Tea Time

[mocksluzer]

Did anyone here participate in or see a "tea party" protest yesterday? Some estimates put the nationwide participation at 1/4 million. What does everyone think of the idea? I was contacted by several people to participate, but didn't feel compelled to. I thought this was interesting from DC though:

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/04/16/schakowsky-tea-parties-despicable/

The article is interesting in itself but, what I believe is telling, are the comments from "the people" down below. The people aren't happy and, if Schakowsky couldn't tell from yesterday, they are acting upon that anger.

[Nil Satis Nisi Optimum]

This is another one of those "groan" moments. Tea parties? Really? Here's a hilarious segment from the Rachel Maddow show (note: I'm not endorsing Rachel Maddow, because I still don't really know how I feel about her show, but this is still funny): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLsKt4O4Yw8. Here are some pictures from the Minnesota rally that further show how ridiculous this whole protest thing was: http://minnesotaindependent.com/32378/photo-gallery-scenes-from-a-tea-party. My favorite is the "Tax slave to pirates in Wash." Tax slave? Come on. And I think the estimated attendance is probably a bit high. In Minnesota the organizers claimed they had 10,000 people attend, but police said it was more like 2,000. Organizers always overestimate their attendance.

[mocksluzer]

Just to clarify, the estimates I cited were from organizations that were uninvolved in the set-up of these events. I can understand the sentiment that might cause someone to write "Tax slave to Washington". People see more and more of their tax dollars going to more and more places that they disapprove of. It's the old argument: should the government spend money on what it thinks is right or what the people want? Hell I'm tired of my tax dollars going to bailout out idiots who couldn't win a Junior Achievement competition. But guess what, America? We voted the other idiots, who allow and support this behavior, into office. I understand the protest as a sign to the politicians that they're either not doing what they said they would when America voted them in, or they're not doing it properly/well enough.

I was really surprised to see that you found this tea parties as "groan"-worthy. Ridiculous? I don't think so.

[Nur Rauch]

This whole thing is pretty funny. Proponents of the movement have called it "tea-bagging." For real. Fox News said they would "give lip service" to the "tea-bagging." 

[mocksluzer]

Hilarious. If you want to see what some other people think about it, check out this article and the comments underneath.

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/16/youdecide_teabagging/

[Golden Skull]

Just looking at the first few comments, I am kind of amazed at how many people are offended by "tea-bagging."  You're right, pissed-off crowd.  A little toilet humor is TOTALLY indicative of bias. 

If I were a reporter and if it legitimately related to a story, I would use "teabagging," "donkey-punching," and other such crude sexual slang as often as I could get away with.  It wouldn't be a bias thing, and it wouldn't matter who the story was about.  That stuff is hilarious.

[mocksluzer]

If I were a reporter and if it legitimately related to a story, I would use "teabagging," "donkey-punching," and other such crude sexual slang as often as I could get away with.  It wouldn't be a bias thing, and it wouldn't matter who the story was about.  That stuff is hilarious.

Hilarious indeed. For me, though, the standard wouldn't be "legitimately related"- anything even "tenuously related" would certainly get the potty-mouth reporting that everyone is so pissed off (get it?) about.

[Golden Skull]

Hilarious indeed. For me, though, the standard wouldn't be "legitimately related"- anything even "tenuously related" would certainly get the potty-mouth reporting that everyone is so pissed off (get it?) about.

Fair enough, sluzer.  You make a very persuasive argument.

[Lord.Tetris]

i overslept.....

[mocksluzer]

Thought I'd resurrect this thread with my favorite comment on Fiscal Budget 2010 (so far). This comes from my favorite sports columnist Gregg Easterbrook who is mainly an book-author with several popular and influential books, including his recently released Sonic Boom which has been heralded as the unofficial follow-up to The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman. Easterbrook adopts an unserious and irreverent tone when authoring Tuesday Morning Quarterback (his ESPN column).

His final (I think) column of Football 09-10 reviews the bad predictions (not just sports) of the past year. [As an aside Easterbrook predicted the Saints and Colts in the Super Bowl before the season began]. Anyway here's the quote, link following:

White House Predicts Unlimited Milk and Honey in FY 2063: On Jan. 18, the Congressional Budget Office predicted the fiscal 2010 federal deficit would worsen to $1.3 trillion.Just two weeks later, the White House said yet another round ofdebt-based spending would push the 2010 deficit to $1.6 trillion. Whathappened between these two projections? Addressing Congress, PresidentBarack Obama called for fiscal restraint.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/100216&sportCat=nfl