For Conservatives, a Political Surge
I've always had the impression that third party movements are basically suicidal since they steal support for candidates most likely to be supported by those who flock to the third party. In this case, republican candidates are likely to be threatened.
Tea Party adherents seem to think they have bipartisan appeal and appeal to independents, thinking thus that they could challenge both parties for popular support. But since they espouse many views that appear to be to the
right of moderate Republican I cannot see them as a real threat to the Democrats.
Still, they seem to be an emerging factor.
Both parties have had a taste of this stuff over the years. Quite frankly, I used to love it when it split the dems and despised it when it happen to the Repubs, ala [nasal voice]Ross Perot[/nasal voice] in '92.
However, the current tea party movement in humble opinion can be attributed to the republicans own "undoing" under Bush II and the republican congress of control. For the "ump-teenth" time here, the republicans did absolutely nothing for 6 years in congress. Nothing, crickets chirping, zippo, nadda. Bush focused on Iraq and keeping American safe. But beyond that? It was almost as if we didn't even have a government.
I will hand the tax, spend, and waste democrats one thing, when they get in office, they DO what they say. They will spend, tax, and waste resources by expanding government to be all things to all people. The republicans had control and missed a great opportunity to totally reform the tax code and essentially trim the size of government and its role over people's lives. For almost 40 years since Goldwater, we only heard the good reforms, etc. the repubs would do if they EVER got total control. Well, they did and failed. They worse than failed, they didn't even try. GD 'em. The republicans didn't do jack #(#(# and essentially rendered themselves totally useless for me.
While I am not a "tea party" person, I don't blame them for one bit, nor do I have any sympathy whatsover for the repubs. As for third parties in general. I have done a "180" (or, as Maxine Waters would say, a "360") and think them good things. The two parties have totally failed this country in my opinion. I have no respect for either of the two major parties.
Despite the result in upstate NY, I remain convinced that the Tea Party movement is merely a FoxNois/Limbaugh-led outlet of anger for Republicans designed to hamper the efforts of the Democratic majority and conversely to provide a new opening for Republicans.
The Tea Partiers claim that they are inclusive, not hatemongers, focused on budget issues and limiting the role of government, and not the wedge issue politics that defined the Republican Party of the last two decades.
I think we'll find that the Teabaggers are just the most reactionary of Republicans and not interested in a new kind of politics, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
I am suprised that even more Americans haven't caught on and abandoned both our major political parties. I would be ashamed to admit to membership in either one.That said, I think that a party that attempted to capture the American middle would have a better chance of success, rather than a group trying to move to the right of the current pubs.
The Tea Party phenomenon is as "American" as it gets, and I wish them well. And as far as I know, they haven't resorted to assault yet, unlike their liberal/union counterparts in the health care town hall debates.
What everyone should take from this is how they've been trashed in the majority of the media and by the President himself, to the point of using a vulgar pejoritave to describe them. But that's cool. It's not working, as the President recently set an all time record for low approval ratings this soon in a tenure (Gallup) with independents polling even lower than the overall population.
Independents decide elections and if they are any indication, we'll see some big changes in 2010 and maybe 2012.
Does the Tea Party thing have anything to do with that? I'm really not sure. But I don't think it's hurting.
The right isn't anymore opposed to expanding the government than the left -- they just want it done in a way that solidifies their own particular brand of control. What's happening now is a great example this in action: despite the fact that we absolutely need healthcare reform, the initiatives passing through the government are mostly about how to do it in a way that maximizes their hegemony.
Bravo Grimp...and your statement demonstrates just why we badly need to hear from a much wider spectrum of ideas...especially from the Left, on this issue (as well as all others).
I would submit this for consideration, Padre: though we like to proclaim that businesses are bad because only profit matters to them, is the government really any different? There is technically no "bottom line" to maintain but is there any doubt that power and control is all that really matters to them -- and legislation is just something that they sell? Nay, promises are what they sell and legislation is what they impose. At least, in a properly regulated environment, businesses cannot impose anything.
But there is, short of a boycott, which I admit is a possibility, or a strike, which at the moment Big Business has rendered a weak possibility through the demonization (with a little help from demon labor organizers) of organized labor, that we can do to effectively influence Big Business.
The mechanisms at least for influencing government are both part of our national institutional fabric and regularly exercised (interestingly where those tools work least satisfactorily is where Big Business has most infected government).
(12-10-2009 09:25 AM)sunnyheel Wrote: [ -> ]Despite the result in upstate NY, I remain convinced that the Tea Party movement is merely a FoxNois/Limbaugh-led outlet of anger for Republicans designed to hamper the efforts of the Democratic majority and conversely to provide a new opening for Republicans.
The Tea Partiers claim that they are inclusive, not hatemongers, focused on budget issues and limiting the role of government, and not the wedge issue politics that defined the Republican Party of the last two decades.
I think we'll find that the Teabaggers are just the most reactionary of Republicans and not interested in a new kind of politics, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
This movement is more then what the left could wish for: a profound fragmenting in the Pub party. It might be the only thing (other then another dud of a candidate representing the Pubs) which might give hope to the sinking Titanic of an Administration of Barack Obama in 2012.
(12-10-2009 12:55 PM)JMGrimp Wrote: [ -> ]The right isn't anymore opposed to expanding the government than the left -- they just want it done in a way that solidifies their own particular brand of control. What's happening now is a great example this in action: despite the fact that we absolutely need healthcare reform, the initiatives passing through the government are mostly about how to do it in a way that maximizes their hegemony.
In this you are not correct! If you look at the entire group to the right of center, those closer to the center fall under your statement, but the conservatives are further yet to the right wherein there is no support of large government or expenditures except for legitimate defense of the Country.
I think there was some potential for such a movement to bring left of center libertarian type independents into the fold in the very early stages...but once FAUX adopted it that was over.
(12-10-2009 01:53 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]But there is, short of a boycott, which I admit is a possibility, or a strike, which at the moment Big Business has rendered a weak possibility through the demonization (with a little help from demon labor organizers) of organized labor, that we can do to effectively influence Big Business.
The mechanisms at least for influencing government are both part of our national institutional fabric and regularly exercised (interestingly where those tools work least satisfactorily is where Big Business has most infected government).
That idealistic book espousing that understanding was written a long time ago. Nothing influences government per se, merely episodic squeezes of various politicians to tweak government behavior here and there. Government is almost an organic entity which must consume money to grow in size and power, it is government's prime directive. And nothing stops it!
You think elections which involve the votes of millions of poorly educated people, ignorant folks, aliens (legal and not) who are unfamiliar with American laws or rights actually change anything? Come on man, that it is not how it works in reality. The masses are massaged by superfluous features of good looks and glib tongues, both meaningless in any final analysis. The voters of this Country are predominantly well meaning, but uninformed sheep, and you expect that herd to understand issues and vote accordingly. Nope, sheep get sheared, and that's that!
Corporations are certainly guilty of infamous behavior but on the other hand are subjected to the government's laws, regulation, and fiats. And corporations have little recourse when mano a mano with the Goliath government. History is filled with examples of corporations being regulated out of business, told to make this for that, told to freeze pay and pricing, and yes, being taken over by government itself. Most bad corporate behavior has a government somewhere behind its actions.
The real enemy of the people is ultimately their own government, an evolved parasitic entity eroding their wealth and personal freedoms day by day, week by week, year by year, decade by decade. Government was to be a machine to serve its citizens, but somewhere along the way it gained its own intelligence, and with that brain, it follows its mandated prime directive to the end of time: grow in size and power.
Quote:You think elections which involve the votes of millions of poorly educated people, ignorant folks, aliens (legal and not) who are unfamiliar with American laws or rights actually change anything? Come on man, that it is not how it works in reality. The masses are massaged by superfluous features of good looks and glib tongues, both meaningless in any final analysis. The voters of this Country are predominantly well meaning, but uninformed sheep, and you expect that herd to understand issues and vote accordingly. Nope, sheep get sheared, and that's that!
Forgive me if I insist on, if I must, have greater faith in the American people, humanity and our system of government. I truly hope that what you have written above is the stance taken by the Right.
I truly do.
In fact, that one's a keeper.
(12-10-2009 04:29 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:You think elections which involve the votes of millions of poorly educated people, ignorant folks, aliens (legal and not) who are unfamiliar with American laws or rights actually change anything? Come on man, that it is not how it works in reality. The masses are massaged by superfluous features of good looks and glib tongues, both meaningless in any final analysis. The voters of this Country are predominantly well meaning, but uninformed sheep, and you expect that herd to understand issues and vote accordingly. Nope, sheep get sheared, and that's that!
Forgive me if I insist on, if I must, have greater faith in the American people, humanity and our system of government. I truly hope that what you have written above is the stance taken by the Right.
I truly do.
In fact, that one's a keeper.
It is a very sad development because America cannot survive with the government becoming all powerful, demanding larger control and consuming the productivity of its people and that of those yet to be born.. The thoughts that votes can change anything is, sadly, laughable. In the first place the persons standing for Office are not near the best for those jobs, so we get third rate con artists or dumbarses to lead the nation. Nope, it is over. We have seen the enemy and he is us, so sayth Pogo many years ago!
(12-10-2009 03:41 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 09:25 AM)sunnyheel Wrote: [ -> ]Despite the result in upstate NY, I remain convinced that the Tea Party movement is merely a FoxNois/Limbaugh-led outlet of anger for Republicans designed to hamper the efforts of the Democratic majority and conversely to provide a new opening for Republicans.
The Tea Partiers claim that they are inclusive, not hatemongers, focused on budget issues and limiting the role of government, and not the wedge issue politics that defined the Republican Party of the last two decades.
I think we'll find that the Teabaggers are just the most reactionary of Republicans and not interested in a new kind of politics, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
This movement is more then what the left could wish for: a profound fragmenting in the Pub party. It might be the only thing (other then another dud of a candidate representing the Pubs) which might give hope to the sinking Titanic of an Administration of Barack Obama in 2012.
You and I see the Teabaggers quite differently, then. I see them as merely a Republican stalking horse. I don't know anyone who associates with the Tea Party movement who isn't a Republican, de facto or de jure.
I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts they're financed by Republicans and Republican interests. An early test of that theory will come in Florida. If Crist can hang on to the Repub Senate nomination that has been his for the taking (versus the Teabaggers' choice of Marco Rubio), we'll see what the Teabaggers do in response. I predict they'll refrain from a third-party effort against Crist and Meek even though Meek is a very weak candidate for the Dems.
Are you looking to wager?
(12-10-2009 04:36 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 04:29 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:You think elections which involve the votes of millions of poorly educated people, ignorant folks, aliens (legal and not) who are unfamiliar with American laws or rights actually change anything? Come on man, that it is not how it works in reality. The masses are massaged by superfluous features of good looks and glib tongues, both meaningless in any final analysis. The voters of this Country are predominantly well meaning, but uninformed sheep, and you expect that herd to understand issues and vote accordingly. Nope, sheep get sheared, and that's that!
Forgive me if I insist on, if I must, have greater faith in the American people, humanity and our system of government. I truly hope that what you have written above is the stance taken by the Right.
I truly do.
In fact, that one's a keeper.
It is a very sad development because America cannot survive with the government becoming all powerful, demanding larger control and consuming the productivity of its people and that of those yet to be born.. The thoughts that votes can change anything is, sadly, laughable. In the first place the persons standing for Office are not near the best for those jobs, so we get third rate con artists or dumbarses to lead the nation. Nope, it is over. We have seen the enemy and he is us, so sayth Pogo many years ago!
Given this sort of resignation...would you mind getting out of the way then?
(12-10-2009 04:48 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 04:36 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 04:29 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:You think elections which involve the votes of millions of poorly educated people, ignorant folks, aliens (legal and not) who are unfamiliar with American laws or rights actually change anything? Come on man, that it is not how it works in reality. The masses are massaged by superfluous features of good looks and glib tongues, both meaningless in any final analysis. The voters of this Country are predominantly well meaning, but uninformed sheep, and you expect that herd to understand issues and vote accordingly. Nope, sheep get sheared, and that's that!
Forgive me if I insist on, if I must, have greater faith in the American people, humanity and our system of government. I truly hope that what you have written above is the stance taken by the Right.
I truly do.
In fact, that one's a keeper.
It is a very sad development because America cannot survive with the government becoming all powerful, demanding larger control and consuming the productivity of its people and that of those yet to be born.. The thoughts that votes can change anything is, sadly, laughable. In the first place the persons standing for Office are not near the best for those jobs, so we get third rate con artists or dumbarses to lead the nation. Nope, it is over. We have seen the enemy and he is us, so sayth Pogo many years ago!
Given this sort of resignation...would you mind getting out of the way then?
Yep!
Good ole negative right...just like the old days
(12-10-2009 03:45 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 12:55 PM)JMGrimp Wrote: [ -> ]The right isn't anymore opposed to expanding the government than the left -- they just want it done in a way that solidifies their own particular brand of control. What's happening now is a great example this in action: despite the fact that we absolutely need healthcare reform, the initiatives passing through the government are mostly about how to do it in a way that maximizes their hegemony.
In this you are not correct! If you look at the entire group to the right of center, those closer to the center fall under your statement, but the conservatives are further yet to the right wherein there is no support of large government or expenditures except for legitimate defense of the Country.
Words in papers, words in books
Words on TV, words for crooks
Words of comfort, words of peace
Words to make the fighting cease
Words to tell you what to do
Words are working hard for you
Eat your words but don't go hungry
Words have always nearly hung me
What are words worth?
(12-10-2009 04:23 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ]Corporations are certainly guilty of infamous behavior but on the other hand are subjected to the government's laws, regulation, and fiats. And corporations have little recourse when mano a mano with the Goliath government. History is filled with examples of corporations being regulated out of business, told to make this for that, told to freeze pay and pricing, and yes, being taken over by government itself. Most bad corporate behavior has a government somewhere behind its actions.
This argument tends to get reduced to government vs. business and the purported evils of each. However, I believe our problems lie in the fact that the two are far too interconnected. Tag, you point to 'laws, regulation, and fiats', but these are too often written by deep-pocketed interests in this country. This problem, in turn, arises both from the revolving door between business and government and because our campaign finance structure is essentially a legalized bribery scheme. Sometimes the money goes into a numbered account, but the real and much bigger problem is that huge sums of money are 'invested' (yes, that's the correct verb) so the electee can get the power you speak of since you need the benjamins to get elected the way we run things. Pretty absurd how it all works when you step back I think, but with entirely predictable results.
Two last things:
First, my favorite cartoon from the 2004 cycle was of a pollster on this guy's front step asking him if he was 'concerned about the 'axis of evil'? " His answer: "No, I'm more concerned about the evil of access".
Second thing:
The solution pushed by Bill Bradley, Bob Kerrey, Warren Rudman and Alan Simpson.
(12-10-2009 05:33 PM)crufus Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 04:23 PM)Tagterp Wrote: [ -> ]Corporations are certainly guilty of infamous behavior but on the other hand are subjected to the government's laws, regulation, and fiats. And corporations have little recourse when mano a mano with the Goliath government. History is filled with examples of corporations being regulated out of business, told to make this for that, told to freeze pay and pricing, and yes, being taken over by government itself. Most bad corporate behavior has a government somewhere behind its actions.
This argument tends to get reduced to government vs. business and the purported evils of each. However, I believe our problems lie in the fact that the two are far too interconnected. Tag, you point to 'laws, regulation, and fiats', but these are too often written by deep-pocketed interests in this country. This problem, in turn, arises both from the revolving door between business and government and because our campaign finance structure is essentially a legalized bribery scheme. Sometimes the money goes into a numbered account, but the real and much bigger problem is that huge sums of money are 'invested' (yes, that's the correct verb) so the electee can get the power you speak of since you need the benjamins to get elected the way we run things. Pretty absurd how it all works when you step back I think, but with entirely predictable results.
Two last things:
First, my favorite cartoon from the 2004 cycle was of a pollster on this guy's front step asking him if he was 'concerned about the 'axis of evil'? " His answer: "No, I'm more concerned about the evil of access".
Second thing: The solution pushed by Bill Bradley, Bob Kerrey, Warren Rudman and Alan Simpson.
A lot of thoughtful ideas there crufus!
However, I would note that corporations are the more likely failures (see banks, etc), others are forced by their own ineptness to be bought by government. While the apparent "black hand" as don bosco calls it still exists, we need to re-examine on whose hand is that glove worn? Government has just gotten larger and more powerful over time, being the winner on any contested field of difference.
(12-10-2009 01:53 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]But there is, short of a boycott, which I admit is a possibility, or a strike, which at the moment Big Business has rendered a weak possibility through the demonization (with a little help from demon labor organizers) of organized labor, that we can do to effectively influence Big Business.
The mechanisms at least for influencing government are both part of our national institutional fabric and regularly exercised (interestingly where those tools work least satisfactorily is where Big Business has most infected government).
The only thing that affects business has to do with the bottom line -- all other items are but a subset of this. This is only a problem when the government fails to do it's job enforcing the law -- or when it enforces it unevenly. The government isn't accountable to the people and business has been given every incentive to take full advantage of this. The problem with every approach to this problem I have seen thus far is that it relies, essentially, on the fox guarding the hen house. How many times do we have to be zapped before we stop reaching for the cheese? The government needs to be large enough to do it's job regulating, defending and legislating but small enough to be kept in check.
I don't fear paying taxes, I fear the rich paying the taxes.
(12-10-2009 05:53 PM)JMGrimp Wrote: [ -> ] (12-10-2009 01:53 PM)don bosco Wrote: [ -> ]But there is, short of a boycott, which I admit is a possibility, or a strike, which at the moment Big Business has rendered a weak possibility through the demonization (with a little help from demon labor organizers) of organized labor, that we can do to effectively influence Big Business.
The mechanisms at least for influencing government are both part of our national institutional fabric and regularly exercised (interestingly where those tools work least satisfactorily is where Big Business has most infected government).
The only thing that affects business has to do with the bottom line -- all other items are but a subset of this. This is only a problem when the government fails to do it's job enforcing the law -- or when it enforces it unevenly. The government isn't accountable to the people and business has been given every incentive to take full advantage of this. The problem with every approach to this problem I have seen thus far is that it relies, essentially, on the fox guarding the hen house. How many times do we have to be zapped before we stop reaching for the cheese? The government needs to be large enough to do it's job regulating, defending and legislating but small enough to be kept in check.
I don't fear paying taxes, I fear the rich paying the taxes.
Good observations.
Reminder to the left: corporations can fail and disappear, even big ones. Has a government in these United States failed and disappeared?
