Driving along La Paz towards Marguerite just before 5 p.m. I was both surprised and impressed by the size of the crowd on all four corners of this major Mission Viejo intersection. This corner has been a vocal point for rallies ever since we became a city and yesterdays TEA Party was no exception. When I arrived at the start of last years event the people were trickling in. That is not what I experienced yesterday.
Furthermore I disagree with the Register reporter on the number of TEA Party attendees. Three different participants told me that the crowd was larger than last year. There were actual counts that exceeded 600 people lining the streets. In some areas these patriots were crammed together 4 or 5 deep waving home made signs, banners and American flags.
There surely was a difference between this year and last years April 15th events. One major distinction yesterday is that 2010 is an election year. In speaking to M.C. Mark Dobrilovic this morning he agreed saying that “the 2009 TEA Party attendees were angry and had apprehension. While still having anger, this years attendees see hope in knowing that change is coming. We’re making a change and can see light at the end of the tunnel. A lot more people have been awakened as to state spending.”
The MC of this rally was Mark Dobrilovic, Mission Viejo Investment Advisory Commissioner and Orange Juice blogger. He did a commendable job serving as the rally MC as he warmed up the crowd with his knowledge of issues which brings us together.
The first speaker introduced by Mark was Pacific Justice founder Brad Dacus. Brad spoke to the crowd about preserving our religious freedoms and cited examples of his firms efforts protecting those freedoms every day.
While www.Holycoast.com blogger Rick Moore covered the event with photos and a brief video clip I wish someone had shot the entire 90 minutes plus of this event so that we could show proof that there were no mob scenes with violence or racism. Didn’t happen. In fact, every 15 minutes or thereabouts, Mark invited a middle aged man wearing an Obama T-shirt to use the microphone. Mark said “you are more than welcome to come and speak.” Each time the man declined.
Mark opened saying this isn’t about black and white. This is not a racist event. In fact he said the first person we will go after is a white Republican foreigner named Arnold Schwarzenegger. Another person he criticized was Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens pointing out her comments on our having 2,000 empty beds in our jail system while releasing 500 inmates into our neighborhoods. Some of his facts were quoted during the sheriff candidate forum held at the Casta Del Sol Republican Club meeting that I published last month.
Between speaker’s we listened to patriotic music of Charlie Daniels and Lee Greenwood.
42nd CD Congressman Gary Miller’s office provided 600 pocket size copies of the Constitution which disappeared rather quickly.
Other event speakers included: OC Sheriff candidate Bill Hunt, Assembly Candidate Don Wagner, Central Committee candidates former acting sheriff Jack Anderson and Lynda Barnes, current Mission Viejo council member Cathy Schlicht, Lake Forest council member Marsha Rudolph, former Mission Viejo mayor Gail Reavis, CRA Vice President Scott Voigts and current SRA president Matt Corrigan and Congressman Miller’s local District Director Steve Thornton. Each of them encouraged the crowd to become active in taking this energy to a higher level of political participation.
While I know many of the participants, it was awesome to see so many new faces in the crowd. American patriots coming together to share their frustration and willingness to take time out of their lives to send a message. The participants were encouraged by the many cars and trucks that passed by blowing their horns and waving signs and flags out their windows.
At one point I approached local watchdog Joe Holtzman speaking to Bill Hunt. I asked Joe if he questioned Bill on one of his biggest public safety concerns. This morning Joe reconfirmed that he indeed asked Bill that if elected sheriff would he get Sheriff Deputies off sidewalks with their motorcycles which violate the vehicle code.
Quoting Joe Bill said “he would certainly follow a policy of getting them off the sidewalk following the CA vehicle Code CVC 21663.” Joe continued saying that Bill understands the problem as it relates to pedestrians.
As this event was held right across the street from our city library and city hall I was surprised that Cathy Schlicht was the only member of our current city council to attend. Note: I did speak to former Mission Viejo mayor Bill Craycraft who also attended last year’s gathering.
I will give councilman Dave Leckness a pass in that he was working on a multi page rush project for me yesterday. As they say action speaks louder than words. While Trish Kelley can take time out to go to a spelling bee yet skip a patriotic event in your home town is a reflection on priorities, especially when speakers travel to Mission Viejo from Sacramento.
Yes, Cathy Schlicht was there. In fact I introduced her to the Register Reporter who interviewed her after interviewing Brad Dacus. I guess Cathy joins me on the Register black list in that you will not find word one of that exchange in today’s Register.
To paraphrase Mark’s closing comment to the participants he said that “at the end of the day, unless we convert our anger into activism..get involved, walk precincts, etc., we will miss sending our message to those in elected office who have created the current mess we need to clean up.”
While I was able to get a few photos when cars were not whizzing by, let me simply request your going to Rick Moore’s link which follows where you can see some of his photo’s along with a very brief video. In fact, I am included. Where’s Waldo is all I will add.
Great report — factual and accurate. I enjoyed Rick Moore’s photos and article on HolyCoast. Kudos to all the Tea Party folks. I loved the sign, “Dump the IncumBUTTS.”
The council members who didn’t show up would not get any votes from the Tea Party group anyway. Besides, there was no “free food” for them. No food, no interest.
If the event is a Republican or conservative cause the OCR reporters don’t like, the number will be downplayed. Some of the “suits” at OCR might be Libertarians, but their reporters are liberals. Just ask them — they’re proud of it.
Beyond the 600 to 700 people lining the streets on Thursday, the other participants were in vehicles driving by. Everyone there — standing on the corners or driving by — saw that the rally was well attended.
Despite liberal media reports, the Tea Party movement is not dying.
Order your “IncumBUTTS” Banner here…………
That’s… that’s just brilliant, #1 & 4.
I’m speechless.
Spelling Bees are much more important than what those flag waving traffic blockers are doing.
Besides Trish Kelley needs the expense money she gets from the city of Mission Viejo for the 2.7 mile round trip from her home to the school where the Spelling Bee was held. After all she needs the MONEY.
Here’s an interesting take on the Tea Baggers, from Andrew Sullivan;
The Daily Dish:
The last week has seen a lot of analysis of the Tea Party Movement. It’s a Republican rump, according to the NYT, and a national majority, according to Pat Caddell. My view is that it’s so amorphous that you can slice it any which way. A minority of Americans seem enraged by the Obama administration in ways that are hard to explain. But many Americans also retain a healthy distrust of government and debt (even though they keep voting for lower taxes and more spending). They have a real point. Over the last decade, it is surely evident that big government has come back with a vengeance. And one has to grasp that part of the tea-party anger is pent up from the Bush years. Most of the rational tea-partiers accept that the GOP has been as bad – if not worse – than the Democrats on spending, borrowing and the size and scope of government in recent years. They repressed this anger during the Bush years out of partisan loyalty. Now, they’re taking it all out on the newbie. It’s both fair and also unfair.
It’s fair because Obama is a liberal who believes government can and should help the poor and disadvantaged and has proven it by providing access to insurance for the working poor. But it’s unfair because Obama’s fiscal and governing record is massively distorted by the impact of the bank meltdown, the steep revenue-killing recession, and the stimulus. Until its last months, the Bush administration could claim no such excuses for its awful debt-management. The big Bush jumps in discretionary spending, the big leap in entitlements under the unfunded Medicare D program, the long nation-building wars put off-budget, and the huge claims for executive power dominant in the first term: all these are far more damning to my mind than Obama’s pragmatism in grappling with an economic collapse or even the healthcare reform, which at least formally claims to reduce the deficit and pay for itself (unlike Bush’s Medicare-D). Even the protests at the manner in which the health reform was passed are disingenuous. The Medicare-D process – involving holding the vote open for hours and brutal arm-twisting on the floor of the House – was far, far more cynical and brutal.
And this is why, despite my own deep suspicion of big government, I remain unmoved by the tea-partiers. Their partisanship and cultural hostility to Obama are far more intense, it seems to me, than their genuine proposals to reduce spending and taxation.
You know I was just thinking last night, right before I dropped off to sleep, that if a movement similar to the Teabaggers had emerged during the early years of the Bush administration that I might have been at least interested enough to have read their brochures and even possibly to attend one of their rallies.
But if that group had also decided to call themselves the Tea Party I would have NEVER been able to take them seriously, as it would have shown an incredible lack of historic perspective and demonstrated a terminal case of ignorance on their part.
However if they had chosen another, more palatable, name I might have been able to hang out with them in their protests against the Bush administration’s government expansion, their illegal wars, the dumbing down of our eduction systems, the suspension of habeas corpus, and the fact that they were spying on citizens of this country.
Yet if I had managed to go along with the movement at least that far, on the day that I saw signs calling Colin Powell a N****R I would have been finished with them. The same would hold true if I found myself standing next to somebody whose sign, or rhetoric, called for the overthrow of our government. Or if there were signs and protesters calling for violence against George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, or any other members of the Bush administration. If I saw those signs, and realized that the other protesters did not find them offensive, I would have known I was not standing among people who shared my values. I would have simply walked away despite the fact that, on many issues, we were in agreement.
The facts are that those sentiments course through the veins of the Teabagger movement, and to me that makes any salient points they might make suspect. If hate for Obama is their primary motivator, than they are not a “movement”, they are a mob. And mobs are forces of destruction, not forces for construction
Anonster.
Sorry that I didn’t call you to offer a ride to the Mission Viejo event where you would have seen patriots from 8 to 88 years old on the crowded corners. Many of these people did not know each other yet were united to express their disappointment with our gevernment. And let me add many were independent voters.
Mobs. I have been in a mob scene where NJ National Guard troops were shooting from rooftops. Perhaps you watched the Watts riots in LA that were around the same time. That’s a mob scene.
Larry,
PATRIOTS??? Not in my book, most these people are a bunch of idiotic crybabies, who strut around and complain about “losing their freedoms” when what they REALLY LOST was the ELECTION. These “patriots” only “love” their country when Republicans are in power, otherwise they piss and moan about the “government” and threaten sedition.
These “patriots” (aka poor saps) are just jumping through the hoops Faux News has set out for them, it’s sad really, most of the “baggers” I spoke to on Thursday are the very folks who will benefit from “OBAMA’S SOCIALIST AGENDA”, they’re just too dumb to know it.
This may be a harsh assessment, but the proof will come soon enough; WHERE WILL THE TEA BAGGERS STAND ON WALL STREET REFORM? They’ve been OUTRAGED by the bailouts, but will they back reform? Not if Faux News and the Republicans have their way, these folks can be tricked into believing UP IS DOWN and that’s what they’re counting on.
Fair weather “Patriots”, I give you the words of one of the Tea Party’s BIGGEST supporters;
“I think the bailout is the right thing do. The “REAL STORY” is the $700 billion that you’re hearing about now is not only, I believe, necessary, it is also not nearly enough, and all of the weasels in Washington know it.” – Glenn Beck, 9/22/08
“He’s (Obama) reminded us over and over again that President Bush was in office when Tarp [sic] bailout happened, well, we were all against it..”
Glenn Beck 4/06/10
Larry,
MORE FYI;
Tax Day Fools
by John Avlon
Tea Party supporters applaud during a Tea Party rally in Boston, April 14, 2010. (Darren McCollester / Getty Images) Do the thousands of protesters descending on Washington for Tax Day protests know that taxes have gone down?
Thursday is Tax Day, and more than 750 Tea Party-inspired protests are scheduled to be held across the country, including the Sarah Palin-helmed “People’s Tax Revolt” on the Washington Mall.
Paying taxes has never been anyone’s idea of a good time, but a populist revolt casting President Obama as a socialist King George III is a bit misplaced. While there is ample reason to be angry at unsustainable levels of government spending and fearful of future tax hikes, here’s an inconvenient truth: Americans are paying less in federal taxes this year.
The Obama administration can claim that its president signed the largest single tax cut in American history—although no one’s going to mistake President Obama for a supply-sider.
That’s not all. According to a new report issued by Citizens Against Government Waste, pork barrel spending is on the decline as well—under Democrats’ control of Congress.
Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America. By John Avlon. 304 Pages. Beast Books. $15.95. But don’t expect those facts to get in the way of spleen-venting sound bites that call for a new American revolution.
Our political debates have become increasingly dishonest, distorted by constant partisan spin. But as my math-whiz friends tell me, numbers don’t lie. So here are the facts as they relate to 2009’s tax burden.
To date, as the courageously consistent fiscal conservative economist Bruce Bartlett states in the pages of Forbes magazine, “No taxpayer anywhere in the country had his or her taxes increased as a consequence of Obama’s policies.” In fact, as Bartlett attests, “federal taxes are very considerably lower by every measure since Obama became president.”
Indeed, 98.6 percent of taxpaying working families saw tax cuts in the first year of the Obama administration, according to the dependable Nate Silver over at fivethirtyeight.com. More than one-third—or $288 billion—of the much-protested $787 stimulus bill was in the form of temporary tax cuts or tax credits, most geared toward individuals in admittedly small increments. That’s why the Obama administration can claim that its president signed the largest single tax cut in American history—although no one’s going to mistake President Obama for a supply-sider.
Because out-of-control government spending is the stated No. 1 issue for most Tea Party protesters, Wednesday’s release of the annual “Pig Book” is worth special mention. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) is one of the most vigilant watchdogs of wasteful spending, and this year’s report showed surprising signs of optimism. Overall pork-barrel projects have declined 10.2 percent since the last fiscal year, and the cost of these projects has decreased 15.5 percent, from $19.6 billion in fiscal year 2009 to $16.5 billion this year. The high-water mark for pork-barrel spending took place in fiscal year 2006 and helped lead to Republicans losing control of Congress. CAGW credits “greater transparency” for the reductions, and its spokeswoman, Leslie Paige, concluded, “We’re going in the right direction.”
Anonster.
We can all read someone else’s published text. How do you really feel?
You might make it easier for all of us by simply providing the link.
The jury is still out as it relates to tax increases and decreases.
And as our president continues to offer more benefits for some where is he going to find the money to pay for it?
Larry,
“The jury is still out as it relates to tax increases and decreases.”
NO Larry, the jury IS NOT still out, Americans got their TAXES CUT by Obama, you can defend the motivations of your misguided and fair weather “patriot” crybabies, but DON’T LIE about the facts.
“How do you really feel?”
See comment #9
anonster. Are you telling us that the top rate on federal income taxes is not going up 12 percent next year? From 35% to 39.8%. You call that a tax cut?
OH. You do not make enough to qualify for the rights to pay a higher tax. The point is that anyone can play with numbers. For those who do not pay taxes and receive a stimulus rebate they benefit from the Obama administration’s leveling the playing field on the back of those who do.
It’s called “redistribution of wealth.”
So was Don Wagner there with his wife or his girlfriend?
Concerned. As I do not recall your having posted before let me recap our Juice guide lines.
No offensive language, no personal attacks and stay on the topic thread.
You have just violated two of our three simple rules.
While you are welocme to enter the debate, the above comment will not be tolerated.
Larry,
Don’t bother with anonster, his mind is as closed as the doors to the businesses his party is forcing out of California. He doesn’t care about facts – like Obama’s record and vomit-inducing deficit, or the fact that EVERYONE’s taxes have already gone up (tobacco, etc.), and will go up when he lets the Bush tax cuts expire, not to mention when Obamacare gets into full swing and cap-and-tax is rammed through. He would rather smear and degrade the patriots that exercised their First Amendment rights peacefully than address the real problems our country faces. It’s typical rhetoric from his side of the aisle. Oh, and anonster, I guess you missed the recent poll that showed that 40% of Tea Partiers are independents and Democrats, or the new Pew poll showing that 80% of people don’t trust our government – I’m guessing a few Democrats are even included, but I’m just speculating. So, as much as you’d like to think, it isn’t just a bunch of Republicans who are mad about losing the election. But why let pesky facts get in the way of a good story?
Newbie,
No need to warn Larry, he and I have been sparring for the last couple of years.
“..Obama’s record and vomit-inducing deficit..”
Facts are facts chump, and just because you don’t like them doesn’t make them any less factual.
Obama’s record on tax cuts-read it and weep.
From POLITIFACT;
The stimulus, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, included tax cuts for many Americans, Obama said.
“We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses,” Obama said. “We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.”
Democrats applauded, while Republicans were silent for the most part. In one of the unscripted moments of the night, Obama looked at the Republican side of the room, smiled and said, “I thought I’d get some applause on that one.”
Here, we wanted to check Obama’s statement that he cut taxes for 95 percent of working families.
The key word in his statement is “working.” Obama’s claim is based on a tax cut intended to offset payroll taxes. Under the stimulus bill, single workers got $400, and working couples got $800. The Internal Revenue Service issued new guidelines to reduce withholdings for income tax, so many workers saw a small increase in their checks in April 2009.
The tax cut was part of Obama’s campaign promises. During the campaign, Obama said he wanted $500 for each worker and $1,000 for working couples. Since the final number was a bit less than he promised, we rated his promise a Compromise on our Obameter, where we rate Obama’s campaign promises for fulfillment.
During the campaign, the independent Tax Policy Center researched how Obama’s tax proposals would affect workers. It concluded 94.3 percent of workers would receive a tax cut under Obama’s plan based on the tax credit to offset payroll taxes. According to the analysis, the people who wouldn’t get a tax cut are those who make more than $250,000 for couples or $200,000 for a single person. Obama said he intended to raise taxes on those high earners, a promise he reiterated during the State of the Union, and that revenue would offset the stimulus tax cut.
Because the stimulus act did give that broad-based tax cut to workers, we rate Obama’s statement True.
“Vomit-inducing deficit”, again, read it and weep.
Also from Politifact;
In a spirited and unscripted debate with the House GOP, President Barack Obama said Republicans were wrong to portray him as running up large deficits.
Speaking at a retreat for House Republicans in Baltimore on Jan. 29, 2010, Obama was particularly critical of a question from Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. Hensarling asked Obama, “You are soon to submit a new budget, Mr. President. Will that new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25 percent of our economy?”
“The fact of the matter is,” Obama replied, “is that when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion — $1.3 trillion. So when you say that suddenly I’ve got a monthly deficit that’s higher than the annual deficit left by Republicans, that’s factually just not true, and you know it’s not true. And what is true is that we came in already with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I had passed any law. What is true is, we came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade.”
We checked Hensarling’s claim in a separate item. Here, we’ll look at Obama’s claim that he came into office with a $1.3 trillion deficit and $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade.
On Jan. 7, 2009, two weeks before Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the deficit for fiscal year 2009 was projected to be $1.2 trillion. The 10-year projection was estimated to be about $3.1 trillion. So Obama’s number was very close on the 2009 deficit — he said $1.3 trillion — but substantially different from the 10-year projection — he said $8 trillion.
There are two reasons why he differs from the CBO. On the difference between the $1.2 trillion and the $1.3 trillion, the Obama administration credited a small portion of spending on its watch to policies of the previous administration. The reason for this is that the federal government runs on a fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, so Bush and Obama technically split responsibility for 2009 spending.
The large difference on the 10-year projection has to do with Bush administration tax cuts. The CBO creates its estimates based on current law, which means the CBO assumes that the Bush tax cuts will end in 2010 and everyone will start paying higher taxes in 2011 and going forward. The Obama administration, on the other hand, assumed in its baseline that those tax cuts would be renewed.
Economists we spoke with — Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition, and Brian Riedl, lead budget analyst of the conservative Heritage Foundation — both said they believe the White House approach is more realistic because it assumes current policy will continue.
So the CBO’s estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don’t quibble with the White House methodology. It does highlight, however, that when it comes to budget projections, people can have differences of opinion about what to include. In any budget projection there is room for interpretation, but it seems reasonable to assume for a baseline that the Bush tax cuts will continue. Obama’s numbers are fairly solid, so we rate his statement Mostly True.
Larry,
“anonster. Are you telling us that the top rate on federal income taxes is not going up 12 percent next year? From 35% to 39.8%. You call that a tax cut?”
Larry, what part of 95% of people don’t you understand, well, let me explain it to you, 100%-95%=5%, YES the TOP 5% of tax payers will see their taxes go up. It’s about time too, average american workers have been losing ground ever since your beloved Reagan began cutting taxes for the upper class and what have those tax cuts done for the country? Let’s see, that would be deficits, debt, job losses and an ever widening gap between the rich and the poor.
“OH. You do not make enough to qualify for the rights to pay a higher tax.”
Oh, but I do.
Larry, since you’re a “bagger”, tell us, where do you stand on Wall Street reform?
Sticks and stones anonster,
Since you’re such a numbers guy, this blows your attack of Larry out of the water: http://www.journal-news.com/news/nation-world-news/will-you-pay-more-when-bush-tax-cuts-expire–646402.html?bigName=&bigPhotog=&bigCap=How+the+expiration+of+President+Bush's+tax+cuts+might+affect+you+in+2011&bigDeclCap=&bigCred=&bigUrl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ohio-share.coxnewsweb.com%2fmultimedia%2fdynamic%2f00668%2fddn041110taxesgd_668287c.jpg&superSizeImage=y
That would be taxes raised on everyone except those few who fall in the 15% bracket, including those in the 10% bracket (the lowest bracket) getting a 50% hit up to 15%. A bit more than 5% now isn’t it? Ok, I’ll preempt your next insult-laden response. If you think Congress is going to approve Obama’s budget with only the taxes going up on the two highest brackets, I have a bridge for you to buy in Brooklyn.
Newbie,
From your article;
“If I were in Las Vegas, I would probably say the smart money would be on tax cuts extended for most people except for high-income people,’’ said Gerald Prante, an economist with the Tax Foundation, a conservative organization in Washington.
The battle on Capitol Hill this year over whether to extend the tax cuts should be another divisive exchange between Republicans and Democrats. But unlike many struggles which end up in a stalemate, this time neither party wants gridlock because no action will mean tax increases across the board.
President Barack Obama wants Congress to extend the lower tax rates for individuals earning less than $200,000 a year and families making less than $250,000 annually.”
And your point is?
My point is that the tax cuts are going to expire at this point. There are no true facts, other than sheer speculation. When they expire, taxes will go up on nearly everyone.
My second point is I note that you have ignored Obamacare, cap-and-tax, the tobacco tax (already raised by Obama, there goes that campaign promise), and the myriad of other taxes that have been/will be raised when Obama is done with his agenda.
Newbie,
Sorry, my tea leaves have gone cold, I can only address what is.
Well, since you are so fond of Politifact, how about what your tea leaves say about this:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/515/no-family-making-less-250000-will-see-any-form-tax/
Newbie,
“The health care law that Obama signed on March 23, 2010, raises taxes on some things regardless of income. Two taxes in particular stand out. A tax on indoor tanning services begins this year. And in 2014, people will have to pay a fine, levied through their income taxes, if they don’t have health insurance. Neither of these taxes are pegged to income.”
Is this what all the Tea Baggin'” was about? Oooh, a tanning tax, the sky is falling!
Anonster, you are so damn insensitive. I don’t think you appreciate how tanning services hold the body politic together.
Do you want to turn on your TV someday and John Boehner is looking like Julianne Moore?
Vern,
I think the Dems underestimated the impact the “tanning tax’ would have, this was like a shot straight through the heart for Serror Palin and all those pasty-white “baggers”, no wonder they’re outraged.
There is a terriffic graph on the following link showing the growing gap between the rich and the poor;
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/19/849018/-Tax-the-rich-until-their-freakin-eyes-bleed
Vern, this would make a great post and it speaks for itself.
Here’s yer graph… took me a while to figure out what it meant. The top line shows how rich the VERY RICH (top .01 percent, which means top ten-thousandths) are compared to the rest of us; and the bottom line shows what their tax rate has been – looks like for some reason, the richer they get the less percentage of tax they pay. MORAL tax ’em till their eyes bleed!
anonster, you always provide so much good information in your comments. You really should start posting on this blog!
Reality Checker,
Thanks for the kind words, and as to posting, well, I already spend waaay too much time on this blog.