Wednesday, April 15, 2009

VIDEO: Full Coverage of Springfield's Tea Party

In 60 Seconds
Springfield, Mo.

More Video of my Q & A with Attendees . . . Courtesy of the hardest working photographer in all of television, Taka Yokoyama.

Plus: Raw Opinions on Roy Blunt, Kit Bond, Claire McCaskill and Sarah Steelman
(Click on the final TWO clips)


In the first clip, Mark Brown voices his opinion about why President Obama should be impeached for his economic policies. "He's not doing what he promised. He's a liar," said Brown. Brown dismissed a question about Bush-era spending, saying it's "nothing like it is now."

Angela Galiana attended the rally holding a picture of her three children and said she was worried the President would saddle them with overwhelming debt. She said the main reason she attended was tax policy. But even though Galiana would benefit from Obama's tax cut this year, she said his long-term policies impacting businesses would override any gain this year. "He's taking higher class citizens who are making over $250,000 . . . It's not fair," she said.

Janice Parker said she stood on Chestnut Expressway to show her displeasure with political profiling in the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report. "All I know is, they were trying to profile, and I didn't care for it," Parker explained.

Drury University Professor of Economics Steve Mullins
offered a counterpoint to the protests, noting that the current debt level as a percentage of the economy is lower now than it was during President Reagan's administration. "These people weren't protesting then. These people haven't been protesting for the past eight years, where we've spent more than $500 billion dollars a year more on wars, tax cuts and a Medicare prescription drug benefit."

Mullins said that while he believes some of the Tea Day party attendees have genuine concerns, many were there for purely partisan reasons. "Why just under the current administration does borrowing and budget deficits scare you so much," Mullins asked. "When you put these numbers in perspective, they're not as scary as some of the critics could make them out to be."

"We're Going on A Spending Frenzy"
Karen Richmond was one of the most articulate Tea Partiers we met -- and she's a conservative who feels abandoned by GOP leaders.

So I asked her what she thought about a variety of Missouri pols -- and their fiscal conservative credentials.

On Roy Blunt: "He's been there too long . . . I really liked Jim Talent."

Richmond just offered a hearty belly-laugh when we asked if one particular Missouri Republican was a true conservative.

To see who she laughed off, CLICK ABOVE.

"They're Not Listening To The People"
"I'm against Republican representatives not listening to us."

Sandy Thompson is self-described independent who feels sold out.

"I think we need to clean out the Congress and we need to clean out the Senate," Thompson said.



Sherri_Disgusted said...

omg!!!! i was watching the news and the mentality of these people are embarrasing!!! obama hasn't kept his promise?? he's been in office 3 months!! it's not going to be an overnight fix of the last 8 yrs downward spiral. what moran's!! if you're going to protest, at least know what you're protesting about. read up on history, morans. if our grandchildren suffer, it's the republican party that has set the foundation for their future, live with it!

gumshoe said...

Wow…. Just wow… God as my witness, I had to double check to see if I was watching the Daily Show or videos clips from The Notebook. Dave, I hope you randomly interviewed people and didn’t just find the selected morons. This was funny… very funny.

I wonder how many of these individuals give to SarahPAC. They seem to buy into the anti-intellectual ideology that has hit a large faction of the Republican Party… I think the Republican strategists call them “Wal-Mart Women” -- “We don’t need to listen to these well-educated people who went to these credible colleges and universities and…got degrees… studied public policy… youuuu betcha.” Woman: “Stop taxing – stop the overtaxing.”

Dave: “President Obama has implemented a tax cut this year through his stimulus plan. Were you aware of that?”

Woman: “I am aware of it, but it’s not enough to make a difference. He’s taxing higher classed citizens making over $250,000 dollars…”

Dave: “Do you make over $250,000?”

Woman: “No I don’t make over 250,000 but it’s not fair.”

Dave: “But you would likely get a tax cut under President Obama’s plan, cause you make under $250,00”

Woman: “The things is though, I work for a smaller company and they make over $250,000 and if they tax that, they can’t continue to hire people and expand like they need to… they will have to cut jobs.”


Ma’am, you just compared household income to the revenue of a business…. Moreover, a business making over $250,000 IS NOT a small business – but don’t take my word for it. Checkout this crazy liberal site overseen by the United States Department of Labor:

You could also do some latte liberal fact checking and lookup the U.S. Census site and search the report of income by source of income.

The average amount of self-employment income reported per taxpayer in 2007 was $31,246
The majority of small business owners that file report self-employment income. So it appears that the average income of a small business owner is well below $250,000.

Regardless, will giving tax breaks to people making over $250,000 a year encourage them to create more jobs? This assumption assumes these individuals are making their money in fields that would in fact lead to job creation…

I’ll stop there for the sake of time.

Angela Galiana said...

Gumshue for your information I was approached at the peaceful tea party and was asked a few questions. I insulted no one unlike yourself from what I gather you think that I am an illiterate, white trash, Wal-Mart hag. Compared to these geniuses who went to these so called credible colleges that are so much smarter than us ie. Turbo Tim. Who couldn't even fill out his own taxes correctly, lied and got penalized on 2 years worth of taxes and then refused to pay the other 2 that he should have. Because he felt that it was his American duty and because the statute of limitation had run out. For one thing in the interview I said I work for a some what of a small business. Which does employ about 200 employees. Which probably does make well over $250,000 a year. I understand that I don't make that much but would like to one day. But as the current situation goes I could probably quit my job and receive more benefits and money hence the reference WELFARE STATE. But I find it more rewarding to actually work hard and earn what I have as my family taught me rather than have it handed to me on a silver platter by the Government. To get back to my somewhat small business that I work for, the harder you hit my employer with taxes and regulations the worse off it is for the employee and that goes for any company, small business, or self employed person. Also you refer to a couple of liberal websites for me to look at. Why would I trust a liberal website when the liberal president we have lies to us quite frequently. I can make one reference to which lie he has specifically stated which is his "Transparency" campaign statement. He stated that he would put any bill out there on the web for us to look at for 5 days before he would sign it not to mention he also claimed he would not allow any more pork spending or earmarks. So again why would I want to look at or even trust a liberal website?

I will sign off now, not for the sake of time but since I understand you think I'm a white trash, Wal-Mart hag which apparently I am not. I understand that you liberals living in your low income communes are probably wanting to go to bed early tonight so you can catch the mail man in the morning to receive your food stamps in the mail. Unlike your self I will sign off using my actual name Angela Galiana.

Bungalow Bill said...

"omg!!!! i was watching the news and the mentality of these people are embarrasing!!! obama hasn't kept his promise??'

What's embarrassing Sherri Disgusted is that you don't are so blinded by Obama that you fail to see he lies. Throughout the Bush administration, we heard how evil was Bush was for conducting illegal wire tapping. Obama promised to end the wire tapping, but now Obama plans to increase wire tapping and push it even further than Bush. He wants to make the US Government immune from any lawsuits brought against it for wire tapping on the citizens of the US. If you are going to question the mentality of the patriots that protested along Chestnut, you should make sure you can back up what you say. You are obviously out of touch with what Obama is doing. Maybe you are the moron (or is that moran) that needs to do some reading. The people I stood with yesterday were well versed in history.

Sunny Boy said...

Many of us want a middle of the road approach to solve these issues. Insulting each other as if we were on the elementary school playground gets nothing accomplished. I supported the protest because I support the Fair Tax. My reason is very simple. Drug dealers and other criminals will be taxed just like the rest of us who actually work for a living. This goes for the illegal aliens that our government refuses to send back to their home country as well. It's just what it says it is a FAIR TAX! Those that live unnecessarily off of the taxpayers dime will be forced to do their share-FINALLY! I do not support or like Obama, but come on people- he's only been in office for 3 months. I whole heartedly disagree with his rampant spending on "stimulous" items- but the Republicans can share that blame as well. Look at Mitch McConnels, Roy Blunts, and John Boehners earmark records. That was the reason I supported McCain-he has NEVER asked for an earmark. Bush was a blithering idiot and I regret voting for him to some degree. To sum it all up, until WE elect people who can work together and stop electing fanatics, nothing will get done and we have ourselves to blame. I would like to thank everyone for keeping the protest peaceful and for taking time out of your day to protest. One last question: How many of you voted for City Council & Mayor? Gotcha!

Bungalow Bill said...

Gumshoe, you don't have to be rich in this country to watch 40% of your income eaten up by one form of tax or another. Our tax you at every turn system is unfair. Take off your rose colored Obama glasses off, and start tracking each penny you pay just like I have displayed on my daily blog feature titled One Man, Many Taxes, 365 Days. Just over 40% of my income has been robbed from me by the government, and I don't even make close to $250,000.

Many of the people at the tea party would love to contribute to PAC for the causes they support, but the continued overtaxation of the American people makes it harder and harder.

Obama's tax cut you mentioned was nothing more than a stimulus payment similar to George W. Bush's. Obama and his administration didn't trust the people would do with the stimulus payment what they wanted you do with it--spend it. Many Americans paid of bills or saved the Bush stimulus payments, so the tax cut you speak of is a $15 a pay period stimulus payment over the course of a year. Obama knows it's harder to save or pay off bills with $15, but Americans are more likely to spend it to generate the needed recovery. The controversy of what you call tax cuts is the tax tables didn't change like they do when a tax cut or tax increase happens. You have been duped. There wasn't a real tax cut in the stimulus. Your taxes are going up when the Bush tax cuts expire next year.

gumshoe said...

I value life, quality of life and human dignity. If you read more closely, you’ll see I stated Republican strategists refer to you as “Wal-Mart Women.”

For a fair and balanced assessment, you can hear for yourself on Fox News. Just copy and paste this link:
Also, in my previous post when I referenced “liberal websites” to check out the facts … that was sarcasm. The websites are government websites. The United States Department of Labor and the United States Census are federal agencies.

Now, as far as your rant on some elected officials – I’m not defending them. This thread is about policy not candidates.

You stated, “the harder you hit my employer with taxes and regulations the worse off it is for the employee and that goes for any company, small business, or self employed person.”Please explain this to me… can you provide any data like I have provided or are you just “going with your gut feeling?” Cause I’d like some facts before “going with my gut” on the most pertinent economic issue facing our nation in recent history.

Roughly 3% of U.S. households make over $250k a year.

If your statement were true then it’d make more sense to just not tax corporations at all… do you truly believe if we eliminated taxes all our problems would go away, everyone would be employed and we’d all have a living wage?

If so, could you please provide some data supporting your claim?

Paul Seale said...

Hey gumshoe,

Your harrasing people who, to be frank, have legitimate concerns by using "fuzzy" math and other verbal trickery.

For instance, the claim that only 3% of the nation makes $250k or greater is a straw man.

Just like your claim that a business making $250k is not a small business, you some how fail to mention how many of those are small businesses, sole propriotorships or SCorps. You know, the "little guy" who runs a mom and pop store but will get crushed underneath forth coming tax hikes and government regulation.

As a small business person let me spell it out to you. The more money and time I have to spend putting up with government taxes and regulations, the less I can spend on payroll or focusing on what I do best.

This might come as a shock, but there is a principle which Angel is spont on about.

You fail to mention the massive tax increases coming from 100% cap and trade in addition to the SCHIP tax passed (taxes on cigarettes) in addition to the trillions of dollars in deficit spending which make the pork spending under Presidnt Bush look like child's play.

Just like this report, the assertion that people are stupid (see wal-mart women post) and anti-intellectual is intellectually dishonest and devoid context.

In the end, though, does it really matter?

Jeremy D. Young said...

I attended yesterday's Tea Party. I'll probably be attending Saturday's event at Fassnight park as well. I support drastic decreases in the size of the Federal Government.

As I read the comments here and elsewhere, I'm constantly amazed at how partisan our country has become. This isn't about the President. This isn't about the previous president, or the one before him. As bad as things are, this isn't even just about Congress.

People are fed up because it doesn't take 7 years in a University to understand that if you continue to spend money that you don't have, there will be dire consequences.

When people borrow money to buy a house, and they can't pay, what does the Bank do? The Bank gets to take ownership of the house and sell it. What happens when an individual piles up so much debt that they no longer have collateral to give in the debt's place? Bankruptcy. Most of what they own is liquidated to pay portions of the debt, and then no one will loan them money.

When the government borrows money, what do they put up as collateral? What happens if China wants their money, but the U.S. Government doesn't have it? Well, the U.S. Government, with the help of the Federal Reserve, will just issue up more debt to pay it back. What happens if other countries stop buying that debt? What if the Federal Reserve just starts printing out more Federal Reserve notes to pay back the countries that have bought our debt? What happens if just one major holder of our debt decides they want out of Dollar backed investments? What happens if the banks that the Federal Reserve loaned out multiple trillions of dollars to can't pay back the loans?

Hyper-inflation is the answer to those dangerous questions.

To avoid Hyper-inflation, and destruction of the dollar, we as a nation must swallow the recession we've created and balance the Federal Budget. If our current politicians won't turn the budget around, we must elect new ones in 2010.

To fully understand where all this new money is going, and what is being done at our Private Central Bank, please support HR 1207. Audit the Federal Reserve so that we know what Bernanke and the rest of the Federal Reserve board are doing with the power that holds our nation hostage, the power over all our wealth.

gumshoe said...

Straw man?

Yeah, right.

Cute argument, albeit a bit brief. And too smart by half.
So is this a fight between an employer and the government?

Do you love your boss so much you think he is always looking out for you first and foremost?
I called out the b.s., you just try to muddy the water.

I provided not only the unbiased departments that report the numbers; I provided the links to look it up yourself.

You don’t like it, but the de-regulation juggernaut of the past two and a half decades led to our mess. You can talk up ACORN and Fannie and Freddie and your Aunt Bertha all you want, but the 35-to-1 leverage by banks and brokerages, busting big time through any and all previous constraints, and all manner of other ways of letting “capitalism” flourish, have done us in.

Good luck to your children.

Even Alan Greenspan finally collapsed turtle-like into his own shoulders and said he had been mistaken all along, as in mucho decades, about human self-interest. Atlas Shrank.

But hey, Paul, keep drawing that salary and counting on your pension while you pontificate about capitalism and the greatness of individual choices… while ignoring and eliding the raw power of those who have controlled a world of finance that overtook and eclipsed government.

Too bad those same folks lost their bid to take the Social Security funds and hand them over to the marketers so we could all be making even more “individual choices,” though not by our own choice, and lose our paltry future funds in the market.

What you fail to understand is that government is proposing to tax you and redistribute a portion of your earnings to others, some of whom cannot compete in the marketplace, because a large percentage of people — after all, Obama was elected in a free and fair election -- want government to do that.

That is, because most Americans are socialists to some degree. They want government to do things other than provide national defense and law enforcement.

They want social security. They want some level and degree of welfare. They want universalized health-care insurance. They want medicare. They want police and fire protection. They want good schools for their families, paved roads and power lines.

The Ron Paul crowd is a very small percentage of our society as can be seen by the fact that there is exactly one person who is even remotely close to being as governmentally minimalist as Ron Paul in Congress.

Paul Seale said...

Jeremy: Well said and explained. This government, nor any other government in the world, cannot operate as we are and Democrats are trying to propose to do.

This is why many other nations soundly repudiated Obama's call for massive spending programs. They know it will break them, as it will us if something doesnt change.

Gumshoe: Thank you for at least admitting that you are a anticapitalst in belief of how our market system should work.

Yes, your arguments are nothing but straw men propped up by by very thin data and no historical background.

There are a number of very important items you left out of your analysis including the impact mark to market and government forced loans on banks.

Thats not to give banks a free pass because, to be honest, their mess up was packaging bad loans as legitimate ones. That should be against the law - no ifs, ands or buts.

However, the government had no business forcing banks to make loans to people they would otherwise not be able to and creating the burden in the first place.

Lets not stop there, however.

Up until that point the "Bush Economy" was rocking along quite well (do a google search for "greatest story never told") with record low levels of unemployment.. small businesses were booming. Lots of awesome stuff.

Was it complete lazie faire capitalism? No - but it was close enough - and most importantly people were given the choice without worry of government crushing them. It worked. It was this phiosophy which brought us out of the recession brought on after 9/11 and exasterbated by energy prices left high during the Clinton years.

This is another point you fail to mention. Part of the inflation and trip wire which Americans faced in this economy was energy prices created by spikes and supported by poor energy policy here at home.

Instead of finding ways to undercut and provide downward market pressure like making the Dollar return to king or *gasp* drilling - Democrats refused to move (and still do).

If the economy still had any steam in it we would still be paying exorbant prices.

It doesnt stop there, either. People were getting hit with stealth taxes as their property was being assessed at a higher rate. This means people who might have purchased a home at 100k and jumped into a 200k bracket could get their taxes doubled and force them into foreclosure. Sound phoney? It is a real situation. I had a friend of mine who has since moved out of the state have it happen to them.

All these issues (and many more) were never discussed and like the report created by Mr. Catanese here, were very one sided and provided no insight and very little truth. The whole purpose was to discredit and make people who protested against what they see as a direct threat to our future as uneducated idiots.

None of the "facts" by you or Catanese actually addresses the grievences which these people are seeking to discuss and voice their opinion about.

Jeremy D. Young said...

Paul, thank you for the compliment, but I cannot allow your statement to go unchallenged:

Up until that point the "Bush Economy" was rocking along quite well (do a google search for "greatest story never told") with record low levels of unemployment.. small businesses were booming. Lots of awesome stuff.The Bush economy wasn't rocking. It was inflating a bubble, a bubble to replace the bubble of the 90's. The Federal Reserve held interest rates insanely low (Slashing from over 6% to below 2% in 2001-2002 and holding it below 2% until 2005), causing a massive amount of malinvestment. In this case, the Federal Reserve and Congress colluded to create the Housing Bubble. Holding interest rates so low caused people to take risks they wouldn't normally take. They bought up houses at an alarming rate, causing huge numbers of people to enter the housing industry (Realtors, builders, speculators, etc). Unfortunately, malinvestment happened in other sectors which caused the appearance of growth elsewhere. The piece of the puzzle that put the most Americans in danger though is that the interest rates encouraged people to take out home improvement loans and to spend that money on consumption.

To keep up the appearance of a booming economy, Bush told Congress to cut everyone a check so they could go out and spend more on shiny things (consumption) even in the midst of an expensive foreign war (I don't want to discuss the merits of that war, because for the economy, it is moot).

Many of the things that partisans are screaming most loudly about with Obama, were started in Bush's years. Much in the same way Hoover started the expansion of government in the 30's, saved by FDR dwarfing his efforts, Bush began a massive expansion of government that will now be dwarfed by Obama's New New Deal.

The reason that I mention partisans, is because I feel that people that are screaming now just because it's not a Republican in office aren't being honest with themselves, or the rest of the country. They are diluting our message, the one that some of us have been bringing since 2007, and others have been wise enough to bring for decades. The message is that deficit spending and disregard for individual liberty have dire consequences in the long run.

It is necessary to admit the mistakes of the past so that we do not repeat them. The policies of McCain and Obama, working together to broker the big bailout are an abomination. Anyone that voted for the Bailout (TARP) should be voted out of office in 2010. I think that people that support a member of a party without regard to their actions are destroying this great nation.

gumshoe said...

I feel like some people are making the mistake of directly equating an economic system with a system of governance. There appears to be confusion between liberty and markets.

One system involves each individual making choices for himself or herself, while the other system involves a smaller number of people making choices for others. Uncontrolled capitalism (i.e. no restraints) and socialism result in the same freedom outcome. In one is it is the dictate of economic power -- and in the other, of government. In either it is potentially a dictatorship (see corporate drones taking pay cuts, working longer hours and management abuse in the ‘unregulated’ corporations as evidence).

Capitalism is an economic system governing capital and labor distribution. It is not a governance system of societal contract or law.

Freedom can be encapsulated in law, social convention, constitution, social contract or through the democratic process. There is no inherent connection to capitalism. Economics and governance are separate entities and until you realize that ideology and policy are different things then you are incapable of any objectivity.
What I’m trying to say is that pure capitalism is also unsustainable, as is proven by the fact that pure capitalism exists nowhere on earth.
Its unsustainability is, I grant you, different from socialism’s unsustainability in that it is a political unsustainability.

Nowhere on earth are the mass of people, if given the choice, going to allow the few to control the vast majority of the wealth to the hindrance of the rest. When, as is the case in America, most people are pretty well off -- those people are going to insist that some provision be made for those many who are less well off than they. Thus, every first world country has some form of social safety net and welfare system because most people, viewing the economic inequities about them, view this as an issue of injustice.

Their sense of fairness must be addressed and their power through the ballot will be the instrument through which they address that injustice.

Where do you suppose you’re going to go that you will not be taxed or where some of your taxes will not be used to support the poor? To Galt’s Ranch?

You are aware, aren’t you, that Atlas Shrugged is just a novel -- and not a very good novel at that. It was imagination. This is reality, my good friend, Paul. To what utopia do you plan to flee?