Monday, April 20, 2009

Newspaper blames Tea Party protesters for national debt?

The liberal media continues to denigrate the spontaneous Tea Party tax protests that sprang up across the country on April 15.

The latest newspaper to take cheap shots at the protesters is The Philadelphia Inquirer, which comes to the idiotic conclusion that "The deficit problem didn't begin with the economic-stimulus plan. Nor will it be solved without public pressure, including tea parties."

Come again? How did the half-million citizen protesters cause the national debt? That's one of the many unanswered questions in the convoluted editorial that tries its hardest to absolve the Obama administration of any involvement in the fiscal abyss it has helped create over the past three months.

The federal government has approved nearly $13 trillion in new spending without any coherent plan on how that money will ever be repaid.

Barack Obama, the agent of "change" that so many voters supported with the hope that he would put a stop to the free-spending ways of the Bush administration, is setting records for deficits in just his first three months in office.

So let's pick on the Tea Party protesters, shall we?

The schizophrenic editorial recounts some of the basic problems with runaway spending, but then blames ordinary American citizens for protesting the insane fiscal policies of Congress and the Obama administration.

"And anti-tax protesters don't talk enough about what spending they'd like to cut. The Pentagon's half-trillion-dollar budget? Government pensions or Medicare's prescription-drug program?"

It's not the job of ordinary citizens to figure out where to cut defense and government entitlement. Obama wanted the job. Let's see him do the work. And let's see these liberal newspapers stop attacking people who disagree with "The Chosen One" and start holding the free-spending liberals accountable for a change.

If you're a glutton for punishment and want to read the full editorial, check it out at the Inquirer's Web site.

No comments: