Tea Party Patriots Ordinary citizens reclaiming America's founding principles.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

British Teen gets Banned from U.S. for Calling President Obama a Name

We welcome & protect criminals illegally entering our country with open arms, people calling for the destruction of our country & the killing of Americans get carte blanche treatment, the President of Mexico can slam our country and he gets a free dinner at the White House... call President Obama a name -- you get banned from the country!

From FOX DC --
A British teenager who sent an email to the White House calling President Obama an obscenity was banned from America for life, The Sun reported Monday.

The FBI asked local cops to tell college student Luke Angel, 17, his drunken insult was "unacceptable."

Angel said he fired off a single email criticizing the U.S. government after seeing a TV program about the 9/11 attacks.

He said, "I don't remember exactly what I wrote as I was drunk. But I think I called Barack Obama a p***k. It was silly -- the sort of thing you do when you're a teenager and have had a few."

Angel, of Bedford, in central England, said it was "a bit extreme" for the FBI to act. "The police came and took my picture and told me I was banned from America forever. I don't really care but my parents aren't very happy."

A Bedford Police spokesman confirmed they had spoken to Angel about the email. Officers will take no criminal action.

Joanne Ferreira, of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said there are about 60 reasons a person can be barred from visiting America.

She said, "We are prohibited from discussing specific cases."

Read more:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3135327/Obama-rant-Brit-banned-from-US-for-life.html

Small Business to Shoulder over a Third of Tax Increase on Top Earners

And here is more proof that President Obama's so called "tax cuts" for the middle class will hurt small business. This would be the small Mom & Pop type business that built this country. These so called cuts will kill the small to medium size companies that in the aggregate employ millions of Americans across the country.

From Tax Foundation --
Advocates of allowing the top two federal income tax rates to expire claim that only 2 or 3 percent of businesses would be affected, but a new Tax Foundation report shows that more than one-third of the revenue from an increase in the top two rates would come from business income.

About 39 percent of the $630 billion tax increase on high-income taxpayers (defined by President Obama as individuals earning more than $200,000 and married couples earning more than $250,000) in 2011 would come from business income. This amounts to an extra $246 billion in taxes on business income over 10 years.

"The fact that 'only' 2 or 3 percent of taxpayers with business income would face higher taxes is meaningless to the debate," said Tax Foundation President Scott Hodge, who authored the paper. "What matters most is not the number of taxpayers impacted, but the amount of business income - and, therefore, business activity - impacted."

Tax Foundation Special Report, No. 185, "Over One-Third of New Tax Increases to Come from Business Income," is available online at http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/26696.html.

More than 74 percent of tax filers in the highest tax bracket report some business income, compared to 20 percent of those at the lowest bracket.

Of the roughly $864 billion in taxable business income reported on individual income tax returns in 2008, nearly 68 percent was claimed by taxpayers earning more than $200,000, and 35 percent was claimed by taxpayers earning over $ 1 million.

"This means that the combined business income of every taxpayer earning up to $200,000 was still less than the total business income of taxpayers earning more than $1 million," Hodge said.

More business income is taxed under the individual income tax code as "pass-through" businesses (non-corporate firms such as sole proprietors, S-corporations, Limited Liability Corporations and partnerships) than is taxed under the traditional corporate income tax code. The number of pass-through businesses nearly tripled between 1980 and 2007, from roughly 10.9 million to more than 30 million. The number of traditional C-corporations declined steadily from 2.2 million in 1980 to 1.9 million in 2007.

In the same time period, net receipts for C-corps roughly doubled, from $752 billion to $1.4 trillion, and net receipts from pass-through entities saw a six-fold increase, from $315 billion to more than $1.8 trillion.

The Tax Foundation is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that has monitored fiscal policy at the federal, state and local levels since 1937.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Dick Morris; 2010 St. Louis 9/12 Tea Party (Video)

Part 1

Part 2

Image Impact

Houston, Texas Tea Party
Felicia Winfree Cravens

There's a lot of press chasing the latest doings of the administration, and the vocal opposition to its agenda. You can't turn on the news without seeing a story about the health care debate, or the economy, or Cap and Trade. The debate is a good thing, and people who never cared about such issues before have suddenly found themselves chest-deep in the intricacies of legislation, discussing the Constitution. That renewed interest can never be bad for our republic.

What concerns me is the image portrayed by our opposition.

First, let's think about the goal here. Is the highest goal to keep a given piece of legislation from being passed? If so, then how do we make that happen? The obvious answer is to amass enough public opposition to render it politically impossible for Congress to pass it. This is why the town hall meetings have been so compelling; people are attending these events in unprecedented numbers to make their opinion known, especially on the health care legislation.

Is it having an effect? A little bit. It might result in a watered-down version of what's currently on offer being passed. But make no mistake, unless there's a radical change in the typical congressvarmint's point of view, this bill, in some form, WILL PASS.

So how do you change the view of Congress? My opinion is that you do it by reaching some of their base who do not currently agree with you. That takes many forms, but a good example is Tracy Miller's attempt to explain the health care legislation at an aborted Sheila Jackson Lee town hall. Sheila moved her town hall, and Tracy ended up at the original location. There she met several people who were supporters of the congresswoman, but who didn't know much about what was in the bill. She spent time that evening talking to those people and giving them facts and excerpts from the bill, and found common ground with them. She gave them something that was in short supply from Sheila Jackson Lee - information. That's a valuable outreach effort.

Would Tracy have had that opportunity to reach these SJL supporters had she charged in with her Obama Joker poster held high? I really don't think so. Would they have been receptive to anything she had to say? Probably not. Tracy knows this, and acted accordingly.

We should all take a page from her book, and learn something about image.

When Houston Tea Party Society hosted tea parties, we did our best to encourage people to focus on Congress as their targets. Putting the focus on the newly-elected, highly popular, still-honeymooning president would only serve to make those supporters dig in their heels and root their support even deeper. Congress was (and is) a much smarter target choice, and as Tracy found in an early SJL town hall, rich with material - as when SJL pretended to listen to Tracy's question and talked on her cell phone at the same time. That video landed the congresswoman, and Tracy, on the Fox News Channel.

The point here is that without the distraction of an altered Obama photo, without the distraction of a Sheila Jackson Lee voodoo doll, the story became Sheila Jackson Lee's behavior. Add those distracting elements into the picture, and the media would be reporting on the poster, on the doll. Is that the story we want to tell? Is that the goal; to get a chuckle out of people who agree with us? Or is the larger goal to prevail, to sway more people on the fence to agree with us, to amass the numbers we need to force Congress to abandon their socialist plans?

You can go for the cheap laugh, or you can go for the win. It's up to you. But if you go for the laugh, don't be surprised if we aren't all laughing along. Some of us would like to keep the focus on the issues.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

The Reason we were attacked on 9/11...


U.S. Senate Candidate Lee Fisher Disrespects 9/11

From a guy that supports the DREAM Act and amnesty for illegal immigrants, should we expect anything less from a guy like Lee Fisher...

From Politico -- (emphasis added)

POLITICO reports today about the fading taboo of Sept. 11 politics: Marginal groups are holding dueling mosque rallies in New York that day, while across the country politicians tiptoe back toward having certain, relatively low-key political events that day.

The story doesn't make mention of any candidate fundraisers, but Ohio Senate candidate Lee Fisher is crossing that line as well, with a campaign fundraiser that evening at the home of a Mansfield City councilwoman, Ellen Haring.

Asked about the timing, a Fisher aide noted that earlier that day, the Democrat is attending a first-responder dedication ceremony in Hilliard, Ohio.

Fisher is, as far as I know, the only federal candidate in the country holding a fundraiser that day.


Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Ohioans acknowledge Governor Strickland's FAILURE on School Funding Fix

In his own words....

From Third Base Politics --

Remember this quote from Ted Strickland way back in 2006?

"Let me tell ...you this: I am so committed to solving this school-funding issue that if I become governor, and I do a lot of wonderful things but I fail to address this school-funding issue, I will have been a failed governor," Strickland said."

Interestingly enough, respondents to this weekend's Dispatch poll were asked about this very issue:

So 94% of Ohioans are now susceptible to Strickland's own qualification of defining him as a failed Governor.