1. So I talked to and listened to part of a good presentation by local TEA PARTY people last night. They mostly seemed to be from a conservative, Christian, home schooling background. (There definitely is nothing wrong with that.) But they talked nothing but economics–against bailouts and being stimulated, against the fiscal disaster that ObamaCare will be, for the “fair tax,” against the tax burden that are the children of illegal immigrants, and against the huge debt given us by the combo of Bush and Obama. There was a little about the danger of Islamic Jihad, and so no criticism of military spending. They definitely aren’t “lifestyle” libertarians or even Randians. They’re all about the small businessperson and not about the “heroic entrepreneur.” From their “Main Street” (well, in Rome, GA, Broad Street) view, Wall Street is in bed with the Democrats.
2. The smart and eloquent student who framed the whole TEA PARTY phenomenon for the audience was perfectly right that these people are a largely admirable example of democracy in action, of genuine “civic engagement” at the local level. It’s easy for pointy-headed professors (like me) to question their grasp of the facts and all that. But who can deny that they’re trying to inform themselves and make issue-based cases at every public forum made available to them?
3. These TEA PARTY people really do revel in their success in defeating establishment Republicans in primaries. I expressed my concern to one of them about Christine O’Donnell, who really does seem to be sort of nuts. The response was: Isn’t it great that we might be able to get even her elected (she is closing a bit on her flaky Marxist opponent–what a choice they have in Delaware!)? And she will vote right every time (whereas Castle would have only about half the time). Who can deny that the TEA PARTY decision to work within the confines of one of our two major parties is the correct one? The problem with insurgent candidates is that they’re rarely properly vetted, but their victories do expose the decadence of the party organization.
4. So I asked a TEA PARTY guy about the prudence of nominating Sara Palin just to prove “we can do it.” He said that he was actually for New Jersey’s Chris Christie, whom he regards as basically elected by TEA PARTY efforts. I said, more or less, that’s the ticket: You don’t want to portray Obama as evil incarnate, but mostly as pretty incompetent. The election needs to turn, as they say, on both COMPETENCE and IDEOLOGY. The Republicans have successful Governors from which to choose: Christie, Mitch Daniels, Bobby Jindal, and Mitt Romney. They all have downsides, of course: too fat (and too new) or too short or sounds too much like Mr. Rogers or too flip-floppy and too perfect. But each of them has great promise, in my opinion. (Pawlenty, someone might ask!? Didn’t seem that successful to me, I answer. Huckabee!? He’s an entertainer now. Or even Palin!? She neglected to finish her term.)
5. I actually watched about 20 minutes of Glenn Beck at 3 a.m. He began by babbling at some length about fact and opinion and critical thinking as a way of suggesting that Obama is about imposing a radical socialist or even communist agenda on America. Dinesh D’Souza was the guest, and his pretty personal book about the president–which I haven’t read but sounds good–was (by Glenn) being given a conspiratorial spin not intended by Dinesh. I have to admit I stopped watching before Dinesh (who is always worth hearing) said much, because Glenn was interrupting too much. Isn’t it enough to say that the fairly standard liberal policies of the president are unsustainable these days and being implemented incompetently?It’s hard to say there’s a secret conspiracy when he’s pretty much doing what he said he would do during his campaign. And our Constitution will survive Obama.
September 30th, 2010 | 11:46 am
I don’t think people understand the Tea Party. The origin to the Tea Party Movement is the financial meltdown of 2008. The banks, the mortgage lenders, the financial houses and others caused catastrophic damage to the economy and endless suffering to millions of Americans — and NO ONE WAS HELD RESPONSIBLE AND NONE OF THE MISCREANTS SUFFERED ANY CONSEQUENCES! In fact, the financial instutions were BAILED OUT FINANCIALLY BY THE GOVERNMENT! Millions of us were waiting for arrests, prosecutions, jail sentences — AND IT NEVER HAPPENED! Do you understand? It has nothing to do with Obama, or race, or class warfare or anything else. It’s all about an outraged sense of justice, and it’s completely justifiable. That’s the power of the Tea Party Movement, and that’s why it surprised everyone.
September 30th, 2010 | 11:51 am
At chicagoboyz.net please read ” I Think I See What Glenn Beck Is Doing”, and it’s many comments
September 30th, 2010 | 12:01 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by MS, Wendy Rawley and Samantha Davis, James DuBois. James DuBois said: TEA PARTY PEOPLE and Stuff: But they talked nothing but economics–against bailouts and being stimulated, against … http://bit.ly/cRcbyu + [...]
September 30th, 2010 | 5:21 pm
As a pomocon, non-libertarian social con, and liberal media bias hater, I am of course a die-hard advocate of “anti-anti-T-partyism.”
And whenever that which is lablelled T-party is mostly about ordinary Americans speaking out against fiscal insanity or about returning to GENUINE constitutional conservatism (i.e., John-Adams-over-Sam-Adams “founderism”), I’m all for them.
But the last week has been revealing the raw unvetted nuttiness, unfittness, and untrustworthiness, of SOME t-party endorsed candidates–I have O’Donnell and Carl Paladino in mind. These people will not smell well after a half-year in power if they somehow manage to get it. There is maybe a 10% I am wrong about Paladino, that (to offer only one example) the charges now emerging about his staff are somehow flawed, so that by some only-in-NY this-gang-is-better-than-that-gang argument I might need to vote for him.
But this O’Donnell has simply been lying about her CV, which is way more creepier in its implications for her being Senator than dating a nut or saying unintelligent things back in the day. Is her vote for 6 years really worth tolerating her dishonesty? Will conservatives even have that vote, given her character? Glad I’m not a DE Republican.
September 30th, 2010 | 5:34 pm
excellent piece on the inane preachings of Beck lacking entomology. He postulates that Obama is a socialist and a communist. Wow. You’re right he is merely an incompetent liberal who had control of the senate and house and passed terrible legislation, despite the fact that he had all the time in the world. I think its absurd that he has been literally incapable of ending wars in iraq and Afghanistan, closing Guantanamo, prosecuting those responsible for irresponsible actions that causes the greatest recession in our history, passing health care that actually lowered the deficit instead of merely claiming to, failing to pass tax cuts, failing to cut spending, failing to reform immigration, failing to reform campaign finance, failing to post bills 48 hours before a vote, and failing to offer any real change? where is the change? it seems the same. This isn’t socialist its incompetence. Beck postulates he is a radical communist because he doesn’t believe in god, he doesn’t have a strong will to lead (or will to power) and he doesn’t care about YOU. But Beck cares, he thinks we should care as much as he does. about what? this is not clear. at all. libertarianism? no. economic conservatism? I can buy that, but i dont buy into the idea that this is a populist movement, and i definitely dont think that his ends in any way reflect some deep rooted understanding of the founding as Robert claims.
September 30th, 2010 | 7:12 pm
Peter says, “Isn’t it enough to say that the fairly standard liberal policies of the president are unsustainable these days and being implemented incompetently? It’s hard to say there’s a secret conspiracy when he’s pretty much doing what he said he would do during his campaign. And our Constitution will survive Obama.”
As Peter says the obvious answer to his question is YES. It’s a good question and an even better answer. But in the heat of the moment have “we” become oblivious to what we already have?
Peter’s account of his experience with the Tea Party seems to make the case that “we” are not that oblivious. Thanks for the tale. It is probably an adequate representation of the Tea Party as it really is–as it were.
I too am intrigued by Dinesh D’Souza’s personal argument. I just don’t think its explanatory power is as effective as it seems to be.
BTW, the “fact”/”opinion” distinction that Beck makes is asinine–I watched that show (I fear I am becoming obsessed with it, so pardon me). Beck says it is a “fact” that Obama’s father held such and such “opinion.” The so-called fact is itself presented as an opinion about the sincerity of one holding the same said opinion. So Obama knows and is friends with and has been influenced by many who hold similarly bizarre opinions.
I’m the same way as Obama. Who’da thunk it?! It is a wonder I never became president. I’m the same as Obama only I didn’t know how to dissimulate my own belief in such a craven Machiavellian way. If only I had presidential ambition, I’d be president too!
Aw shucks. Don’t listen to me because I’m just a country lawyer–er, community college professor.
Give me a break.
October 2nd, 2010 | 10:04 am
Carl, the taint you are beginning to smell is the subsuming of honest , if somewhat confused aims by the various forces that are always on the hunt for a reptilian pony to ride into that swamp of gouty excess known as Washington D.C..
The key lies in neither conquering nor abandoning Washington but in resurrecting the counterbalance to the unbalanced thing our Federal Government has become. This will only happen in the States. St. Paul himself could gain majority chair in our Congress as it exists now and be overcome by the besotted confusion of it all. Empire is the isolationism which the powers-that-be claim the Tea Party promotes. Unfortunately, Empire sings its sultry songs to the Tea Party and they come away smitten .
Needless to say, entering a whorehouse and expecting anything beyond whoring would seem a profound waste of time. Are all our Federal acolytes little better than whores? Of course not but the gilded cage that has been erected around our finer aspirations is looking more than a little lurid these days. It will not find its own way. It needs to be led there firmly. Unfortunately, the erstwhile citizen is expecting to be led by those who cannot lead because they are too busy feathering their own nests. This might be fine if the birds in questions were not the vultures we elect with steady alacrity. The citizen looks to be led while they themselves must lead.
October 3rd, 2010 | 1:47 am
hjelden, thanks for that tip. You have to search for the article, but I found it.
I think the whole tea party movement really is another Great Awakening.
It has many parts, many Venn Diagram circles as the Chicagoboyz poster put it. But finally the silent majority is silent no longer.
No wonder the elites have their knickers in a twist.
I hope we stay up past November.
October 4th, 2010 | 3:13 am
After reading the NYTimes magazine piece on Beck, let me put in a few words for Bob Cheeks’ doubts of “our” doubts regarding Glenn Beck. Bob earlier mentioned in another post that there were elements of Beck worth defending, and that he was not all that bad.
Upon reflection I agree with Bob, insofar as I worry that excessive criticism of the obvious points of weakness in Beck’s argument may occlude what is obviously true in what he says. Beck appeals to the noble historical ancestry of our founding, to constitutionalism and the rule of law, to hard work and the right of each man to the fruits of his own labor, and to family and the obligations of religion. These are not bad things.
It is true that Beck sometimes confuses the relation between these elements and what is possible and sensible in current American politics. His version of American history with evil Woodrow Wilson and purely good George Washington is silly. But many of the principles he stands for are decent and good, and they are considered to be decent by many Americans who–if not themselves–have family members who make deep sacrifices for their nation.
It is that issue of sacrifice which makes the typical political issues seem miniscule. It would be a shame if President Obama didn’t consider that question in his decision regarding Afghanistan. It would be shame if Glenn Beck demagogued such an issue.
But it seems that no one can speak like an adult because no one is competent to point out what American interest is involved in any American war since at least Vietnam. These wars should have been fought in their own way (even if they became debacles), but it seems that no one who holds office responsible to the constitution and people knows how to justify what is being done. But Glenn Beck with his new Great Awakening is no better. He may even be useless–let alone dangerous.
October 4th, 2010 | 5:25 am
Now c’mon Carl we’ve all have a Christine in our past: a bit of an airhead, confused, with that far away look, and living way to much in a second reality but really harmless, in a dittzoid, Paris Hilton way, and hey, she’s not a democrat and as far as I know doesn’t kill her young.
And, Mr. Paladino is obviously not a man one should mess with, particularly concerning his children; either the ones living with a paramour, former or otherwise, or the ones at home. And, while we might criticize Mr. Paladino’s lifestyle and its certainly not one I’d choose as a struggling moralist, he appears to be the kind of man who, as we used to say, makes ‘amends.’
Mr. Paladino appears to be much, much superior, intellectually and morally, to New York Attorney General Cuomo. So much so that a vote for Cuomo is an indicator of a distrubed mind or an alienated conscience.
And, Ben my friend (he said harmoniously) I did not say Beck’s “ends in any way reflect some deep rooted understanding of the founding..”, rather that he had a ‘pretty good’ grasp of the founding but more importantly he was engaged in the act of teaching the masses about this founding and in so doing was aiding and abetting this ‘awakening’ of our historical traditions and that that’s a really good thing in this dark and unhappy age of Hope and Change.
October 4th, 2010 | 10:34 pm
Hey, I like citizen Coriolanus Paladino. As a fellow citizen. As a gadfly. And I’d perhaps like him even as a Senator. But can he assemble a decent team? Can he GOVERN? To vote for him seriously, is to seriously consider him as a better governing option for a huge and hugely complex state than status quo Cuomo. If he can give me more confidence about his team, and about his ability to work with the NY Republican Albany pros, I’ll give him another look.
Actually, I think on those terms I’d have an easier time voting for lying O’Donnell–she’ll just vote, usually the right way, and from time to time embarrass conservatives with her lies.
October 13th, 2010 | 12:42 am
It turns out that Mr. Paladino is as stupid as Clayton Williams. In Texas it may be a faux pas to say that one should take rape as one gets it as Mr. Williams advised those who may have found his policies too overbearing. In New York it may as well be as saying that one hopes one’s kid isn’t gay given all the trouble that is involved in coming out of the closet. Mr. Paladino may as well say that his policies will be out of the closet, and if those fags don’t like it, so be it.
Calayton Williams and Paladino are cut from the same coat. Rich dudes who think they have earthy humor until they put their dual foots in their own mouths, and then the conservatives who love them wonder why did they ever support such assholes. Give me a break.
Really? Let’s look for some rich SOB who has a sense of humor–he who can talk shit to the PC until they say something that will be taken to the limit by the liberal press. Those rich SOBs are looking for the typical oil company/investment firm breaks that their respective states can give them. Gimme a break! Paladino?!
NY Republican/conservatives were as dumb in nominating Paladino as Texans were in Clayton Williams. Just like that stupid chick in Delaware!
Wake up dudes. Must I make a gay joke or even a joke about rape to wake you up?
Remember Texans were so stupid with Clayton Williams that they ended up electing that crass and utterly incompetent woman who beautifully spoke of George Bush’s silver foot in his mouth!–i.e., Ann Richards.
Is that what you want?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact