Posted on 04/17/2009 12:19:58 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When thousands of people in all 50 states assemble to protest government policy, you might suppose that this is news. Not according to the coverage on the front pages of the Washington Post, New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal. The "tea party" rallies went unmentioned. In Washington, D.C., despite temperatures in the 40s and a driving rainstorm, about a thousand demonstrators assembled across from the White House. The front page of the Times found space for a big story with accompanying pictures of competing public demonstrations in Kabul, Afghanistan, but not a word about the American protestors.
Perhaps this snub was intentional. Fox News (becoming a participant itself and not a recorder of events) had been beating the drums for these rallies for days, and some pressies clearly regarded them as therefore necessarily illegitimate. One reporter, Susan Roesgen, who "covered" the Chicago tea party for CNN, was downright confrontational with attendees she interviewed, challenging a protestor who referenced Abraham Lincoln with "What does this have to do with taxes?" The man attempted to explain. But the reporter interrupted him. "Did you know that you are eligible for a $400 rebate? Did you know that your state, the state of Lincoln, gets $50 billion out of the stimulus? That's $50 billion for your state." She then tossed back to the anchor noting that "This is really not family viewing."
What Ms. Roesgen and others like her do not understand is that some people are interested in more than their own narrow self-interest. Perhaps the protestor she interviewed, who was holding his 2-year-old son, is eligible for a tax rebate. And perhaps his state will get a juicy piece of the stimulus money. It is possible, just possible, that such a bribe does not influence him. Perhaps it doesn't buy his support because he is skeptical that his taxes can remain low when the federal government is embarked on a record-shattering spending spree. He may be offended by the bailout culture, and worried that the obligations of taxpayers cannot remain low when it seems that every irresponsible borrower, failed car company, and free spending state is being rescued by the federal government. Additionally, he may be dubious that the government will spend the money wisely. It has been rumored that government spending has produced waste, fraud, inefficiency, and corruption. But he also may simply believe that engorging the government and enfeebling the private sector -- no matter who is writing the checks -- is not good for the economic or spiritual health of the country.
The tea parties demonstrated that resistance to big government persists in the hearts of many Americans. And yet, Roesgen has a shadow of a point. When the vast majority of Americans are getting benefits from the government but not paying the bill, the constituency for tax reform does shrink. As Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam note in their book "Grand New Party": "Just before the Reagan tax cuts, a median-income four-person family paid about 12 percent of their total income in federal income taxes. Reducing that burden, predictably enough, yielded a political windfall for Republicans ... Today the bite the federal income tax takes out of working class and middle-class paychecks stands at roughly half the pre-Reagan level."
A recent Gallup poll found that only 46 percent of Americans say their taxes are "too high." Fifty-two percent of those earning between $30,000 and $75,000 said their taxes were "about right." IRS data show why this should be so. Those earning more than $388,806 in 2006, the top 1 percent of earners, paid about 40 percent of the taxes. The top 5 percent, those earning above $153,542, paid 60 percent of the taxes. And the top 10 percent, those earning more than $108,904, paid more than 70 percent of all taxes. Some, including President Obama, argue that the wealthy were disproportionately benefited by the Bush era tax cuts. But as the American Enterprise Institute's Kevin Hassett has pointed out, the tax share shouldered by the wealthy increased more than the share of income going to that group during the past decade.
Still, the numbers suggest that income tax reductions are not going to be the royal road back to popularity for the Republican Party. The path back to political viability will have to be found elsewhere. More on that in future columns.
That sounds about right, since 40% don't pay any taxes at all!!
Who cares who beat the drums? What matters is how many people answered the call.
Progressives just don't get it. So the guy is supposed to be thrilled about getting a $400 rebate when he's children's future is being robbed? What a clown. That $50 billion isn't coming from no where...it's coming from the person she was talking to...and his children, and his children's children. It's immoral to steal from those who haven't even been born yet. It's idiocy to think he should be thrilled that they're taking thousands out of his back pocket so they can slip him $400 and claim the government is doing some great thing for him.
Not everyone is eligible for the $400 rebate, but Susan just assumed that the guy is.
As for those Bush tax c uts for the wealthy, what’s not being said is that for many, the AMT might have eliminated any tax cuts they would have received.
The other 6% are on government pensions.
Second, when 40% of the American adult population doesn't pay any income tax, I can see where it's not going to be a big issue - not anymore. Peter can always rob Paul, that is until Paul runs out of money to rob, which could be sooner than later.
Of course, the core issue of the Tea Partiers wasn't taxes, per se, it's the out of control spending in Washington. And, granted, it may not be important in the zeitgeist of America, but it sure will be with the resulting inflation hits in the next 20ish months. When people start paying $4 for a gallon of gas (again) and $3 for a loaf of white bread, government out-of-control spending will be a VERY big problem. And, the Republican's pointing fingers will actually carry some weight then.
She would have loved for that guy to say he wasn't eligible for the "rebate". It would have given her the opportunity to paint all the protesters as rich, fat-cats who don't care about America or it's "little" people. I wouldn't at all be surprised if that was a set-up question.
If Code Pink had ever managed to get so many people out in some many locations, you wouldn’t have seen anything else on TV, and Anderson Cooper certainly wouldn’t have been joking about what anatomical part of the participants was pink.
When non-communists demonstrate, however, it’s non-news.
The reason that there weren’t more protesters is because those tax-paying right-wing patriots that CNN so despises were at work—making money to pay the darn taxes!
The problem I have is that all of the media ,and yes even Fox news to a fair degree , are trying to define the cause of the discontent as a tax and spend issue with an order of big government on the side. To me that is a reversal of cause and effect. It is like saying the symptoms are the disease. I thought the whole thing was about a return to the common sense principles our Constitutional Republic was founded on. Yet when I turn on my TV I see some of the same people who have not, and did not uphold their oaths to the Constitution. They call themselves Republicans or conservatives ,but its easier for me to just call them all liars than remember their names. I guess the way I feel could just be a personal problem caused by the honor I felt when I swore an oath to that same Constitution. I guess the son my wife and I raised must have somehow inherited this same defect since he felt honored to swear the same oath I did before he departed for Iraq. If this whole thing is not about the rescue of our Constitutional Republic then what is the point?
“The path back to political viability will have to be found elsewhere.”
That path will not be defined by a single issue, but by a combination of issues, AND identification of those issues that split the democrat base.
I have spoken to several people who do not like what the democrats are doing, but who feel that the Republicans have no well thought out message.
Any idea what that message could be? Most dems don't pay taxes (that they have to hand over)lots get money from .gov. How do you convince them they should vote for smaller .gov?
Current cable ratings show CNN has dropped to a solid third place. Keep it up CNN, and your ratings will be lower than the Spanish language cartoon network!
FOXNEWS 3,390,000
MSNBC 1,210,000
CNN 1,070,000
downright confrontational with attendees she interviewed,CNN is confused that everyone isn’t a bloody progressive.
You can write to Ms. Susan Roesgen and express how you feel via her email address here:
could you e-mail somebody in crayon.
Everyone pays for higher income taxes. Those taxes are passed along to the consumer who must pay them in higher costs of goods and services.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.