Thousands Prepare To Descend On Boston

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Sheridan Folger, Co-Founder Foundation for Conservative Solutions 603-534-7932 executivedirecto2@letsgetthisright.com

THOUSANDS PREPARED TO DESCEND ON BOSTON FOR TAX DAY TEA PARTY

BOSTON-- While there are over 2000 tea parties planned around the nation for this coming tax day, April 15, one of the largest and certainly the most symbolic will be held in Boston. Thousands of participants are anticipated to gather to hear some of the nation's leading public policy leaders address why our federal government's policies of excessive economic micromanagement, punitive taxation, and unprecedented wasteful spending are proving damaging to American freedom.

The Boston Tea Party on Tax Day will be held:

Date: Wednesday April 15, 2009
Time: 11am ET to 9pm ET (speakers can be heard from noon to 2pm ET)
Location: Massachusetts State House at 24 Beacon Street, Boston

From noon to 2pm, the following speakers will address the Boston Tax Day Tea Party, which will be emceed by WRKO Radio host Todd Feinburg:

**Jim Stergios, Executive Director, Pioneer Institute
**Massachusetts State Senator Bob Hedlund (R-Weymouth)
**Barry Hinckley, Fair Tax
**David Tuerck, Beacon Hill Institute
**Carla Howell, Center for Small Government
**Chip Faulkner, Citizens for Limited Taxation
**Michael Johns, national conservative leader and former White House speechwriter and Heritage Foundation policy analyst
**Brad Marston, Foundation for Conservative Solutions
**Sheridan Folger, Sovereignty Alliance

The event, which is expected to feature prominently in national media coverage of the Tax Day Tea Parties, is open to the public and media.

Credible ABC Journalist

Since much of today's media has such a blatant school-girl crush on President Obama, it is important to not only point out the shmoes who can't resist telling America that President Obama gives them a, 'thrill up their leg;' it is also important to point out those few journalists who are credible. National Review did this in their article Jake Tapper Isn't Letting Go. The article not only points out that ABC's Jake Tapper was virtually the only network journalist willing to write an article critical of then candidate Obama, but also that he is now pretty much the only one willing to ask Press Secretary Gibbs a tough question during White House briefings. For many Tapper was the first to show Robert Gibbs as a sub-par press secretary when Gibbs refused to take Tapper's questions about transparency seriously, as shown in the clip below. National Review did all of us who are fed up with the over-the-top media bias a service by not only highlighting Tapper as a solid competent member of the media, but also by reminding us that one can't just complain about those who do a poor job, and that it may be even more important that we applaud and encourage those who are competent than it is to gripe about those whose bias is so obsurd and obvious.

Recognizing a Professional Journalist - Katherine Morrison

Democrats Oppose Transparency

All but three Senate Democrats voted against an amendment, "To increase transparency by requiring five days of public review of legislation before passage by the Senate." This simply states that bills that are rushed through the Senate would have to garner 60 votes only if they had not been posted online for five days. The irony of the Democrat's opposition is this measure is taken directly from the Obama presidential campaign. President Obama promised more transparency in the government by posting bills online for citizens to review prior to a vote. Apparently all Democratic Senators except, Senators Bayh, Nelson, and McCaskill disagree with this increased transparency. This measure doesn't exclude a majority vote on any bill it simply protects against slipping measures into a bill without an adequate review, a protection against situations like the AIG bonus fiasco. It would be interesting to hear the individual Senator's reasons for opposing transparency, and if the President is planning to stick to his campaign promise of putting bills online for review prior to a vote.

More information on the Cornyn Transparency Amendment

Democrats Vote Against Transparency

--------------------

Purple People Vote

Broad Side of the Barn - An Independent Call

Line Item Veto to Cut Pork - McCain, Ryan & Feingold

---

Feingold, McCain, & Ryan Line Item Veto to Cut Waste

Evan Bayh Opposes Omnibus Spending Bill

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana wrote an Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday coming out against the huge appropriations bill that would increase spending eight percent from last year. His article Deficits and Fiscal Credibility is definitely worth a read, below is an excerpt.

This week, the United States Senate will vote on a spending package to fund the federal government for the remainder of this fiscal year. The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 is a sprawling, $410 billion compilation of nine spending measures that lacks the slightest hint of austerity from the federal government or the recipients of its largess.

The Senate should reject this bill. If we do not, President Barack Obama should veto it.

The omnibus increases discretionary spending by 8% over last fiscal year's levels, dwarfing the rate of inflation across a broad swath of issues including agriculture, financial services, foreign relations, energy and water programs, and legislative branch operations. Such increases might be appropriate for a nation flush with cash or unconcerned with fiscal prudence, but America is neither.

Drafted last year, the bill did not pass due to Congress's long-standing budgetary dysfunction and the frustrating delays it yields in our appropriations work. Since then, economic and fiscal circumstances have changed dramatically, which is why the Senate should go back to the drawing board. The economic downturn requires new policies, not more of the same.

---

Senator Evan Bayh Rejects Bloated Appropriations Bill

Pro-Growth is Most Fair Option

Unfortunately, many in America are losing track of the logistics of the economy and are getting caught up in emotion. People are angry about bailouts and white collar crooks running ponzi schemes and are becoming resentful towards big business and the wealthy. Yet we risk losing site of the real goal of turning the economy around when emotion and arguments about fairness start start trumping logic and math. The reason not to raise taxes on the rich, businesses, and capital gains is not because one loves, hates, or feels indifferently about wealthy people. The reason not to raise taxes on those of means is because they are the ones able to create jobs, and invest in the businesses that are so desperately needed right now. The argument that the rich should pay more because that is what is fair ignores the fact that, particularly in a struggling economy, increasing taxes slows growth. Consequently economic recovery slows, and that is fair to no one. In reality when the economy slumps those just getting by pay check to pay check suffer the most. The rich may not be as rich as before, but they're still rich. Those being laid off and struggling to pay their bills are hurt the most in a prolonged recession, and implementing policies that hinder growth is not fair to anyone.

Also, small business owners are being grouped into the 'rich' category in an unfair manner. If a small business owner makes $250,000 a year that becomes a rather average income if he or she has to pay two to three employees salaries with that income. Also if they are trying to grow their business, it is likely a chunk of that income is being put right back into their business. That isn't the life of the highly privileged wealthy class. We'd be well served by taking the emotion and morality judgments out of economic policy, and simply look for policies that are pro-growth.

Larry Kudlow and Donald Luskin voice their frustration about the current policies that are anti-growth. Certainly, not unemotional in their criticism, they point out why a pro-growth strategy is simply the most fair economic strategy for all Americans.

---

Pro Growth is What is Truly Fair

New Hampshire HCR 6: House votes to "Die" rather than "Live Free"

New Hampshire Representatives Vote To "Die" rather than "Live Free"

Click Here To See Pictures From The Event

In what can only be described as a loathsome act of partisanship at approximately 11:00am this morning New Hampshire Legislatures voted
(216-150) not to remove NH HCR6 from ITL. NH HCR6 was Rep Don Itse's
amendment initiated as a 'reminder' for the Federal government that the powers
they possess are in fact few and limited. The resolution re-affirmed

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE ENTIRE UPDATE!! AND THE PICS!!