged when Obama had Grey Poupon mustard on a grinder so obviously it doesn’t take much to set these bozos off.

  5. Zach Rock Says:

    Was it only thirty thousand?

    This British guy thinks it was around one million. There are too many reports to know right now but I’d like to. Though the British are usually right on the mark when it comes to our news.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

  6. jeromy Says:

    I suppose they took ABC’s word for it.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/protest-crowd-size-estimate-falsely-attributed-abc-news/story?id=8558055

    Maybe 60-70,000.

  7. Zach Rock Says:

    I knew it had to be closer to 100,000 than 30,000 at least.

    Well that made me laugh. The one time ABC goes and tries to get the scoop first it fucks up and everyone believes them. Even the BBC. Wow.

  8. jeromy Says:

    At no time did ABC News, or its affiliates, report a number anywhere near as large.

    Wingers made it up.

  9. Group2012 Says:

    It’s way closer to one million vs. 75,000. The downplay on the crowd size was intentional by the likes of ABC.

    People are upset because their tax dollars are being spent on things they don’t approve of and because taxes will have to go up because of the reckless Obama spending. Corporate bailouts, government motors, TARP funds, a stimulus bill that hasn’t worked and the proposed ObamaCare. Taxes are unjustifiably going up no matter how you slice it, and that is a big time concern. Have kids? They can’t afford all the debt Obama is piling up either. And yes, for those of you in liberal land Obama has already blown his no tax hike pledge, if you don’t know how then you aren’t informed on this issue. Cigarette? Small business owner? Drive a car?

    And the czars? What Obama has done is unprecedented. They answer to nobody but Obama, there’s no oversight, they have authority over department officials, they make policy decisions, we don’t know how much they’re getting paid and many of their backgrounds are suspect. Van Jones anyone?

  10. Group2012 Says:

    Oh, and how ’bout that unemployment rate huh?

  11. Zach Rock Says:

    As much as it pains me to say it. I have to agree with the jackass above me. But only because of this:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/how-big-was-the-crowd/

    His math is all there so I’m inclined to believe that there was at least over 100,000 people there and closer to half a million.

  12. sg Says:

    Where was all the reckless spending concern when we decided to blow up a bunch of Iraqis and our own citizens? Where was the fury?

  13. mike Says:

    Corporate bailouts, government motors, TARP funds

    All of these were initiated by George W. Bush yet there were no protests. Seems a little hypocritical but then again I don’t think anybody besides the tea-baggers are convinced that the reason they’re protesting is because of librul spending. (This is the part where 2012 says THAT’S WHAT LIBRULZ DO TEHY CALL YOU A HIPPOCRITE WHEN THEY’RE THE HYPOCRITS!!!!1!!)

    And yes, for those of you in liberal land Obama has already blown his no tax hike pledge, if you don’t know how then you aren’t informed on this issue.

    I’m reading a lot of blustery recitation of right-wing talking points but no arguments or citations to back them up. And I couldn’t help but notice that you’ve once again disingenuously insinuated that your taxes have gone up but don’t have the guts to state it plainly.

    Again, one could take you a lot more seriously if you actually protested any of W’s expansions of government but of course you didn’t because you’re not interested in rational debate. You’re only concerned is endlessly repeating what you just heard on your AM radio. From Limbaugh’s ass to your mouth.

    What Obama has done is unprecedented.

    For instance? What legislation was passed that granted these “czars” powers to make policy decisions? Furthermore, are you capable of backing up anything you say with fact, 2012? Or are we supposed to believe all of your babble simply because YOU SAY SO?

  14. mike Says:

    Just for some context, let it be known that Group 2012 deletes comments on his site to make it look like he gets the last word in. That’s the extent of honesty he’s capable of.

  15. jeromy Says:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/ant-czar-bill-gets-100-co_n_288859.html

    Somebody told Group2012 to bark, so he did. He has no idea what the hell he’s saying, only that he must say it over and over again.

    Remember all those years that we heard about “the angry left”?

  16. Descent Says:

    It’s quite simple, gentlemen. It’s the fault of the liberal media that Michelle Malkin went into a wild-eyed speculatory mania.

  17. Descent Says:

    I’m also in agreement with mike. The turnout was rather low considering it was a corporate sponsored event. Definitely nothing like the anti-war protests in 2007 that were covered on PAGE 8 of the “liberal” New York Times.

    I also see that like most glibertarians Zach Rock is dutifuly repeating Republican talking points. Pajamas Media says that there were a million so who are we to disagree?

  18. Zach Rock Says:

    I didn’t say you couldn’t disagree with me but he’s just using the method that the National Park Service uses so I’m going to go with an accredited method. How is that wrong?

    By the way the only talking point that I have that could be counted as republican is my criticizing of reckless spending. Which I was against when Bush did it by the way. I’m still against it. Speaking of that, how do you feel about our troops being in Iraq still after Obama promised us they’d be coming already?

  19. jeromy Says:

    Here’s some more context on how stupid these guys are being on the czar thing:

    http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26964

    Do I have to say it? Of course, GWB had more czars.

    Goddamn fools.

  20. DarkSock Says:

    [i]Just for some context, let it be known that Group 2012 deletes comments on his site to make it look like he gets the last word in[/i]

    Do they ALL do that? I’ve had that happen to me before.

  21. mike Says:

    These guys banned me for saying that TARP was a George W. Bush invention and deleted all of my comments.

    The stated reason was that I was using their forum to spread liberal propaganda.

  22. jeromy Says:

    Rightwinger psychology 101: Cut the mic!

  23. Group2012 Says:

    We do not delete comments on the Coralville Courier unless they contain profane language, hate language, sexual innuendo, that kind of thing.

    The Coralville Courier opposed Bush policy regarding bailouts, so why we would supposedly delete TARP comments?…. Unless something like in the above was included. Deletion just because the comment came from a liberal is something we just don’t do. In fact, we like keeping those online if they’re clean because it exposes liberal thought for how flawed it is.

    Funny thing about those czars, George Bush didn’t have any that wouldn’t have been confirmed by the Senate. Bush didn’t have any self-proclaimed communists as czars – THERE’S a precedent for ‘ya! An auto-czar with policy making power in the takeover of General Motors, er, government motors, with no congressional oversight is unprecedented. You’re being naive if you don’t realize that Obama is expanding the Executive Branch, circumventing Legislative oversight.

  24. mike Says:

    The Coralville Courier opposed Bush policy regarding bailouts, so why we would supposedly delete TARP comments?

    That comment wasn’t linked to your website.

    Funny thing about those czars, George Bush didn’t have any that wouldn’t have been confirmed by the Senate.

    So now you’re resorting to hypotheticals to try and make your point. We deal with facts, 2012. These are not facts but your own speculation.

    Bush didn’t have any self-proclaimed communists as czars – THERE’S a precedent for ‘ya!

    You stated previously that Obama’s actions in regards to appointments was unprecedented. You have so far failed to explain how or why and have instead decided to focus on the appointee. A rational person would conclude that you can’t formulate an argument to substantiate your original contention.

    An auto-czar with policy making power in the takeover of General Motors, er, government motors, with no congressional oversight is unprecedented.

    Care to substantiate this claim or are you going to just keep repeating it in hopes that it’ll some day come true?

    You’re being naive if you don’t realize that Obama is expanding the Executive Branch, circumventing Legislative oversight.

    Again, George W. Bush vastly expanded the powers of the Executive Branch with the Patriot Act, the selection suspension of Habeus Corpus, the use of warrantless wiretapping without probable cause (and corporate immunity for those that broke the law), the unconstitutional use of signing statements, etc, and at every single key point during his administration Limbaugh acolytes like yourself cheered on these incursions into your civil liberties as necessary to fight the great Global War On Terror. Obama, much to our dismay, is merely continuing these awful policies. Your problem, 2012, is that you and your beloved party have zero credibility in this matter because when the crucial legislation was drawn up you were more interested in playing partisan ping-pong and calling names than you were giving a shit about the Constitution. You watched the Bush administration wipe their ass with the Bill of Rights and you applauded so you can cry like a little bitch about ACORN and “czars” all you want but those of us who kept their eyes and ears open during the last eight years know that when it came right down to it you failed miserably as did every other politician who allowed the Patriot Act to pass. So please, tell me how Obama is expanding the Executive Branch and how it’s “unprecedented”. If you had an honest bone in your body you’d have the decency to at least acknowledge your own hypocrisy.

  25. mike Says:

    And I couldn’t help but notice how you’ve also backed away from complaint about how your taxes have gone up. I’ll take that as a concession and an acknowledgment that you were full of shit.

  26. Zach Rock Says:

    He’ll probably say something like they were hijacked by neocons or something. Which is true. Still doesn’t excuse his parties antics and hi-jinks.

    “I also see that like most glibertarians Zach Rock is dutifuly repeating Republican talking points. Pajamas Media says that there were a million so who are we to disagree?”

    I only offered an argument that had something to back it up other than claiming that the otherside are idiots and made it up. If you did bother to read the first page of that article, you would have noticed that, he uses a method that’s used by The National Park Service. That’s how he gets those numbers. Where are you getting yours?