TomAiello

Depends on what you mean by right wing. I know lots of people here have told me I'm right wing, and I don't think I'm doing that. On the other hand, do you find it hypocritical that folks who were anti-war back when Bush was in the white house are now suddenly pro-war when Obama is in charge? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

You bought the whole jug of kool-aid, didn't you? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I tried to find a hotel room in DC on Saturday night. There were none available, so I ended up driving the 4.5 hours back to our house in Roanoke. Let me repeat that: there were no hotel rooms available in the Washington DC metro area on Saturday night. In a city the size of DC, that doesn't happen from 10 or 20 thousand visitors. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Oh, the other thing that stuck out to me: As the Reason blogger noted, virtually all the signs were hand written. There were no unifying t-shirts, no pre-printed signs being handed out, no central organization defining the "message." It was just a bunch of people who had some things to say, and wanted to be heard. Pretty much the definition of "grass roots." -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Grammar school mid 70's. A big kid took my ice cream money and I didn't do anything about it. The second time I complained but didn't resist. The third time I buried my knee in his nuts and clocked him with a text book. Hypocrite! How dare you assault that poor boy?! You obviously gave your consent the first time, so how could you expect him to leave you alone after that? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I admit that I was surprised that the main stream media reported the DC group as "tens of thousands." I was on the Capitol Mall on Saturday, and if there were "tens of thousands" of attendees, then that's only true if we're talking about 50, or 100, or 150 "tens". If you told me there were 500,000 people there, I'd believe that. If you told me there were 1.5 million, I'd believe that too. If you said there were 50,000? No, it sure looked like a heck of a lot more people than that. If you said there were 2 million? I'd have trouble believing that end, too. The thing I found most interesting was the relative ordinariness of the people there. There were a lot of families, people carrying babies, folks with strollers (I had my two kids there), and such. The atmosphere was part family picnic and part political rally. I did not see a single person I'd describe as loony looking--no skinheads, no neo-nazis, no klansmen. It was pretty much a cross section of middle America. As I said, the reports in the main stream media left me pretty puzzled. My wife and I were confused as to why the number of participants was so drastically under-reported virtually everywhere (that includes FOX news, actually, which is supposed to be the "right wing" news source). We're actually starting to wonder if the people who have sounded paranoid to us for so long may actually be onto something, because it really does look like this event is largely getting ignored or under-reported by the media. There are some decent photos of the crowd here, as well as a time lapse video of the march. I thought the most balanced coverage was this one, which surprised me, as it's a fringe blogger. Honestly, my overall reaction to the media coverage here is to scratch my head and think "hmmm, maybe those tin foil hat types aren't actually as paranoid as I though..." -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I agree as well - taxpayers should be able to allocate their tax expenditures, on a percentage basis to governmental segments that they feel appropriate. Absolutely. And withhold the payment of parts they disagreed with. Or re-allocate their taxes. Next year, I want all my taxes to go to paying off the national debt. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Disagree. They are a bunch of hypocrites who just want to complain about Obama. Next Republican spendthrift in the White House and they will quiet down again. I doubt it. Just from people I've talked to, it seems like in general those folks aren't particularly fond of either party. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm with you. I'd love to see any one person able to stop expenditures of all tax dollars on any program they object to. I think it would give us a much better government. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Indeed. It's unfortunate that the President doesn't seem to know it. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Bullshit. No second President related to a first one has ever acted and performed the same. I do not say this in support or non-support of any, just pointing out an historical fact. Sure. But no second president has ever been married to the first, either. And given Hilary's "adviser-in-chief" role in the first Clinton administration, I'd expect Bill to have a similar role in a second one. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

You know what would be amazing? If we could stop pointing fingers long enough to realize that we're still shoveling ourselves into deeper and deeper holes. And start shoveling the other way. In my opinion, the modern debt was the creation of Ronald Reagan, who was the first politician to realize he could have the cake and eat it, too, by just borrowing more cake. Everyone since then has followed along (and to be fair, there was a very small amount before that). But you know what? That really doesn't matter at this point. What matters is that we stop digging ourselves deeper, and start digging ourselves out. In that regard, I see very few politicians, from either party, who are interested in actually helping. But I see a lot of grass roots tea party folks who understand that main issue, and want to help. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm more looking at the plans the current administration is putting forward, tempered a bit by the fact that they've got to deal with Congress. You're looking at historical data to draw conclusions about the present folks in charge? That might make sense if Hilary Clinton was president--you might be able to assume she'd act somewhat like Bill, who was, without a doubt, the deficit reduction champion of the modern era. But Hilary lost the primary, if I recall correctly. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm pretty sure that hypocrisy is when you criticize someone else for doing something, and then do it yourself (or vice versa). So, for example, if, during the Bush administration, I was busy having a couple kids and running a business, and didn't find time to travel to DC for a rally against things I didn't like, but now I do, that's hardly hypocritical. Hypocrisy would be if, for example, I criticized the US habit of invading random third world nations to distract from domestic problems, and then, once I was elected President, I ramped up yet another occupation of a third world country, to distract from domestic problems. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Why does his name get brought up all the time? I'm gonna have to check this guy out sometimes. I checked him out on Youtube after reading about him on this forum. Apparently he's got a radio show or a TV show or something. He's interesting, but a bit strident, and also a bit religious for my tastes. Of course, that's just based on some Youtube browsing. I've never seen or heard his actual show(s?). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

. There's your hypocrisy, QED. Just the same as we see right here in this forum. Folks who sat on their hands when Bush was prez, but suddenly find fiscal responsibility when a Dem is in the White House. If I didn't like something, but failed to take action, that makes me a hypocrite? People fail to act all the time. That doesn't mean they aren't concerned. It certainly doesn't make them hypocrites. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

It seems like if growth in spending is a cause, then reduction in spending is a logical solution. I have been a registered, dues paying member of the United States Libertarian Party since 1993. Sure. That sucked. I was against it. I'm against breaking those records, which is happening even now. ??? Not sure where you're getting the "fact" that I'm blind to anything. Can you elaborate, by pointing out something I've said along those lines? Personally, I think that's true of almost everyone in Washington DC.

??? I'm not sure what that's got to do with anything. Can you explain what makes you think these are "hate filled racists"? Have you been to any of the events, and talked with people there about their views (racial or otherwise)? I'm pretty sure I'm not a hate filled racist. But maybe you can educate me a little on what you mean by that. Sure. I went to the event in DC. I educated myself on who was leading it, prior to attending. Here's a list of speakers. In particular, I was interested in hearing Bob Levy (which I did), Dick Armey (missed him as I was getting lunch) and Jim DeMint (I did get to hear him speak). I don't think any of them is a "hate filled racist." In general terms, the single person I'd point to as the "headline" organizer of the event was Dick Armey. If you're saying that he's a "hate filled racist" I think I'm just going to have to disagree and leave it at that. ??? Again, I'm not clear on how any of that follows. Are you saying that the people at these events were the "lunatic fringe"? Please explain. You seem very paranoid that these grass roots events are somehow filled with racist lunatics. Let me assure you, from personally attending one, that this is not the case. However, if you want to purchase a tin foil hat, I did see a rather witty gentleman selling them on the capitol mall yesterday. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Interesting coverage of the 9/12 DC event here. An excerpt that relates to this thread: There's also an interesting photo of the crowd, which appears to number well more than the "tens of thousands" reported on CNN. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

The facts are there. Feel free to question the conclusions of the writer. The FACTS are indisputable. The italicized statement, which appears to be stated as a fact, is actually pretty disputable. Further, even if the organizers were previously involved, that fails to show that the actual participants were. My, equally disputable, statement, is that I think the majority of those involved have not been involved in politics prior to this point. I believe that simple fact (which you are welcome to dispute) undermines the entire thrust of the article. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm very confused. I wasn't aware that the President actually exercised complete control over the budget. Can you point me at a reference I can read that explains the process? Thanks! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Ah, yes. The old "well, we're spending a ton of money, so we need more taxes" argument. No point addressing the actual spending, is there? Because that would only address the underlying issue, wouldn't it? No sense at all in doing that. There are two ways to reduce deficits. Increase revenue or decrease expenditures. Pushing for one of these does not make you a hypocrite. It means you have a preference about what direction you want things to move in the future. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I read this book about 15 years ago (when it was first published). It was written by a Republican (former cabinet secretary), who had, for several years prior to that, been sounding the alarm on the massive debt load and skyrocketing deficits. He actually started speaking out on this during the late years of the Reagan administration. The guy even started a Foundation dedicated to fiscal responsibility. Accusing "Republicans" of a failure in this regard is roughly akin to accusing "Democrats" of the same. It's a shamelessly partisan effort to point fingers for political gain. Members of both parties have been on both sides of the issue, and different members of both parties have both worked to reduce the deficit and to increase it (whether through increased spending or decreased revenue). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

The underlying point seems to be that these folks were complicit in previous government actions. The problem is that most of the "tea party" folks are actually totally new to political action. Most of them haven't even really been politically aware before. It's not hypocrisy that they haven't spoken out before. It's a bit silly that they weren't paying attention already, but it's not hypocrisy. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Sorry, I'll try to make it simpler for you next time. Cool. Much appreciated. Thanks! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com