As the left and their propagandist public relations wing (the media), poo poo April 15Th 2009 and how it is just radicals and extremist, or an anti Obama movement sponsoring the events. First we must recognise that the count is still increasing and that the amazing numbers being turned in by the "little" Tax Tea Parties is where the movement is the strongest.
Unofficially we are hearing that over 250,000 nation wide attended these protests and the numbers are still growing. The nay sayers claim that this is nothing as we had over 100,000 in the streets of L.A. in favor of amnesty. A little reminder on that. The majority them selves were illegal and many came from all over the country to attend in one area. I am sure if there was a call for just one Tea march in one city it would get 100,000 people to attend from all over the country as well. Another fact is maybe companies would let their employees off work for this one as they did for the amnesty march.
The myth, rumors, miss information that is being spread as to why people protested is really astonishing. A direct look back wards in our own history would give a better explanation as to why Americans came out in the numbers that they did.
First to those who think that the numbers were to small for the Tax Day Tea Party of 2009 are to small to matter. Let us not forget that only 7000 people were hanging around the Boston docks when as little as 200 men dressed as Native Americans ( that is Indians for the non politically correct). Climbed aboard three different ships and dumped teas belonging to the East India Trading company into the harbour. Thus the beginning of the revolution (metaphorically).
The Boston event was what could be considered the final straw. The one that broke the camels back. Actual resentment of taxation goes back a bit further then 1773. A continual lack of representation in the English Parliament, ( lack of representation? sound familiar) for the colonies set with an increase in fees and tariffs (again sound familiar?). Lead to a high level of frustration by the colonials who found that these fees were way to high and unable in many cases pay for.
Three key acts are pointed out in history as fuel for the fire of the revolution. The Stamp Act in 1765, the Townsend Acts in 1767, and finally the Tea tax in 1773.
The Townshend Acts were British legislation intended to raise revenue, tighten customs enforcement, and assert imperial authority in America. They were sponsored by Chancellor of the Exchequer Charles Townshend, hence the name, enacted on June 29, 1767. The key statute levied import duties on glass, lead, paint, paper, and tea. Its purpose was to provide salaries for some colonial officials so that the provincial assemblies could not coerce them by withholding wages. A tax but not on wages. Sounds like a fee hike that we see today does it not. Hikes in Electric consumption, natural gas usage. Charges for the use of your cell phone when calling emergency numbers (the 9-1-1 fee).
The Townsend Acts run parallel to what the stimulus package of 2009 and the Obama budget creates. No increase in the wages of certain people, yet in the overall picture and increase in the loss of net income do to an increase in hidden taxes (fees). To put it bluntly, it is a tax increase just not in my and your wages. We are going to and are paying more in taxes. Not only on the local, and state levels where the biggest increases are happening, but on the federal level as well.
The Stamp act, which took effect earlier, in the year 1765. Was a tax imposed on legal and commercial documents as well as printed material such as newspapers and pamphlets, all of which had to carry a special stamp. Without this stamp the documents were not recognised. This again is not a wage tax but affects the net income of the taxpayer. Forcing them to pay an additional tax on something that they need. Yet it did not affect their paychecks per say.
These acts of a government, the British Parliament, were imposed upon citizens in the colonies with out any representation given for the colonist.
So how does the lack of representation here compare to what is happening today? In today's environment we have a lack in leadership, responsibility and job description by our elected officials. The argument of no representation can be argued. Officials in Washington have been duly elected in most cases. Voter fraud and appointments not withstanding.
We have officials in Washington who are going through the motions of office and not fully exercising their true responsibility. The prime example, a lack of reading the stimulus package by their own admission. What kind of leadership is this?
In the 1760's and 70's people had the feeling of no say in what the government was doing. On the fees and increases being placed upon their income and restrictions upon their ability to improve their living standard.
Today we see the growing resentment in the very same feelings that lead to the American Revolution over two hundred years ago. The lack of say in fee hikes, rising prices in commodities do to taxes placed upon consumption products (gas, energy,transportation of goods, etc.). Thus a lack in or of representation.
Yes we can say that there is a definite feeling of buyers remorse from the election cycle in 2008. The people are not happy with the direction of the change promised and the fading hope that is coming with it.