The Truth About the Tea Parties
It's the government spending, stupid
The banking collapse and the economic meltdown have prompted many Americans to turn to the federal government as indispensable savior, telling Congress and the president: We hope you can fix it; we want you to do whatever is necessary to fix it; and we don't care what it costs.
That was not the sentiment in evidence at the tea party protests held on Tax Day.
There, the message was one of great skepticism about the efficacy of the government's remedies and great apprehension about the expense (along with some of the extremist lunacy that accompanies any mass movement). The scale of the federal response to the crises has come as a frightening surprise to many Americans, who suspect the cure will be worse, and less transitory, than the disease.
Since last September, a federal budget that was already growing steadily suddenly accelerated out of control. The ride began in the winter of 2008, when Congress and President Bush agreed on a fiscal stimulus package of $170 billion in tax rebates and incentives. It picked up speed in the fall, when the Treasury spent $85 billion to take over insurance giant AIG and Congress approved $700 billion to rescue failing financial institutions.
By the time Barack Obama took office in January, projected federal outlays for this year had soared by nearly $1 trillion over last year, and the budget deficit had nearly quadrupled. But was that enough? Not nearly. Obama saw Bush and raised him, immediately pushing through another fiscal stimulus program with a price tag of $787 billion.
Fiscal hawks thought the budget was out of control before. Now they look back on the pre-2008 profligacy as a golden age of budgetary restraint.
The amount of money involved in all this would be staggering to anyone not benumbed by the incessant torrent of bad news. But judging from the tea party protests, the numbness is not universal. No matter what the state of the economy, some Americans are still capable of being shocked to see trillions of federal dollars pouring out like water rushing over a broken dam. And like many reputable economists, they suspect most of it will be wasted.
The invocations of the Boston Tea Party—on April 15, no less—suggested that the protests stemmed from anger about taxes under Obama. But Obama has not actually increased income taxes—only the federal tax on tobacco, which the majority of people don't pay. His tax plan calls for cutting income taxes for most Americans, and not raising them on the rest until 2011.
So why did people rally across the country when they should have been planning how to spend their tax refunds? Because their true dismay is about the mushrooming of federal outlays, which the demonstrators regard as a future tax increase in the making. Which, of course, it is.
The problem is not just the spending supposedly needed for the current economic emergency. Obama claims that he will cut the deficit in half, to $533 billion, by the end of his first term. Two problems: 1) The Congressional Budget Office says the more likely number is $672 billion, and 2) that is 46 percent more than the deficit in 2008. Worse yet, the CBO says the deficit will then resume its upward trajectory, reaching $1 trillion by 2018 and nearly doubling the national debt over the next decade.
The realism about expenditures is the encouraging thing about the protests. It's easy to convince people that the government should take less of their money. It's harder to persuade them that the government should provide them less in the way of benefits and services. Yet the teabaggers took the view that whatever Washington plans to provide, they don't want—not at this price, anyway.
The country has gotten into a painful fiscal predicament because both parties have let us believe we can have more and more goodies from Washington at no additional cost. The recent explosion of federal spending has succeeded in one way: It has exposed that assumption for the fiction it was.
Like Bernie Madoff's investors, we now face the bleak truth that the comfortable future we expected is gone. Everything the federal government is doing will be forcibly extracted from our future earnings. The tea party protesters see that and are angry. Can the rest of the country be far behind?
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Steve, you nailed it. This is the best understanding of the protest message that I've seen yet.
What remains to be seen is whether our government chooses to understand it. I have my doubts.
It's be nice if that were true, but in all reality we know that most of those people probably have no problem with massive wasteful spending on counterproductive big government. They are just mad that it's being done by someone from the other team now.
Hey, I guess we'll take what we can get. I just have no faith whatsoever that the sentiment will survive past the oath of office next time we switch back.
How come so many of the other journalsts call the tea parties "tea bagging"? The ones on NBC and CNN.
Did they seriously call it "tea bagging"? I read something on Drudge that some CNN coffinstuffer was all hot and bothered on the air about them but I try to avoid cable news.
Yeah - I saw the clip of the CNN lady on the Daily Show. She was scary crazy.
Well, honestly, its more than a little disappointing to see the libertarians at Reason adopting the left's sneer of people protesting a massive expansion of the size and scope of government as "teabaggers".
How come so many of the other journalsts call the tea parties "tea bagging"?
Because they're pinko rat bastards who are hoping that if they repeat a juvenile epithet often enough, they can change the facts before them.
-jcr
"Well, honestly, its more than a little disappointing to see the libertarians at Reason adopting the left's sneer of people protesting a massive expansion of the size and scope of government as 'teabaggers'".
Dangit, we didn't even say "teabaggers". Go get pissed off at CNN and their ilk. I might even join you in getting pissed off at them.
:::tips hat at Steve Chapman
"Well, honestly, its more than a little disappointing to see the libertarians at Reason adopting the left's sneer of people protesting a massive expansion of the size and scope of government as "teabaggers"."
Come again?
I don't see that here. Seems more like Suki was pointing out CNN and the like for doing so.
"Did they seriously call it "tea bagging"? "
Suki's right. I get my news from NPR and Jack Beattie (?) calls them "teabag parties" all the time. I'm like WTF?
We hatses the nasty teabaggers yes we do preciousssss!!!
"Did they seriously call it "tea bagging"?"
Yeah, and no scary crazy at the various tea parties...
The house liberals take on the tea parties:
The Good
1. It's always good when people take the time to pay attention enough to politics to have an opinion about it and then
2. take part of their time and do something political
The bad
1. Protesting taxes on tax day takes little courage or nuance, protesting the programs the taxes pay for would have been more impressive to me (I know this was done there, but not how they were sold)
The ugly
1. The promotion/formation/bandwagonning of the events by Hannity et al.
Whoops, that post should have led of with:"saw the clip of the CNN lady on the Daily Show. She was scary crazy."
MNG,
At least in Macon, there didn't seem to be too many scary crazy types. OK, except for the guy ranting about illegals and taxes, but that was one guy out of two or three hundred.
Specifically ranting about how illegals don't pay taxes, or some such.
economist, Kyle Jordan,
Actually, my criticism was not levelled at the commenters, but at Steve Chapman:
"Yet the teabaggers took the view that whatever Washington plans to provide, they don't want-not at this price, anyway."
Bill,
I owe you an apology.
I actually glossed over that when I read the article and it didn't even register to me. I have to agree with you that it's not exactly encouraging to read Chapman use the term.
Mr. Jordan,
No apologies necessary.
It's interesting to see the contrast between the dismissive and disdainfull way that CNN and the other "mainstream" media outlets covered the tea party protests and the deferential and boosterish way they've covered any sort of leftist protest about anything for many years.
BD,
Actually, my criticism was not levelled at the commenters, but at Steve Chapman:
So Chapman is so into teabagging he gets the term confused with tea parties? Not that there is anything wrong with that . . .
Ann Coulter had a funny article on journalists doing what SC did, but failed to mention him.
Anderson Cooper likes to say teabagging because it gives him a hard on. I attended the rally for exactly the reason Chapman describes. Well done.
I think in the main, Steve provided an excellent analysis on the meaning of the "tea parties." I would agree but would like to add a point (central, at least from my point of view). Underlying all of this, I am troubled that there does not seem to be a damn thing we can do about it. That "scary, crazy" CNN lady pointed out that our elected officials voted for these packages overwhelmingly. The central issue is the retention rate enjoyed by Congress, 90% or so, even though their ratings are in the basement. People vote them out of power only rarely. Why, because Dems and Repubs have created safe districts for themselves by gerrymandering. Because of this, incumbents don't worry too much about keeping their jobs once in, and their parties less so. The net effect is a ruling class that is no longer accountable to the people that elect them but more so to special interests. How many times have any of us written to our national representatives about concerns only to have a e mail sent stating that the representative has received our email and thanking us for it, but we never get a reply to our concerns. At least for me, it's about 100%. I suppose (rightly so) that if I was a big campaign donor I'd get a reply. Gerrymandering is at the heart of the problem. Find a way to make races truly competitive, and I think that a lot of other problems will go away.
Yeah, I got the idea that Anderson Cooper wasn't saying "teabagging" over and over to put anyone down, but because he's only just barely still in the closet, and occasionally throws out double entendres to his gay fans. So he wasn't saying, "Ha! I can call these guys 'teabaggers' and it demeans them!" He was more like, "If I say, 'It's hard to talk when you're teabagging!'" all my gay fans will say, "You oughta know, Anderson!" He was playing to the guy who writes Dlisted, not to Dkos.
Mr. Chapman, you've written a wonderfully on-target article, but why use the term "teabagging" to refer to tea party protestors?
Find a way to make races truly competitive, and I think that a lot of other problems will go away.
No they won't.
If the races were competitive, a lot of people would run for Congress on the GOP ticket and promise to cut spending, but would then get into office and raise spending. Because that's what the GOP establishment and the conservative movement are all about.
The problem isn't that elections aren't competitive. The problem is that we have a major party in this country which self-identifies with smaller government, but is lying - and the public is so stupid that they believe them, no matter how many times they prove that they're lying.
This just in from Tammy Bruce: The crazy CNN reporter who was babbling about FOX News applied to FOX news twice and was never hired by them.
Chapman missed one small detail I think...
We have the government we deserve since we continually vote these clowns back into office...
I attended one for the specific purpose of figuring out how libertarians can infiltrate the leadership. Turns out, it should be easy -like most organizations, they welcome those willing to step forward and assume leadership.
(Much like it doesn't take much to become State Chair in many Libertarian Parties within two years of joining.) Once in the leaderhip, you can influence who speaks at the rallies, what kind of issues are mentioned on signs, what books are recommended to your members for self-study, etc. etc. Sure, there is some carrying water for conservatives but just how do we expect to stay pure and influence those already inclined towards many libertarian answers?
creech,
Once in the leaderhip, you can influence who speaks at the rallies, what kind of issues are mentioned on signs, what books are recommended to your members for self-study, etc.
Can we get some snappy arm bands and spiffy uniforms? I prefer blues, grays and black. Not into browns or tans.
YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF RAAAAAAAAAAAAAACISTS!
I wish we had a better semi-organized protest of the bailouts, with perfect leaders and pure principles...
But from wear I'm standing, I think this is the only semi-organized protest of the bailouts we've got.
Yeah, The teaparty movement may not be perfect, but I'm not sure it isn't the only movement we've got.
Chapman got one right?
Blind pig, broken clock, whatever.
I drove past a small group of people the other day, with their "audit the Fed" signs; standing at gthe end of the line were a coule of guys with a bedsheet with "9/11 was an Inside Job" spray-painted on it.
I cannot bring myself to associate with those bozos.
Please disregard typos as necessary.
I don't think the teabagging did much to change the perception of the American right as being out of touch, hypocritical, paranoid, and tools of the GOP and Rupert Murdoch.
They are just mad that it's being done by someone from the other team now.
False. Republicans who voted for the bailouts were roundly booed at these events.
As for the term "teabagging", I think we should co-opt this term and use it proudly. We won't stop the Other Team from using it, so we might as well take it away from them.
What's wrong with the Right.
I don't think the teabagging did much to change the perception of the American right as being out of touch, hypocritical, paranoid, and tools of the GOP and Rupert Murdoch.
Perhaps. But you know what might change that perception? When these tools and nutjobs are nevertheless proven right by soaring taxes, inflation and/or a government defaulting on its debt.
Oh, loosen your girdles, ladies. The teabagging term came in handy to the MSM because somebody threw a bunch of teabags. The term was funny and it stuck. You can keep whining about it or you can do what everybody with a successful movement does and start using the term of abuse yourselves, my niggaz.
tools of the GOP and Rupert Murdoch.
Speaking of paranoid...
Oh, loosen your girdles, ladies.
I shall not sacrafice my perfect figure for the sake of passing up an opportunity to pick on your little buddy Steve Chapman!
"As for the term "teabagging", I think we should co-opt this term and use it proudly."
I assumed Steve was heading in this direction, or at the least using it as an endearing jab. I wonder how many of the talking heads on TV that are using the word actually know what it refers to.
Didn't know about the tea bag throwing thing. And on further thought, it's better to be a teabagger, then a teabagee.
I don't think the teabagging did much to change the perception of the American right as being out of touch, hypocritical, paranoid, and tools of the GOP and Rupert Murdoch.
Step outside your leftist echo chamber, which is not to say "watch FOX." Read some of the blog reports. Don't bother with the HuffPo pictures; look at the pictures taken by people who believed in the protests. That's the only way you'll understand the real flavor of the protests. This should be obvious, but, then, I'm talking to someone who only wants his pre-conceived opinions validated. The truth doesn't matter, does it, Tony?
These really weren't partisan. Republicans got almost as much heat as Democrats did.
I think Chapman makes a great point about the spending. The fact that so much of the money being spent is going to bankers is a big factor as well.
And you can't help but laugh at the Washington Post breathlessly trumpeting on behalf of the administration that they're going to try and cut $100 million out of the budget at a time when the national debt is going up by billions of dollars a day. It's a joke.
"Can the rest of the country be far behind?"
Unfortunately, yes.
I wonder how many of the talking heads on TV that are using the word actually know what it refers to.
Oh, they know. How do you think they got those cushy jobs, anyway?
They are just mad that it's being done by someone from the other team now.
That's asinine. Republicans were taken to task as well as democrats. We don't care what party, we care about the spending. The movement is far more libertarian than you know. There's liberals as well.
I don't think the teabagging did much to change the perception of the American right as being out of touch, hypocritical, paranoid, and tools of the GOP and Rupert Murdoch
Wow. Massive intentional ignorance, when all you need to do to know the truth is go to a local meeting.
You could do like I did at the first meeting. I told them I was a lib but I was very concerned about the spending, and hence taxation and inflation that will come and asked them was I in the right place? Was I welcome?
It was a resounding yes.
isn't tea bagg'n when your buddy passes out from drinking too much and you drop 'your' nuts on their chin?
Medic
We don't care what party, we care about the spending.
Then where was all the teabagging over the last 8 years? I mean besides Larry Craig's hotel room.
or you can do what everybody with a successful movement does and start using the term of abuse yourselves, my niggaz.
Like this?
Then where was all the teabagging over the last 8 years?
Fuck you Tony. Fuck you with a great big spiny dildo.
If you think there is really no difference between government spending before Sept 2008 and after Sept 2008, then that's all the dialogue you get. So spare me your quips about "fuckity fuckity" as well.
Then where was all the teabagging over the last 8 years?
If you listened to any right-wing talk radio (and not just out-of-context excerpts), they were railing against Bush on No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part B, Farm Subsidies, all his other non-war spending. They did support the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but don't paint them as being only concerned about spending when it's democrats doing it.
The Boston Tea Party wasn't even about taxation. Me and my friends were smuggling Dutch tea into America which we sold at a lower price than the English monopoly sold it. When those three boat loads of tea arrived in Boston harbor the price of tea crashed. The English tea, even with the tax, was cheaper than what we sold. So we went down and threw that shit into the water! Taught those bitches a lesson about fucking with my money. Too top it off we blamed the whole thing on those asshole Indians! ROFL!
'But, but 95% of people got a tax cut!!!!!'
I swear the next Democrat that says this I am going to knock their teeth down their throat.
We don't care what party, we care about the spending.
There were plenty of complaints.
Even if there wasn't, apparently to your genius intellect because something bad happened then that means you can't say anything when something three times as bad happens.
But that's not the case. Almost every lib and liberal was complaining and lots of conservatives were.
But apparently it was patriotic to complain about Bush's spending*2 but now it's bad to complain about Obama's spending*3.
Hypocrisy straight up. Go sell it on Huffpo, Salon or KOS where it sells.
I think you're wrong. I think tea parties were a display of wanton ignorance engineered primarily to provide comedy material for the left. They once again undermined libertarianism by making it seem as if the people who support libertarian ideas are jackasses and tools of the right-wing media, and fundamentally dangerous to society. GG Fox, you've screwed us again.
False. Republicans who voted for the bailouts were roundly booed at these events.
But how many of them voted for those people and called it "the lesser evil"? I'm sure that there were some honestly libertarian people there, but the whole Hannity connection causes me to greatly distrust them.
If you think there is really no difference between government spending before Sept 2008 and after Sept 2008, then that's all the dialogue you get. So spare me your quips about "fuckity fuckity" as well.
And I must note that I barely heard a peep about it from the usual Red Team blowhards until about a week into November.
They did support the Iraq and Afghanistan wars
Exactly. This is why the right has no credibility. Any spending that actually helps people (or allegedly to stop the economy from falling off a cliff) is pure, utter evil.
Trillions to blow shit up though? Just fine. Don't even need a justification!
'But, but 95% of people got a tax cut!!!!!'
I swear the next Democrat that says this I am going to knock their teeth down their throat.
Because facts are pesky things when you have an ideological crusade to wage.
"most of those people probably have no problem with massive wasteful spending on counterproductive big government."
Truer words were never spoken. I wonder how many of these 'small gov't' wannabe-libertarians were in favor of the PATRIOT act?
I agree that the Hannity connection detracts from the credibility.
I suppose bandwagoners are better than nothing.
@Jacob: they're not better than nothing though. When they parrot libertarian ideas alongside stupidity the person unfamiliar with libertarianism assumes that it's another form of stupidity and the whole movement is discredited to that individual. The jackasses at these tea parties (and I'm sure the jackasses were cherry picked by the media) who were screaming tyranny and fascism could not give a principled argument as to why Obama's policies are bad. They also intermingled opposition to taxation and wasteful spending with any number of patently retarded ideas, for instance the guy on the Daily Show segment who claimed the Obama adminsitration was worse than British rule, or the guy who dressed Obama up like hitler. These people destroy libertarianism; they make us look like idiots by lumping us together with their idiotic ideas. They are worse than nothing, they are a net negative to the whole movement.
Now listen, these tea parties could be turned to good. These people have the right ideas even if they have no idea how or why they're right; if you can start from there and argue them back to first principles, empower them to understand the why and how, you have something. Getting them out in public waving signs and talking out their assholes is not helpful, though. If we're going to have an army of protesters running around spouting libertarianism they need to be able to hold their own in an argument and explain calmly and rationally why they're right when someone shows up with a camera, or even when some interested individual approaches them and asks questions.
One last time:
The folks at Free Republic (among others) were calling their protest movement 'teabagging' fully aware of what that meant long before anyone in the librul media was doing so.
Yeah freepers sure are clever.
@Justen
Amen
These people have the right ideas even if they have no idea how or why they're right
Right. So all you ivory tower libertarians please feel free to keep feeling superior and complaining while nothing ever changes.
There are some of us in there educating and getting our feet wet. It's work, but there may never be a better chance.
So if you actually care to do more than bitch, then dust off your logic, go to a meeting, and get in the game. There's literally hundreds of thousands of people who are trying to get their head around how they got to this place. People who are activated, but not knowing exactly where to go.
You can make fun of them and let them go back to their prior sleep, or you can explain it to them.
The GOP didn't start this train but you be damned sure they will try to get into to conductors seat if they can, and they are already trying.
Screw that. I'm tired of just voting and bitching.
I've been using the TEA Party bandwagon as a way to introduce people to Rothbard. With any luck, I just may convert some Republicans into true libertarians.
As far as I can tell, "teabagging the White House" was a comment used by a Fox reporter, presumably in ignorance of what it meant, and picked up by Jon Stewart.
If the protests were actually about increased spending, and only indirectly about taxes, then the very fact that this has to be explained to people makes the protests themselves less than effective. Protests are a lot like jokes that way.
"'But, but 95% of people got a tax cut!!!!!'
I swear the next Democrat that says this I am going to knock their teeth down their throat.
Because facts are pesky things when you have an ideological crusade to wage."
Just read the fine print. 95% get a tax cut (until the debt actually comes due, in which case we will either take it all directly through taxes, or try to inflate our way out of the mess, because that always works so well).
"You can keep whining about it or you can do what everybody with a successful movement does and start using the term of abuse yourselves, my niggaz."
I am a proud teabagger!
Oh, Yankee Doodle came to town...
"Can we get some snappy arm bands and spiffy uniforms? I prefer blues, grays and black."
No, I was thinking more like red with a hammer and a scythe-looking thing.
"We have the government we deserve since we continually vote these clowns back into office..."
I DIDN'T FUCKING VOTE FOR THE CLOWNS IN OFFICE. *grinds teeth angrily* I WANT THE RECORD TO SHOW THAT I DIDN'T VOTE FOR ANY OF THESE DOUCHEBAGS, GET IT? IT'S NOT MY FAULT IF THEY FUCK EVERYTHING UP!
You can keep whining about it or you can do what everybody with a successful movement does and start using the term of abuse yourselves, my niggaz.
I laughed when I read it. Besides, the association will stick with people, like a hair caught between your front teeth.
So, libertarian graphic designers, get busy on the t-shirts. Two designs come to mind:
One: A lettered shirt reading TEAbagger, where the g's have been replaced by a pair of teabags.
Two: An Obamiconed image of il Duce with a couple of teabags hanging out his open mouth.
I am a proud teabagger!
Oh, Yankee Doodle came to town...
How heroic. Brings a tear to my eye, really. A bit revolutionary-come-lately though.
The tea party in Overland Park, Kansas was angry people who want less government. Signs called for no more taxes, no more wars, no more bailouts, an end to the war on drugs, an end to socialist policies of all kinds. Some of the more detailed signs included graphs depicting the baby boomer retirements affecting the budget deficit.
I dispute the notion that only disgruntled Republicans were present. There were some, but most of them were from the Campaign for Liberty. There were also plenty of independents, Libertarian Party people, and others protesting the outrageous spending and nationalisation policies of this new administration.
I didn't vote for Obama. I didn't vote for McCain. And I was there, just as upset as everyone else.
I'm disappointed to see reason so naively picking up their cause, actually duped into thinking these people didn't notice fiscal problems until this year, conveniently the year Obama took office. As if this is a non-partisan issue. Really. This is the elephant in the room. Paleoconservatives and neo-conservatives are finally meeting up.
The rage behind the tea parties was triggered by a bailout signed by President Bush .
Oh, please! Some people actually have the foresight to look beyond the immediate consequences of actions and policies.
By spending trillions of dollars NOW, we will have to raise taxes LATER to pay for them. It does not matter that Obama hasn't, yet, raised any taxes. They're coming with 100% certainty.
It doesn't matter if Obama INTENDS to tax only the rich, because those of us with intelligence and education know that those taxes will affect all of us. We know that you cannot support broad-based spending by taxing a narrow base. The "rich" are already paying the vast majority of income taxes in this nation. We could tax 100% of their income and we'd STILL have huge deficits.
Those of us with an attention span longer than an Obama campaign sound bite know that the impending bankruptcy of Social Security and Medicare is on the horizon and headed straight for us. We've only been warned of it for the past 30 years, but no rush... no rush solving it!
Tea Parties are about opposing confiscatory taxes, wasteful spending, politically motivated redistribution, and government control of enterprise - in short, socialism.
Wow this Tea Party thing is really taking off!
I was never that interested in politics before, but this Tea Party movement has got me all excited!
I have some photos that I took at some rallys here in Portland at; Tea Party Chronicles
This is so awesome, I met a lot of interesting people, hope to meet many more!
Paige
This Tea Party thing is SO EXCITING!
I've met so many awesome people at the rallys!
Hope to meet many more, especially here in Oklahoma City!
Kisses,
Paige
is good