It has been over a month since my last post and I really do apologize for my laziness and irresponsibility and hereby pledge to post much more often. Now bear with me as I brush off the rust in the first few posts. I will be back to myself very soon, I promise.
Much has happened since the last time I talked at length about anything. The Democrats managed to pass healthcare without a single Republican vote in either the House or the Senate, President Obama has agreed with the Russians to further draw down our nation's nuclear stockpile and Poland has experienced a horrible tragedy following the plane crash that killed off most of the country's best and brightest conservatives. I plan to address these as well as a few other issues in the coming weeks. Today however, I would like to address a growing concern of mine, this being the mis-representation and at times outright mocking that many liberals have engaged in in regards to the growing Tea Party movement.
Let me first and foremost make clear that I am in no way associated with any Tea Parties. Nor am I a Glen Beck watching or Sarah Palin listening drone. And once again, I am not a mouthpiece for the GOP. However I do point out when either side does wrong, and in my opinion, liberals have wronged the tea parties and have done so at their own risk. Let me further elaborate on this.
President Obama has referred to them as "folks waving tea bags around," liberals such as Jon Stewart point out their tri-cornered hats, not necessarily the issues they bring up, even my own friend and rival at the Spun Zone tags his posts on the subject with the relative pejorative of "tea-bagging" but I tell you the reader that the Tea Party movement is not to be taken lightly nor should it be mocked to the degree that it has been. This is a truly grassroots movement without a clear leader at the forefront. It is, simply put, United States citizens that are fed up with the over reach of the Democrats in the past year and a half. When this group, that is characterized by liberal media as a fringe element, touts 20% of the electorate among its members nearly half of which are independent and Democrat, President Obama should be on notice not jabbing one-liners towards them. President Obama less than two years since winning his election with a whopping 365 electoral votes has managed to re-invigorate the conservative movement which many had predicted was so utterly destroyed by the '06 and '08 election cycles that the Republican Party would become a regional party for an entire generation. A year after his inauguration, a Republican is occupying a seat in the Senate which had become essentially a possession of the Kennedy family for over a half century and he is in very real danger of losing a House that the Democrats had just conquered four years ago. Something, somewhere went horribly wrong on the way to hope and change. "Yes we can" has been replaced by "what are you doing?"
For one thing, as noted by your humble writer before, the Democrats misinterpreted the last two election cycles. America is a center right nation. The electorate voted the Republicans out of office more so than they voted the Democrats into it. Democrats won convincingly not because the people were calling for universal healthcare or cap-and-trade, but because we the people wanted to restore balance to the equation. Instead the Democrats came in guns blazing attempting to do accomplish everything on their agenda. They were so pompous when they managed to secure 60 votes in the Senate that they decided to forgo campaign pledges of true bipartisanship in both houses. I still cannot get over the fact that the Healthcare overhaul, possibly the most consequential legislation since the Great Society or perhaps even the Civil Rights Act was passed without a single Republican vote in either chamber. I am truly astounded by the Democrats. And then when Tea Parties sprout up gathering widespread support, President Obama in all his glory decides to mock them saying this last tax day that they should thank him for lower taxes. This either shows a disconnect between the president and his constituents or a blatant disregard for the honest issues expressed by said groups. Most members of the tea parties would point out that the very fact that no one is paying taxes while our deficits go up amid continued spending projects. This only serves to underline the problems of Washington and paint it as bubble that does not itself exist in reality. Either way the Democrats come off as the elitist, disconnected party which is bad for them.
It is exactly because of this kind of attitude in Washington that Tea Parties emerged. While Washington lives in a dreamy utopia, the rest of us look in shock as public debt is crawling over 50% of our GDP. We are shackling ourselves to a massive beast of a healthcare plan which has yet to be seen the exact costs that will be associated with it. And now we are considering cap and trade again as well as over regulation of finance, both of which will have immense negative effects on the recovery of the economy. All while unemployment remains at around 10%. And after all of this we are told that the Tea Parties are the ones that have no sense of reality. After the actions taken by the Democrats in the short time that they have been in power, I am led to say the very same things about them. The Tea Parties are angry and deservedly so. I am not saying that the Republicans were anymore right 5 years ago, but at least they made at least some attempt for bipartisanship and they never mocked the left at least never nearly to the same degree as liberals do now.
In the end, we should not be surprised if in November we see a new Speaker of the House emerge. It seems to me that the Democrats either really hate themselves or simply do not know how to maintain a majority. There is no other explanation for what they have been doing since Day One.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Question: are you referring to the trading of pollution emission rights when you say "cap-and-trade"? If so, I don't think that such a system would have a downward pull on the economy. We have to realize that with every challenge in business, new opportunities for innovation exist that can actually improve the economy. For instance, at the beginning of the 19th century, the British feared that the abolition of the slave trade would ruin the British economy. Instead, it opened the door to increased mechanization in agriculture which resulted in the industrial revolution. Increased economic pressures to reduce pollution might create a strong green-tech industry which could boost the American economy.
ReplyDeletePolls have shown that members of the Tea Party also happen to be well-off financially and are more likely than not to say that too much has been made of Black problems over the last 20 years. Also, these people complain about government programs but still want to keep Medicare and Social Security. It's the naive message and hypocracy that causes the mockery of the Tea Party.
ReplyDeleteWe are in a recession, and most economists agree that cutting spending in a recession is a BAD IDEA. As for taxes, Obama passed the largest tax cut in American history. When both of those are taken into account, the Tea Party truly does look foolish.
I'm sure not all people in the Tea Party are like this. But the fact is, that these people weren't doing anything when Bush destroyed a budget surplus. Why now?
The GOP would be smart to treat the Tea Party as what it is. A reactionary, naive group.
Addressing the first comment: It is never intelligent to introduce a massive new tax in the middle of a recession. It is true that new challenges keep business on its feet and provide completely new reasons for innovation. However, when unemployment is at 10% and non full-time unemployment is at more like 20% We cannot impose a tax as large as cap and trade would be, this would absolutely cripple the economy.
ReplyDeleteAnd the second point: Did you read the entire post? Because I mentioned this. How exactly does the Tea Party look foolish when they protest the fact that increasing spending whilst cutting taxes will bankrupt us. Is there something wrong with the this logic. Does taking in less money while spending more ever cut deficits? You are naive for saying that.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am sorry, but when 90% of a group is white, you will undoubtedly get skewed results in which sizable factions do not understand the plight of black people. By the same logic, if a group was 90% black in composition and a sizable minority were part of thee Black Panthers or the Nation of Islam, would we characterize the entire group as racist? Of course not.
Bush did indeed destroy the budget surplus, but this was in a time of war. No one is defending him for cutting taxes in a time of war either. He was wrong and I will attest to that, but it is highly irresponsible to not heed criticism when it is indeed valid. Are you saying that the main Tea Party concerns over massive spending, running up deficits and corruption are entirely invalid because some of the members happen to not want to give up Social Security? Seriously? Besides most are in favor of reforming Social Security and Medicare with raising the minimum age and cutting benefits. The left makes the mis characterizes these people as not wanting any reform whilst not willing to give anything up. This is simply not the case. Most agree that healthcare does need reforming as does Social Security, they simply do not agree with President Obama's plan.
And finally, this is indeed a reactionary group. But the fact that it has swelled to such an impressive size and grows daily is a testament to its own legitimacy.
What is perhaps missing in your analysis of the Tea Party is the fact that it is 89% white and that nearly 60% of it is represented by those that consider themselves members of the GOP. (Having the remainder consider themselves Dem or Independent is hardly a cross-section of America.) The truth is, the Tea Partiers hardly reflect the "everyman" sensibilities that they so often espouse. They are also mostly middle-class Americans.
ReplyDeleteIronically, Obama was correct to speak of the fact that they were not paying very much in taxes: a recent report just showed that the middle class paid fewer taxes than any other block of people.
Also, as far as Healthcare costs: the entire plan, over the next 10 years, will cost roughly the same (or less) than how much we spend in our Defense budget over the next TWO years. Why are we so quick to fork over megabucks to fight enemies that are other people, and yet so hesitant to pay even a fraction as much to fight the enemies of sickness, disease, and poverty? If you're worried about spending, maybe we can stand to save a couple billion dollars per year on bullets and guns and war?
I agree with you that the Tea Partiers shouldn't be generalized into a group of homophobic, uneducated white supremacists, but the truth of the matter is that it's a group of people that seem to throw around words like "socialist," "fascist," and "communist" as if the words were interchangeable--despite the fact that these are actually opposites in some cases.
Also, your claims of the left abandoning bipartisanship really are a chicken-or-the-egg situation: perhaps the reason bipartisanship has failed is because the Repubs have entrenched themselves behind party lines and are unwilling to compromise? Considering that the Healthcare plan can trace its ideas back to the...wait for it...REPUBLICAN response to Clintoncare back on the 90s, I'd have a hard time agreeing that the Left has abandoned bipartisanship. It tried so hard to get the Right on board that it used Republican ideas straight out of Mitt Romney's playbook!
Maybe the reason bipartisanship was more frequent back when the Repubs were in power is because the Left, as a minority, didn't try to filibuster every single bit of legislation?
I mean, it goes both ways. I am not trying to paint the Right as all bad and the Left as all good--but it's hard to argue that bipartisanship has failed because of only one party. The fact that the Repubs have toed the party line so strongly is a good sign that they are just as culpable.
And, let's be real, if Bush had introduced this plan in the height of his popularity, Republicans would have been all for it. They simply don't want Obama to succeed (as former Bush speechwriter David Frum tried to point out--and then got kicked out of his conservative thinktank for doing so).
The Tea Party has a lot of conflicting ideas, but the one thing they can all unite behind--Obama hatred. Which is why it's hard to take them seriously. When they so vitriolically hate a leader, the descent into hyperbole and pejorative rhetoric is quick and inevitable.
I just would note that it was actually a Tea Party member who first coined the term "Tea-bagging," with the rallying cry "Let's Teabag the White House," which I must admit conjures a rather amusing image.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, you should watch how you use your numbers. 20% of Americans consider themselves to support the Tea Party's platform (whatever that happens to be; they aren't necessarily that cohesive in that regard), only 4% actively participate in its activities. And I would suspect that a majority of the "Democrats" and "Independents" who support the Tea Party haven't voted for a Democrat in quite some time.
Furthermore, it is an election year, and Obama has every right to shoot back at the Tea Party. If they are going to be politically active, they shouldn't expect the president that they have been attacking since before he was even inaugurated (remember the Tea Party started before the Health Care bill was even proposed) to be overtly friendly.
I agree that it is not safe to throw a blanket statement over the Tea Party by calling them all racist or homophobic. However, racist and homophobic rhetoric has been featured over and over again in speeches at the Tea Party (often to thundering applause).
ReplyDeleteRecently, at a Tea party even in South Carolina, Willian Gheen gave a speech that I can only describe as ignorant and offensive. Here are some quotes from the speech I think illustrate
my point.
1. "These corrupt politicians and illegal aliens have something in common: lying, cheating, and stealing everything they can from the American taxpayer"
2. "Sometimes I wonder what it would take to make a person sell their own country out like that. And there's one thing that it could be, that I'm going to put out in the open here today...Senator Graham, you need to come forward and tell people about your alternative lifestyle and your homosexuality... I need to figure out why you're trying to sell out your own countrymen and I need to make sure you being gay isn't it."
Alright, if that isn't offensive speech, I don't know what is. Again, I acknowledge we can't judge the entire Tea party of the rhetoric of a few. However, when Tea party protests become a veritable safe zone for hate speech, I feel we have an obligation to ask a few questions. One of these questions is, "What kind of person goes to an event like this and applauds this blatantly bigoted speech?"
Good to see a new post!
ReplyDeleteWell, when it comes to the Healthcare reform,
As Austinsthoughts said, this healthcare law resembles very closely the one the Republicans proposed in the 90's as well as the one Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. That being said, it's hard to see why the Republicans oppose it so vehemently (other than trying to make Obama look bad).
As for the Tea Party, while some of their arguments are reasonable (having a balanced budget, opposition to big bailouts), I think the second poster was trying to say that during a recession, balancing the budget isn't necessarely going to be the best thing. It's true that raising taxes in a recession is bad for the economy, but so is cutting spending (as then the recession will get worse). Once the recession ends, then it would be wise to do what it takes to reign in the deficits (not saying we should be spending ourselves into oblivion now), but the Tea Party's demands for a complete spending freeze is not advisable in a poor economy such as this.
One issue I have with the Tea Party is that they are playing a large part in the "purge" of Republicans that they don't consider Conservative enough. They want to replace problem solvers like McCain and Crist, with ideologues that are running on a platform of "No cooperation." Getting rid of the moderates of the party in order to purify it into a right wing party is not a step towards bipartisanship. That's just a "my way or the highway" mentality, and it leads to further gridlock.
The Tea Party is not full of bad people at all. But their arguments, in this current time, are a little naive and I'm not sure that they'd work out so well in a recession. And while their viewpoints should be accepted into the debate, their efforts to run other viewpoints out of the party are something that I do not respect.