- Connect
- Login
- Print Subscription
|
Welcome,
| |
| |
« Reason Home
Texas-sized hypocrisy 
Posted on: April 21, 2009
An old college friend of mine asked me last week if I had attended a Tea Party. The first I heard about these was on Tax Day itself, which clearly means I don't watch enough cable news.
The movement — if that’s what it is — was spawned by a rant on Feb. 19 from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange during a live report by the CNBC reporter — if that’s what he is — Rick Santelli, suggesting that it was time to organize a “tea party” to protest government spending on failed mortgages.
The cable news networks took it from there. Fox News, after running more than 100 promos about its coverage of the event, which did a pretty effective job of marketing them at the same time, had wall-to-wall coverage on the anointed day and dispatched four of its leading hosts around the country to perform a kind of hybrid task, covering events that they also seemed to be leading.
My friend gushed about his experience, "I felt like part of history. Almost like you could roll the clock back 225 years and see the colonists assembling." Back then, the media were fiercely partisan, framing the day's news in terms of ideological leaning, so the comparison may be very appropriate indeed.
I have become exhausted by the talking heads, and I have watched very little news since the inauguration. It's just hard to get pumped up about the news when it's all about the miserable economy; and when it's not, it's this faux populism of the likes of Glenn Beck and Rick Santelli. Populism in pursuit of ratings, not politics.
If the goal were pure political progress, then the Republicans would have been crying foul for the last eight years while more money than has been dreamed of in President Obama's stimulus was poured down the drain of war in the Middle East.
And in Texas, Governor Rick Perry praised the assembled throng in Austin, whose cries of "Secede!" found no rebuke.
Afterward, he told reporters that Texas had come into the union with a unique right “to leave if we decided to do that.” This is a beloved piece of state folklore despite its unfortunate drawback of being totally untrue.
Haven't we been hearing for the last eight years how we need to support the troops by supporting America and the President? I guess that was just if he was a Texan, and GOP, and named Bush.
So, spare me the rhetoric about bureaucratic spending. I'd rather spend a trillion dollars at home than abroad. Sure, it would be nice if we didn't have to spend anything, but when no one is spending, that's when the government has to fill the gap.
Just ask Alexander Hamilton; he would've understood.
- Requires free registration.
Comments
I agree with the point about media, but I'm more bothered by the "objective" outlets than the clearly partisan ones. CNN for example follows the tired format of having two ideologically opposed talking heads argue over an issue; both spout half truths and party lines and the "journalists" make no attempt to differentiate which is telling the truth--"debate" has become the substitute for actual fact-finding and in the long run democracy suffers.
Not too many years ago, Japan was at the top of the economic international heap. They had the highest saving rate of any country, most folks used little credit, and most transactions were in cash. I lived there for 3 years in the 1980s. Then they bought into consumerism, started to rack up credit card debt, and later, went onto recession. I also had money invested in The Japan Fund, a Fidelity mutual fund. It tanked. Through the 1990s, Japan tried to spend their way out of their recession. Just as this tactic failed in the past by other countries, it failed for Japan as well. The point is the same over time. Politician can't seem to learn from history, and somehow think that the present problem is somehow so different that they will take the same failed actions. Rick Santelli's rant was actually right on the money. The massive spending will cause long term damage to our economy and the stated purpose of job creation is a farce. Long term job creation is NOT paving projects or ditch digging endeavors. It is closing the loopholes in the way US companies leave profits from overseas operations outside the country. It is creating a business friendly environment like cutting the corporate taxes which are second highest in the world, and it is changing or adopting new policies that create new manufacturing jobs or cause these jobs to be returned to US operation. When over 40% of the working people in this country pay NO income taxes, that is a major problem. Even when I worked many years ago for very low wages, I still paid SOMETHING in taxes, even if it wasn't much. Being a citizen requires your support of the country and that is fair and equitable taxes, and/or service to the country, preferably in uniform. People who get off with paying no taxes have every incentive to vote for higher taxes and increased social programs on the backs of those who do pay. This concept is ruinous, breeds contempt, and creates a group who think that they are "entited" to a free ride. The current administration is rapidly going down this road and they really need to get a grip.
I find it breathtakingly ignorant that liberals love the UN and seem to think that everything should be somehow vetted and approved by this cesspool organization. If this is the view, then how many UN Resolutions should we let dictators like Saddam ignore all the while gassing his opponents? How many global terrorist, like Abu Nidal or the Ansar Islam, should we let let him harbor and train? How many other countries should we let him invade? How may US Presidents should we let him try to assassinate? The Bush Administration wasn't perfect by a long stretch, but they did take direct action to kill and capture terrorists around the globe. One may disagree on how the war was conducted, but since 9/11 there have been no additional attacks on the US. We'll see how Obama and Co. take care of business. Thus far I'm extremely underwhelmed
Good comments. Santelli may have been right in his call to arms to those who dont want govt support (and thus intervention), but all he was doing was fueling the anger of people who feel its okay to make money without meaningful contribution to society. We have CNBC on in the office all day...its a bunch of blah blah blah (Bloomberg is slightly saner). The tea parties are a joke...last I checked we have taxation and represention in America. Its an insult on the backs that shed blood to free us from England that we call these soundbites 'tea parties.'
And cityguy, your comments about CNN are so true, except I would go further to say they have swayed to the left. CNN.com is a joke of a website - instead of objective reporting they go to iReporting. My wife and I got rid of our cable last year and realized how little we miss it (the Newshour with Jim Lehrer on PBS is still the best daily news program around).
A common falsehood of the right wing is that 40% of people do not pay income tax. He even claimed that he piad taxes when he was making little money.
The fact is the people not paying "INCOME TAX" are paying nearly 15% in medicare and social security taxes which are in effect the same as income taxes since they go to pay the largest expenditures in the budget.
Of course Clark paid "INCOME TAXES" back when he worked for little money but his medicare and social security taxes were much smaller too.
The fact is anyone with a job that has any of the taxes taken out pays INCOME TAX and at rates sometimes much higher than the wealthy who derive much of their incomes from capital gains.
Well for one Obama has spent more in less than 100 days than GWB did in eight years. And that includes the war.
The interest alone on what he is spending will be pasted on to newborns today most likely years after collage and into their 30's and for what? More Corruption? The lining of pockets? Future votes? health care that has never worked any place all that effective? Having the rich to pay for it or is taxing anyone with a job to pay for it? And believe Obama is not done by a long shot in spending or taxing.
As i sit here writing checks to the utilities companies. not only for my place but for my apartment rentals. yes I offer paid utilities. i wonder if this cap on carbon will force me to stop offering that. When utilities have to bid on permits, permits that some say will be open to everyone, and that means the likes of G.Soros and any billionaire wanting to get into the energy game or other companies all in a open bidding war. I sit and wonder how much of the bottom dollar is going to be passed to me and my bill.
D. Axelrod said today it is bad right now to bring up anti Americanism in the form of protest and tea parties. Some celeb said it was because their is a black man in the White House. maybe they have slept through the past 8 years and woke up in the midst of the New Clinton Administration and only because most of Carters cabinet is either dead or banned from DC. Or should be banned.
If anything Tea Parties did bring over 700 cities and a few hundred thousand people together for a cause. Not to protest Obama and some did. Not to protest democrats or republicans and some did. But people have had enough. Seriously we as a whole have had enough of every one's spending, Taxes, future debt.
I hear it everyday "The last 8 Years" "GWB" wah wah wah. Well you know what my money grew it grew a lot in the last eight years and i pulled out before the peak of the market and never going back into it. i am sorry for GM workers Lear workers Delphi workers but seriously how many years do you think we can continually to pay big wages, big benefits, and big pensions with out a crash. Your finding out right?
All those homes I used to work on in Akron and Cleveland developments the 250k and up homes when the Tech boom was booming. Kids were buying them out of collage that's how easy it was to buy a new home in the mid 90's. Now some are bailout roads.
Things change and Obama is not the answer, neither is spending the way out of it. If anyone does anything today check out D.Feinstein and her hubby and tell me when and where the next party is.
Not that I won't know already. I will be there loud and strong in American pride knowing I still live in a Christian Nation wither or not obama does.
President Bush 43 was irresponsible to have promoted and signed passage of an unaffordable prescription drug program, tax "rebates" and TARP bailouts. But clearly, comparing his shortcomings to Obama's financial radicalism is like comparing a parking violation to homicide.
Last fiscal year, the deficit was $459 billion. For this fiscal year, it was $569 billion when Mr. Obama took office. Under his proposals, another $1.276 trillion will be added to the deficit this year, for a total of $1.845 trillion.
The CBO says deficits will fall for three years to $658 billion, still nearly 50% larger than any past deficit. After that, deficits go back up every year, reaching the trillion-dollar a year mark again in nine years. By 2019, the debt would reach 82.4% of GDP, a level not seen since 1947.
Federal spending will under Mr. Obama top $4 trillion this year. This translates into 28.5% of GDP -- a level exceeded only at the height of World War II.
Alexander Hamilton endorsed some aspects of a strong central government. He was not a socialist. He did not advocate punishing productivty and rewarding sloth. He did not support vote-buying indirectly (entitlements) or directly (ACORN). His positions regarding protectionism are now accepted as detrimental.
Regarding seceding from the union, would you oppose it? Maybe you'd no longer have to deal with the conservatives and their outdated ideas about the American Dream, virtues and personal responsibility.
I don't have a problem with conservatives and Texas will not succeed from the Union. I am proud that some one as in Mr. Perry has the coins to stand up and say hey enough is enough
True it is bad enough we have to pay W' [43] bills, but 44's additions is going to end up in calamity on the horizon.
I must add a idea that I hope dwindles and fades away. Their are congressmen and ladies who want to liquefy your 401k, possible your IRA and maybe pensions. Into what is basically a sister account to S.S. It is estimated that there is as little as 3 trillion in 401K's and up to 10 trillion if you take it to pensions. It was squashed by everyone before the election of 08, re-arose in December and has been quiet since then. The markets do not like the idea and could not handle the blow [right now] So i just want to say it is a very slippery slope we are on. And we all know what happens when they say we will not dip into S.S.
Nonsocialist - The medicare bailout is going to end up costing the fed government Trillions in the next 5 -10 years. It fundamentally weakened this country for decades, all b/c Karl Rove wanted W to get reelected. Bush Sr. enacted pay as you go, where every spending program had to have either a tax increase or spending cut $ for $. Clinton abided by it, Bush Jr. let it expire.
I didnt like the Stimulus bill b/c it was Reid and Pelosi's lovechild and contained ridiculous amounts of pork. But the idea of it being used for infrastructure is a good thing and the timing was essential. Alexander Hamilton would have been for it, because he and Adam Smith understand govt's role should be limited but absolutely crucial when called upon. This govt was asleep at the wheel for proper regulation. The private sector took advantage of it without considering the impact on society. And people overlooked sound conservative principals by overlevering their lives.
I think the Tea Parties are a joke.
Anderson, personally I wish the idea of partial privatization of SS would be brought up now. First, the introduction of trillions of dollars into the markets couldnt be at a better time. Secondly, if people have the ability to choose where their money flows, in this market its a (potentially) great time to buy. Yes, there is downside, that is why I would favor only a 25% cap on SS funds being used this way.
Oh, Anderson, on your carbon point. I am a believer in cap and trade. But Ohioans are really going to suffer. Ohio is 41st in the US in renewable energy usage. 86% of electricity used in Ohio is from coal. Cap and Trade could be great if our state govt gets off their a****s and gets us to 25% renewable generation by 2020.
BTW, I decided this is the only Vindy.com blog I will post on going forward. The conversations here are rational, even if I disagree.
O gimme a break. Here you damn liberals go again with the belief that Fox staged these things. WRONG. Jim Shaw planned the one in Youngstown, NOT Fox News. Justin Higgins of Brookfield, OH helped plan the one in Columbus, NOT Fox News.
And o by the way, it is Rick Santelli of the far left NBC Family of Networks that is the inspiration behind these.
I criticized Bush for spending too much and I am going to criticize Obama for spending even more than Bush did.
Anderson, personally I wish the idea of partial privatization of SS would be brought up now. First, the introduction of trillions of dollars into the markets could be at a better time. Secondly, if people have the ability to choose where their money flows, in this market its a (potentially) great time to buy. Yes, there is downside, that is why I would favor only a 25% cap on SS funds being used this way.
You missed the whole point Some Democrats want to take it and put it in the federal government control and eliminate the opportunity for investing. Google Obama 401K
Rick Santelli of the far left CNBC??? LOL. CNBC is a mouthpiece of the right ValleyRed. Maybe if you watched it, you know.
Anderson - thanks, I didnt miss your point, I was just bringing up something from the past. Obama isnt going to get far on his plan.
ERPLANE,
I believe you're letting your contempt of President Bush cloud your reasoning. Of course President Bush spent way too much money that our children will have to sort out, if they can. But do you dispute that the amount being spent by President Obama and Congress dwarfs what was spent under Bush 43? Read the facts in my entry above and tell me which of those facts are erroneous.
As a finance major at Youngstown State, I watch CNBC every single day to get my market news and information. With that being said, CNBC is part of the far left NBC Network.
Any business student studying capitalism in their courses right now cannot be a liberal, at least on economic issues. Hence the reason they appear to be so conservative. I am sure on social issues, they may be pretty damn liberal however.
Nonsocialist - I dont have contempt of 43. As a New Yorker who was here on one of the worst days of my life, I am very cognizant that there hasnt been another terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11. I think Bush had alot to do with that. It had to be dirty, ugly business to gear us up enough to be protected right after, but he did that.
But I do think your missing a key point in your discussion about Bush v Obama and spending. Your talking about it in terms of framing their ideology with their spending, but the more important issue is the timing of such spending.
Bush spent ridiculous sums of money. He lost all sense of fiscal discipline during a time in which the US economy was humming right along. We are now witnessing that the growing economy was based on irrational confidence in increasing values of real estate, and an overleveraging of the economy to juice returns on investment. Had Bush introduced some restraint in the govt's spending, maybe the bubble would not have gotten as big as it did, and we wouldnt have fallen as much as we have.
Now lets talk about Obama. Its easy to say he is a spending liberal. I didnt like how he essentially let Pelosi and Reid have their way with the spending bill. But all good economists and columnists, ranging in ideology from Paul Krugman to David Brooks, agree that this is the time to spend like mad, to create a floor to the economy's decline. We wouldnt have been in as bad of a deficit position had Bush created such huge deficits during good times. W used our dry powder when we didnt need to use any powder. And yes, I still contend that Bush hurt us much more than Obama. His spending on that medicare bill is long lasting and impactful. I believe you are quoting money spent, but we need to look at money dedicated in the future. He fundamentally weakened this country's economy. If a moderate Republican won the 2008 election, he/she would have acted the same way as Obama.
Valleyred - how is the finance dept at YSU? CNBC used to be good, but now they are the TMZ.com of finance. I recommend Bloomberg.com (dont see the tv network much), and if you can, get hold of the Financial Times (ft.com). The brits are much better at balanced objective reporting of finance and economics. The Journal has been hijacked by Murdoch, sad to say.
ValleyRed, CNBC is about as far right as any cable station can be. Reporters like Larry Kudlow, who was part of Republican economic teams and others on CNBC are a mouthpiece for Republican policies. To even claim that they are left wing shows your complete lack of logic.