An essay on the boiling pot; in the absence of shame and courage; a nation in distressA couple years ago as I waited in the hall at my church a longtime acquaintance came by. On our cordial greetings, I noted he carried a book. Inquisitively, I asked, what are you reading. No audible response. Catching up with him as he stopped to talk to someone, I asked again, thinking in church, he’s probably reading a devotional or some spiritual publication. Seemly reluctantly, he flashed the cover. Don’t remember the exact title, but as I remember three words were in it: Stupid, Idiot, and Liberals.
It is the Limbaughnites and Beckanites who have imposed a projection of the “angry liberals” brand, whereas the right is, at least, equal or even more disposed to anger, in this ubiquitously polarized nation. Thus, enters the tea party. The deep-seated anger turns to frustration. And when frustrations can’t find a way to rationally vent, some minds turn to irrationality and extremism. That’s a part of what this composition is about, (It’s not about welcomed critical debate; it’s about incendiary, destructive demagoguery.) including over-the-top disingenuousness, hypocrisy, and to the point of the right’s monopolist market of an intractable, viral politic that years ago became endemic in national politics without regard to ethic. The tea party, a birthright of the hard-right, exhibits these rudimentary elements unswerving of the movement. I would be remiss not to recognize some of these unbecoming characteristics in the left as well, but it has not become the party’s modus-operandi. At least not yet!
The almost flagrancy of the hard-right promotions, sometime subtle but many times overt, has become inescapable. Last spring when I carried my wife Jane to have her eye’s retina checked prior to cataract surgery, at Raleigh’s Southern Eye Associates office, I became dismayed. Being prepared to stay a full afternoon as advised and after reading all my magazines and other materials, I had been sitting waiting in front of the TV tuned to Fox’s promotional coverage of the tea party --- all afternoon. Nearing afternoon’s end, all others had left, I decided to turn the channel. I did but it automatically came back to the Fox News channel every time. (It’s their right of course, and I’m not opposed to occasionally watching some programs on Fox, but a full afternoon of Roger Ailes’ political agenda?)
A dear friend of mine, in my “Civil Discourse Group”, attended at least one tea-party event. When I shared a couple of articles with the group, investigative reports that showed big-money backing of the tea party, he rightfully took exception, as for his part. However, he further expressed concerns: (condensed) How the heck are we going to pay for all of Obama's ideas and still be America? My friend has traveled many countries and not seen freedoms we have; our government insures individual freedom through inherent belief in dignity of the individual; we should read the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, a government adheres to its founding documents; we are drifting dangerously into a European and socialist model that will take our initiatives and ambition away; He has seen this before his own eyes, and no billionaire has told him this.
I sense a lot of fear and anxiety in these feelings. What is it that drives the disquieting fears and raw emotions that obviously is one of the motivating factors for many of the tea-party following? Nicholas Kristof, gives some response to just that in this article: America’s History of Fear. When fear turns to widespread extremism it must be denounced by more rational level heads. Bridge-builders must prevail who will counter those who spread hysteria of unfounded doubt, hate, and fear that undermines the bridge’s integrity. It’s their job wherever extremism invades and undermines the civil society, whether the moderate Muslim or the moderate-middle-of-the-road citizen of our nation, to have the guts to speak up.
Thus, I begin my response: (By no means does this full response apply to my dear friend; it more broadly applies to the full range of political, contentious strife.)
My honorable friend, you are an independent-thinker and your actions and efforts in thoughts of concern, care, and correction for our country are as noble as mine or others. Many of those who attend tea party events demonstrate the same admiral concern, as apparently evidenced by the weekend of Glenn Beck’s journey at the Hallowed Lincoln Memorial. But let’s step back and try for a little reality check, otherwise known as TRUTH.
Most reasonable, sane people, I believe, uphold the same ideals and constitutional security for our country’s citizens. This should always be our common ground. However, we have different approaches as to what’s best to maintain the principles of our founding fathers that will endure for future generations.
I understand most of the concerns you have expressed, including free-school meals, liberal giveaways. I’ve heard the stories first hand, but these are puny peanuts compared to what’s being siphoned off in so many other ways, much by the rich. All administrations need to bear down on these abuses, whether by law or implementation of the program.
The debt is a big concern! But where was the outrage when in the previous administration the debt doubled as many Republicans said it’s of no concern, including Vice-President Cheney. I know there was 9/11 and two wars to run up the debt when for the first time in the history of our nation taxes were cut during war time. But still a Republican President and Republican Congress found a way to accommodate seniors with meds with pharmaceuticals being the beneficiary, in one of the largest unpaid for social programs ever. Rightly so, I’m guessing this is a part of the tea-party’s justifiable impulsion. I am prone to agree with how another friend of ours describes the tea party: “The tea party movement (whatever it is) is a fragmented protest in the best tradition of American grassroots freedom. Because they are fragmented generalizations do not help understanding. The main message seems to be the increase size of grovernment and the great spending which occurs under both parties. This is perhaps the central issue in politics today.” Whatever the tea party is, it is reaction by some with prejudices and overt racisms or racial overtones.
We can’t deny the derelict, dilapidated, inherited economy (blame many but not Democrat Presidents on debt to this point) given over to this administration without being vilely disingenuous or hypocritical.
*You might not approve of Bush/Obama TARP, but you have to know that bank failures were about to be one of the greatest financial catastrophes this world had ever seen. It was a time in history, two years ago - Sept. 2008, when Republicans and Democrats made our government actually work to stave off a galloping crisis. As Fareed Zakaria says, the fractional-cost of the $700B, was a small price to pay for avoiding another Great Depression, of a potential 25% unemployment. (However, sadly, since then the squawkers have created such a distorted reality that no politician want to claim its success.) You have to know it was large-banks’ failures that uniquely define this longsuffering protracted recovery beyond a normal recession. ---------------- *You might not agree that it was right to bail out the American auto industry, but you have to know that this industry was on the brink to cost many thousands if not millions of jobs around the country and world. ----------- *You might not agree with Keynesian economics, stimulus, but you have to know that this economy was headed deep, deep south fast. ------------- *You might not agree that stimulus (Or you might agree in that much of the stimulus bill was tax cuts.) has been effective, but you have to know that if not for stimulus many more people would be without jobs and that it continues to keep people employed, many in education. ----------------- *You may not agree with Bank-Regulation Reformation, but you have to know that most of all it was big-banking recklessness and abuses over a long period that brought a financial debacle; it’s this that economies must be protected from future financial hazards. --------------- *You might not agree that basic, reasonable-health benefits is an important issue for the wellbeing of a free society as many continued to lose their health coverage, but you must know that Universal Healthcare was a platform promise by President Obama, a priority by many of the majority vote, and you must know it is a law that hospitals are mandated to give care, regardless of a citizens economic status. You must know that a more efficient, reliable administrative instrument, such as the Cleveland Clinic uses must be broadly devised for health-cost control and amenable healthcare. You must know of all the myths generated about Obamacare. --------------------- *We will agree that deficits do matter, but you have to know that seven Republicans (with Obama’s acquiesces) participated in crafting a bill for a “deficit commission” but reneged when cornered by Grover Norquist, the anti-tax hawk, who suggested that tax reformation (or new taxes) would be required to balance the budget.
We would agree that our nation’s defense and security is an imperative, but any fiscally responsible person might question our overreaction to 9/11: “The amount of money spent on intelligence has risen by 250 percent, to $75 billion (and that’s the public number, which is a gross underestimate). That’s more than the rest of the world spends put together.” And that’s in addition to U. S. Defense cost that already is equal to the combined spent by all other countries around the world. You have to know that it is the extreme right that continues the ballyhoo: from neo-Dick and Liz Cheney to right-wing news pundits and numerous articles, including many published on Christian-right websites that continue to stir the flames of fear and doubt that no Muslim can be trusted. Obama is not protecting our nation! These same extremist forces, so blatantly disingenuous and hypocritical, would not provide the “tax dollar” to pay defense of the dire consequences they forecast.
We would agree that to “restore honor to our nation” is a noble calling, but we must know that Glenn Beck, to be a credible spokesman, needs first to work on restoring his honor. It’s as scandalous as it gets when he advises church members to run from any church that preaches or practices social justice, which actually was the principle message of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Maybe his inflections, change in course, was about repentance, being accountable to a higher calling. If that’s it, more power to the cause. Only time will tell. But without prejudging, I highly suspect, in view of the stage backdrop with David Barton of WallBuilders, it was: may I suggest, a political rally wrapped in religious piety. Barton is a Republican Party activist and self-proclaimed historian for the purpose of "educating the nation concerning the Godly foundation of our country." In his view there is no separation of church and state; his constitution would bind our nation to a certain fundamentalist-religious identity, when in fact our founder’s ancestry came to this country seeking the religious freedoms now guaranteed in our constitution.
Now you know of the unknown spirit speaking to Beck which he must have misinterpreted. For surely on the hallowed ground of old Abe Lincoln and for miles around it was the deist founding fathers of our nation speaking in disgust: including Thomas Jefferson who took scissors to the Gospels, removing the chaff and leaving only the nuggets, composed his own Gospel. And, surprisingly this of all places, a right-wing-religious website: God, the gospel, and Glenn Beck: “Rather than cultivating a Christian vision of justice and the common good (which would have, by necessity, been nuanced enough to put us sometimes at odds with our political allies), we've relied on populist God-and-country sloganeering and outrage-generating talking heads. We've tolerated heresy and buffoonery in our leadership as long as with it there is sufficient political "conservatism" and a sufficient commercial venue to sell our books and products.”
It was two different articles I shared with my “Civil Discourse” group that initiated this writing: Covert Operations and The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party . In the first, Jane Mayer of the New Yorker uncovers covert operations of the Koch brothers. My preface in part to the group: “I've known the "Koch" name for many years, because over the years I've purchased some of their petroleum products. However, I did not know of their radical-self-serving ideology or that they are third richest U. S. individuals only behind Buffet and Gates.
It is the money behind the raucous forces that drives a radical-extremist- libertarian agenda; it's not the traditional, gentleman Conservative-Republican Party. These strident forces with overt racism and anti-government slurs fit perfect Beck, Limbaugh-type agendas. Koch's initiatives explain also Mort Zuckerman (remember "Obama's Done Everything Wrong"), Governor Pataki, and don't leave out Dick Armey (Why other than money would he be leading a tea party?). To quote from the investigative, Covert Operations article: The Republican campaign consultant said of the family’s political activities, “To call them under the radar is an understatement. They are underground!” Another former Koch adviser said, “They’re smart. This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves.” Rob Stein, a Democratic political strategist who has studied the conservative movement’s finances, said that the Kochs are “at the epicenter of the anti-Obama movement. But it’s not just about Obama. They would have done the same to Hillary Clinton. They did the same with Bill Clinton. They are out to destroy progressivism.”
In the second article, Frank Rich expands the understanding of what’s behind the tea party: “The Koch brothers’ father, Fred, was among the select group chosen to serve on the Birch Society’s top governing body. In a recorded 1963 speech that survives in a University of Michigan archive, he can be heard warning of “a takeover” of America in which Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the president is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.” That rant could be delivered as is at any Tea Party rally today.”
Is this the mold from which the slogan “Take back our country,” the mantra immediately assailed against this administration? Arrogantly, take back from whom, a new president had just been elected as the economy tanked. (It’s like we all dug a deep hole together, half the group shoved the other half in the hole and have been shoveling dirt on them ever since.) “The conservative movement has spent the last 20 months sowing hysteria about President Obama's agenda. The most respectable Republicans call the president a socialist, a radical, a threat to freedom. The less respectable Republicans, many of them highly influential, call him an alien, a sympathizer of radical Islam, a conscious enemy of the United States who is trying to wreck the economy. Obama is a dangerous figure, he cannot be compromised with, and the fight against him is a twilight struggle to save the last vestiges of the Republic.”
We can pretend that this hyped-up rallying, playing on many people’s prejudices, casting doubt, fear, and hate is harmless. (And I’m not referring my dear friend and many more that follower tea parties.) But in a pluralistic society, the melting pot, it is not only obnoxious and dangerous, it undermines a basic value and violates one of the civil tenets we thought we had mostly won, one that tugs at the very roots of civility.
We may agree or disagree that the ilks of Beck and Limbaugh when at their worst, throwing red meat to the base, are destructive, but we must know they are irresponsible, inflammatory, and beyond powerful reproach by any of their party affiliates. They carry the narrative (the prevailing message that in some places seems to have been won) and banner for the likes of many tea partiers and/or disgruntled bigots.
We may agree or not that the Koch brothers’ right-wing-radical-libertarian ideology and their wealthy undercover influence is of no injury to the American government and its free-enterprise system, but we must know that their monetary-under-the-radar manipulatives negate government policy that would set our country on a corrected course to sustainable, renewable energy and continuing the United States Environmental Protection Agency which was initiated by President Nixon. We must know Koch’s and Murdock’s schema is to stall or defeat any progression for reordering America’s workforce with technological, innovative, jobs that would slow the use of fossil fuels. Note by this chart from a Washington Post blog that energy’s research, the smallest amount of all, and much of that goes to developing new fossil fuel sources. That’s why we so desperately need a renewable-energy bill.
We may agree or disagree that the rampant email rumors in the hundreds of lies, false accusation, promoting conspiracies, such as claiming the illegitimacy of our President’s citizenship, are not harmful ---- but we must know those that claims such as “Obama was not born in America, and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: to believe any of these requires suspending some of our critical--thinking faculties and succumbing instead to the kind of irrationality that drives the logically minded crazy.” We must know that it is our moral duty not to pass these false rumors and half truths but in fact to counter them when received. Nicholas Kristof writes, Is This America? with regard to the false emails being circulated: “Or there’s the e-mail I received the other day from a relative, declaring: “President Obama has directed the United States Postal Service to remember and honor the Eid Muslim holiday season with a new commemorative 44 cent first class holiday postage stamp.” In fact, it was President Bush’s administration that first issued the Eid stamp in 2001 and that issued new versions after that.
Lee Atwater, political strategist and consultant in the Reagan and Bush I Presidencies and political mentor and close friend to Karl Rove and the epitome of dirty politics during the 80s, compares mildly to the ugly, despicable politics of his legacy-party of today.
The many subtle (or overt) messages supported by Koch’s breed of underground operatives, perpetuated by the right-wing media’s bombardment of scurrilous rhetoric, driving the under currents of fear and doubt, has cast a cloud over our nation. A friend says, so what! The Kocks bankrolling the right; the left is bankrolled by big money. Yes, that’s true. It’s long been known that George Soros backs MoveOn.Org. The point is that it’s well known and there is not a hidden agenda to subvert the government. Soros, the 80th richest person in the world, also does not promote policy that would preclude him from paying taxes, dismantle government, or flee his responsibility to society for the great privilege he has to make money in America. In this regard, he is of the spirit of Buffet and Gates even though more politically involved.
The concerns/fears of America becoming a “socialist country” are exaggerated. Certainly, for the purpose of a political wedge, the fact that it’s one of the bugaboos used with Communist, Marist, Fascist and don’t forget the frightful liberal to make you very afraid. We in fact already have social programs which need to be made more equitable, such as healthcare, and made more efficient. But you can’t legitimately pin the socialist-liberal label on Obama without suspending some critical-thinking faculties. He’s made no one happy, left or right, a testament to his center-leadership in one of the most alienated societies ever. Of course, the obstructionist in their false narrative painted him otherwise, and has barred real-reformations needed on many issues. Anything slightly to the left of the tea party’s chanting is made to be extremely liberal.
Just what would a tea party representative have done and what will they do once in office? What’s their platform? Taxes and deficits, maybe, are the crux issues of tea partiers. Ezra Klein writes: “But at the end of the day, eliminating runaway deficits means one - actually, a few - of the following things: Tax hikes, Medicare cuts, Social Security cuts and military spending cuts. Which do the tea parties favor? Actually, let me rephrase: Which will they insist on? That's the hard stuff. That's when we'll see whether the tea parties are really something new in American politics, or just more of the same weak brew.”
If the right’s answer on everything continues to be “no taxes/cut taxes” and those who have had the privilege of getting rich continue to dodge their patriotic duty, we the people of government will surrender to a chaotic society. (It is the extremist view to excessively cut programs, but few say what, except some of the tea partiers openly advocate closing departments of government: Education, EPA, Housing, Energy; abolishment of Medicare and privatizing Social Security.) The top’s growth in income will continue to increase disproportionally to the middle and lower class, and thereby no one has money to make the top richer. In 2007 the super-rich grew even richer, the imbalance grew ever worse. The top 1% of all U. S. earners took home nearly a quarter of all income. Between 2000 and 2008 only 2% of all American workers, only those with postgraduate degree such as doctors, lawyers and MBAs, saw gains in their “mean real money income.” (The Great Reset by Richard Florida) And this chart from Washington Post shows breakdown of who saw the most income growth, 1979 to 2007.
It is understandable large corporation must show good returns for their shareholders; therefore, the largest expenses must be cut first: The axing of workers by the millions is where we are today. But many top executives continue Stuffing Their Pockets. The average CEO’s pay in 1980s was 40 times the average worker’s pay. Today it’s over 400 times! Now I’m not against the rich man; I love him just like I love the pauper. But money, tax cuts, solely as a motivator, for the upper echelon or the lowest worker, to ensure a vibrant economy is a misnomer. If that were true, we would not have many dedicated employees in our society that continue to go beyond the call of duty, in some cases enduring the workload of those laid off. In the case of the 400x average worker, “greed” is fittingly descriptive. Forbes magazine reported in 2004, the federal corporate tax rate was less than 10%. Corporate tax evasions are widespread, much of it by stretching legality of an unfair tax-law, according to former Senator Bryon Dorgan. It’s been reported that overall taxes are the lowest since 1950s. The main point: only people who make money are able to pay taxes; everyone, however, has a stake in the economy, from the bottom-up either by sheer sweat-equity or cash dollars to put something back into American’s well-being safety-net; put something back on the wood pile, whether through volunteerism, charitable contributions, and yes to support a more effective government. And that undergirding must be by all privileged to live and work in the freedoms of this nation, including those having the opportunity to amass enormous wealth. (It is an observation by some of us: seemingly those least able to give back are those who support the less fortunate most.) I am reminded of what the son of a local downtown clothing merchant once told me, quoting his dad: Mr. Huntley said, “Without all the poor people that trade with me I would not make money.”
Newt Gingrich, the gaga boy with all his craziness, trying to become relevant as a presidential candidate, seems to be somewhat emblematic movement of the tea party. “Gingrich was excoriated by right-wing bloggers, who said he had lost all credibility and didn't support true conservatism. He's since made amends by attacking President Obama's "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior" a term he picked up from an irresponsible article in Forbes which has now been widely denounced by some on the right as irresponsible journalism. Newt’s irrationality and that of many tea-party adherents seems mindless, because their consequential offenses, their anathema to taxes/fair taxing and disdain for government, naively or prejudicially mount the Koch’s and hard-right ideology crusades, which, I believe, they’ll learn works against their own interest, not an abolishment of government but a more effective and accountable government.
The right has let itself (Capitulation to Rush, Glenn and their ilk; the right’s politicians catering to, mimicking their screenplay.) be “turned on its head” causing many of the older, highly respected senators to retreat to the quite shadows of the Capitol. The old voices of wisdom such as Lugar and Hatch and most all of the other Republican moderate voices, including Collins and Snowe of Maine, have been relegated to the backseats of a mysterious political progeny. No doubt the extreme right’s shenanigans have been an embarrassment to many ladies and gentlemen, highly ethical Republicans.
Do give Republican Senator Orrin Hatch an award for being “The Most Courageous.” Against all odds, he seems to be saying “enough is enough”: For he has broken ranks with Republicans and is supporting the “Ground Zero mosque.”
After all, the tea party’s battle-of-frustrations and mysteriousness is not in ambiguity to any diligent free -thinker. Just think back to when our president was elected, immediately the right set the narrative and the mantra “Take back our country.” Think of all the “NOs” and John Boehner’s “Hell No.” Think of all the Limbaughnites and Beckanites and their multiple chanters around the country. Think of the Lee Atwater bequest (Even though, at least, he was repentant on deathbed.), Karl Rove, Roger Ailes, Fox tea-party promotions, and now we are thinking of the Koch brothers and their under-the-radar deconstruction of anything progressive. And if you are thinking unethical, you are probably on a more-sound moral-ground and wise mind!
When Bob Inglis, a 93% conservative rated Republican U. S. House of Representative member from S. C., was defeated by a tea party candidate, in this interview, Confessions of a Tea Party Casualty: And when he thinks about what lies ahead for his party and GOP House leaders, he can't help but chuckle. With Boehner and others chasing after the tea party, he says, "that's going to be the dog that catches the car." He quickly adds: "And the Democrats, if they go into the minority, are going to have an enjoyable couple of years watching that dog deal with the car it's caught."
In these austere times, conservatism should be our guide, i.e. “progressive conservatism” as opposed to “regressive conservatism.” By any measure what the tea party is conferring could not in the traditional definition be called conservatism; it is radical opposition to anything pragmatic. “What’s distinctive about the Tea Party is its anarchist streak—its antagonism toward any authority, its belligerent self-expression, and its lack of any coherent program or alternative to the policies it condemns.”
Many candidates may get elected on this anti-everything-everybody wigwag-strategy. But they’re in for an enormous disappointment if they think they can effect a quick-turnaround of this economy. (I doubt that’s their goal.) For according to Richard Florida who compares the current economic downfall to the depressions of 1870s and 1930s, we are now in an era of “The Great Reset”: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity. Inadequately expressed, our dilemma is to find the best answers for a reordering of innovative jobs in a geographical fix, effected by where and how we live, by new-high-speed-rail systems and/or transportation systems that increases connectivity and proximity to thriving markets. Economic geography “is that a good way to get rich (or make a good living) is to be near other rich places; remoteness is costly.” This will not come quickly or easily. It may be an evolvement of twenty, thirty years or longer. Some of Generation Y and Generation X, our youngest generations, may comprehend this seismic shift and be reassessing their values predicated on this premise. My young, 26-year-old, married grandson lives in London, has no automobile, most of the time rides his bike six miles to work, and yet makes an excellent salary with BofA. These youthful age groups, in their vision, are ahead of the upper-middle age and an older generation, mostly male and mostly white tea partiers who are in the fearful throes of “losing something.” Their suspicions are stirred by the limbaughbecks!
To sum it all up as Jim Wallis, Christian writer and political activist, reminds us of what Mohandas Gandhi warned against decades ago, the seven social sins: politics without principle; wealth without work; commerce without morality; pleasure without conscience; education without character; science without humanity; worship without sacrifice. So as our nation is scourged by many of these social sins, some of which have become rife of our nation’s social fabric, so goes our nation into the future. Can that be corrected?
Now, I yield to those who revel on the perilous waves of Limbaugh, Beck, and other trumped-up negative air-waves, who for the most part are the creators of tea party, to extract whatever good or honor may residually lie within. And, I’ll have my eyes open to be flashed a book cover-title, When Darkness Turns to Light, which will be written about those who followed the antics of limbaughbecks, some innocently down a dark terrifying dead-end road. In the meantime, whatever our political persuasions, let us reclaim our ethical mores, attuned to the better angel of our soul, as we are the voice of reason, respect, and goodwill for all people. Let us never despair that man can’t be and do better!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“‘God is always good’ but in reality God is as good as we are GOOD for God, and as Christians expressed through our relationship with Christ, our interpretation of Biblical scripture or lack thereof, ironically, good or evil may be evoked.” Cornell Cox; Verily God will not change the condition of a people until they change themselves" (Qur'an 13:11).
It is the Limbaughnites and Beckanites who have imposed a projection of the “angry liberals” brand, whereas the right is, at least, equal or even more disposed to anger, in this ubiquitously polarized nation. Thus, enters the tea party. The deep-seated anger turns to frustration. And when frustrations can’t find a way to rationally vent, some minds turn to irrationality and extremism. That’s a part of what this composition is about, (It’s not about welcomed critical debate; it’s about incendiary, destructive demagoguery.) including over-the-top disingenuousness, hypocrisy, and to the point of the right’s monopolist market of an intractable, viral politic that years ago became endemic in national politics without regard to ethic. The tea party, a birthright of the hard-right, exhibits these rudimentary elements unswerving of the movement. I would be remiss not to recognize some of these unbecoming characteristics in the left as well, but it has not become the party’s modus-operandi. At least not yet!
The almost flagrancy of the hard-right promotions, sometime subtle but many times overt, has become inescapable. Last spring when I carried my wife Jane to have her eye’s retina checked prior to cataract surgery, at Raleigh’s Southern Eye Associates office, I became dismayed. Being prepared to stay a full afternoon as advised and after reading all my magazines and other materials, I had been sitting waiting in front of the TV tuned to Fox’s promotional coverage of the tea party --- all afternoon. Nearing afternoon’s end, all others had left, I decided to turn the channel. I did but it automatically came back to the Fox News channel every time. (It’s their right of course, and I’m not opposed to occasionally watching some programs on Fox, but a full afternoon of Roger Ailes’ political agenda?)
A dear friend of mine, in my “Civil Discourse Group”, attended at least one tea-party event. When I shared a couple of articles with the group, investigative reports that showed big-money backing of the tea party, he rightfully took exception, as for his part. However, he further expressed concerns: (condensed) How the heck are we going to pay for all of Obama's ideas and still be America? My friend has traveled many countries and not seen freedoms we have; our government insures individual freedom through inherent belief in dignity of the individual; we should read the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, a government adheres to its founding documents; we are drifting dangerously into a European and socialist model that will take our initiatives and ambition away; He has seen this before his own eyes, and no billionaire has told him this.
I sense a lot of fear and anxiety in these feelings. What is it that drives the disquieting fears and raw emotions that obviously is one of the motivating factors for many of the tea-party following? Nicholas Kristof, gives some response to just that in this article: America’s History of Fear. When fear turns to widespread extremism it must be denounced by more rational level heads. Bridge-builders must prevail who will counter those who spread hysteria of unfounded doubt, hate, and fear that undermines the bridge’s integrity. It’s their job wherever extremism invades and undermines the civil society, whether the moderate Muslim or the moderate-middle-of-the-road citizen of our nation, to have the guts to speak up.
Thus, I begin my response: (By no means does this full response apply to my dear friend; it more broadly applies to the full range of political, contentious strife.)
My honorable friend, you are an independent-thinker and your actions and efforts in thoughts of concern, care, and correction for our country are as noble as mine or others. Many of those who attend tea party events demonstrate the same admiral concern, as apparently evidenced by the weekend of Glenn Beck’s journey at the Hallowed Lincoln Memorial. But let’s step back and try for a little reality check, otherwise known as TRUTH.
Most reasonable, sane people, I believe, uphold the same ideals and constitutional security for our country’s citizens. This should always be our common ground. However, we have different approaches as to what’s best to maintain the principles of our founding fathers that will endure for future generations.
I understand most of the concerns you have expressed, including free-school meals, liberal giveaways. I’ve heard the stories first hand, but these are puny peanuts compared to what’s being siphoned off in so many other ways, much by the rich. All administrations need to bear down on these abuses, whether by law or implementation of the program.
The debt is a big concern! But where was the outrage when in the previous administration the debt doubled as many Republicans said it’s of no concern, including Vice-President Cheney. I know there was 9/11 and two wars to run up the debt when for the first time in the history of our nation taxes were cut during war time. But still a Republican President and Republican Congress found a way to accommodate seniors with meds with pharmaceuticals being the beneficiary, in one of the largest unpaid for social programs ever. Rightly so, I’m guessing this is a part of the tea-party’s justifiable impulsion. I am prone to agree with how another friend of ours describes the tea party: “The tea party movement (whatever it is) is a fragmented protest in the best tradition of American grassroots freedom. Because they are fragmented generalizations do not help understanding. The main message seems to be the increase size of grovernment and the great spending which occurs under both parties. This is perhaps the central issue in politics today.” Whatever the tea party is, it is reaction by some with prejudices and overt racisms or racial overtones.
We can’t deny the derelict, dilapidated, inherited economy (blame many but not Democrat Presidents on debt to this point) given over to this administration without being vilely disingenuous or hypocritical.
*You might not approve of Bush/Obama TARP, but you have to know that bank failures were about to be one of the greatest financial catastrophes this world had ever seen. It was a time in history, two years ago - Sept. 2008, when Republicans and Democrats made our government actually work to stave off a galloping crisis. As Fareed Zakaria says, the fractional-cost of the $700B, was a small price to pay for avoiding another Great Depression, of a potential 25% unemployment. (However, sadly, since then the squawkers have created such a distorted reality that no politician want to claim its success.) You have to know it was large-banks’ failures that uniquely define this longsuffering protracted recovery beyond a normal recession. ---------------- *You might not agree that it was right to bail out the American auto industry, but you have to know that this industry was on the brink to cost many thousands if not millions of jobs around the country and world. ----------- *You might not agree with Keynesian economics, stimulus, but you have to know that this economy was headed deep, deep south fast. ------------- *You might not agree that stimulus (Or you might agree in that much of the stimulus bill was tax cuts.) has been effective, but you have to know that if not for stimulus many more people would be without jobs and that it continues to keep people employed, many in education. ----------------- *You may not agree with Bank-Regulation Reformation, but you have to know that most of all it was big-banking recklessness and abuses over a long period that brought a financial debacle; it’s this that economies must be protected from future financial hazards. --------------- *You might not agree that basic, reasonable-health benefits is an important issue for the wellbeing of a free society as many continued to lose their health coverage, but you must know that Universal Healthcare was a platform promise by President Obama, a priority by many of the majority vote, and you must know it is a law that hospitals are mandated to give care, regardless of a citizens economic status. You must know that a more efficient, reliable administrative instrument, such as the Cleveland Clinic uses must be broadly devised for health-cost control and amenable healthcare. You must know of all the myths generated about Obamacare. --------------------- *We will agree that deficits do matter, but you have to know that seven Republicans (with Obama’s acquiesces) participated in crafting a bill for a “deficit commission” but reneged when cornered by Grover Norquist, the anti-tax hawk, who suggested that tax reformation (or new taxes) would be required to balance the budget.
We would agree that our nation’s defense and security is an imperative, but any fiscally responsible person might question our overreaction to 9/11: “The amount of money spent on intelligence has risen by 250 percent, to $75 billion (and that’s the public number, which is a gross underestimate). That’s more than the rest of the world spends put together.” And that’s in addition to U. S. Defense cost that already is equal to the combined spent by all other countries around the world. You have to know that it is the extreme right that continues the ballyhoo: from neo-Dick and Liz Cheney to right-wing news pundits and numerous articles, including many published on Christian-right websites that continue to stir the flames of fear and doubt that no Muslim can be trusted. Obama is not protecting our nation! These same extremist forces, so blatantly disingenuous and hypocritical, would not provide the “tax dollar” to pay defense of the dire consequences they forecast.
We would agree that to “restore honor to our nation” is a noble calling, but we must know that Glenn Beck, to be a credible spokesman, needs first to work on restoring his honor. It’s as scandalous as it gets when he advises church members to run from any church that preaches or practices social justice, which actually was the principle message of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Maybe his inflections, change in course, was about repentance, being accountable to a higher calling. If that’s it, more power to the cause. Only time will tell. But without prejudging, I highly suspect, in view of the stage backdrop with David Barton of WallBuilders, it was: may I suggest, a political rally wrapped in religious piety. Barton is a Republican Party activist and self-proclaimed historian for the purpose of "educating the nation concerning the Godly foundation of our country." In his view there is no separation of church and state; his constitution would bind our nation to a certain fundamentalist-religious identity, when in fact our founder’s ancestry came to this country seeking the religious freedoms now guaranteed in our constitution.
Now you know of the unknown spirit speaking to Beck which he must have misinterpreted. For surely on the hallowed ground of old Abe Lincoln and for miles around it was the deist founding fathers of our nation speaking in disgust: including Thomas Jefferson who took scissors to the Gospels, removing the chaff and leaving only the nuggets, composed his own Gospel. And, surprisingly this of all places, a right-wing-religious website: God, the gospel, and Glenn Beck: “Rather than cultivating a Christian vision of justice and the common good (which would have, by necessity, been nuanced enough to put us sometimes at odds with our political allies), we've relied on populist God-and-country sloganeering and outrage-generating talking heads. We've tolerated heresy and buffoonery in our leadership as long as with it there is sufficient political "conservatism" and a sufficient commercial venue to sell our books and products.”
It was two different articles I shared with my “Civil Discourse” group that initiated this writing: Covert Operations and The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party . In the first, Jane Mayer of the New Yorker uncovers covert operations of the Koch brothers. My preface in part to the group: “I've known the "Koch" name for many years, because over the years I've purchased some of their petroleum products. However, I did not know of their radical-self-serving ideology or that they are third richest U. S. individuals only behind Buffet and Gates.
It is the money behind the raucous forces that drives a radical-extremist- libertarian agenda; it's not the traditional, gentleman Conservative-Republican Party. These strident forces with overt racism and anti-government slurs fit perfect Beck, Limbaugh-type agendas. Koch's initiatives explain also Mort Zuckerman (remember "Obama's Done Everything Wrong"), Governor Pataki, and don't leave out Dick Armey (Why other than money would he be leading a tea party?). To quote from the investigative, Covert Operations article: The Republican campaign consultant said of the family’s political activities, “To call them under the radar is an understatement. They are underground!” Another former Koch adviser said, “They’re smart. This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves.” Rob Stein, a Democratic political strategist who has studied the conservative movement’s finances, said that the Kochs are “at the epicenter of the anti-Obama movement. But it’s not just about Obama. They would have done the same to Hillary Clinton. They did the same with Bill Clinton. They are out to destroy progressivism.”
In the second article, Frank Rich expands the understanding of what’s behind the tea party: “The Koch brothers’ father, Fred, was among the select group chosen to serve on the Birch Society’s top governing body. In a recorded 1963 speech that survives in a University of Michigan archive, he can be heard warning of “a takeover” of America in which Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the president is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.” That rant could be delivered as is at any Tea Party rally today.”
Is this the mold from which the slogan “Take back our country,” the mantra immediately assailed against this administration? Arrogantly, take back from whom, a new president had just been elected as the economy tanked. (It’s like we all dug a deep hole together, half the group shoved the other half in the hole and have been shoveling dirt on them ever since.) “The conservative movement has spent the last 20 months sowing hysteria about President Obama's agenda. The most respectable Republicans call the president a socialist, a radical, a threat to freedom. The less respectable Republicans, many of them highly influential, call him an alien, a sympathizer of radical Islam, a conscious enemy of the United States who is trying to wreck the economy. Obama is a dangerous figure, he cannot be compromised with, and the fight against him is a twilight struggle to save the last vestiges of the Republic.”
We can pretend that this hyped-up rallying, playing on many people’s prejudices, casting doubt, fear, and hate is harmless. (And I’m not referring my dear friend and many more that follower tea parties.) But in a pluralistic society, the melting pot, it is not only obnoxious and dangerous, it undermines a basic value and violates one of the civil tenets we thought we had mostly won, one that tugs at the very roots of civility.
We may agree or disagree that the ilks of Beck and Limbaugh when at their worst, throwing red meat to the base, are destructive, but we must know they are irresponsible, inflammatory, and beyond powerful reproach by any of their party affiliates. They carry the narrative (the prevailing message that in some places seems to have been won) and banner for the likes of many tea partiers and/or disgruntled bigots.
We may agree or not that the Koch brothers’ right-wing-radical-libertarian ideology and their wealthy undercover influence is of no injury to the American government and its free-enterprise system, but we must know that their monetary-under-the-radar manipulatives negate government policy that would set our country on a corrected course to sustainable, renewable energy and continuing the United States Environmental Protection Agency which was initiated by President Nixon. We must know Koch’s and Murdock’s schema is to stall or defeat any progression for reordering America’s workforce with technological, innovative, jobs that would slow the use of fossil fuels. Note by this chart from a Washington Post blog that energy’s research, the smallest amount of all, and much of that goes to developing new fossil fuel sources. That’s why we so desperately need a renewable-energy bill.
We may agree or disagree that the rampant email rumors in the hundreds of lies, false accusation, promoting conspiracies, such as claiming the illegitimacy of our President’s citizenship, are not harmful ---- but we must know those that claims such as “Obama was not born in America, and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: to believe any of these requires suspending some of our critical--thinking faculties and succumbing instead to the kind of irrationality that drives the logically minded crazy.” We must know that it is our moral duty not to pass these false rumors and half truths but in fact to counter them when received. Nicholas Kristof writes, Is This America? with regard to the false emails being circulated: “Or there’s the e-mail I received the other day from a relative, declaring: “President Obama has directed the United States Postal Service to remember and honor the Eid Muslim holiday season with a new commemorative 44 cent first class holiday postage stamp.” In fact, it was President Bush’s administration that first issued the Eid stamp in 2001 and that issued new versions after that.
Lee Atwater, political strategist and consultant in the Reagan and Bush I Presidencies and political mentor and close friend to Karl Rove and the epitome of dirty politics during the 80s, compares mildly to the ugly, despicable politics of his legacy-party of today.
The many subtle (or overt) messages supported by Koch’s breed of underground operatives, perpetuated by the right-wing media’s bombardment of scurrilous rhetoric, driving the under currents of fear and doubt, has cast a cloud over our nation. A friend says, so what! The Kocks bankrolling the right; the left is bankrolled by big money. Yes, that’s true. It’s long been known that George Soros backs MoveOn.Org. The point is that it’s well known and there is not a hidden agenda to subvert the government. Soros, the 80th richest person in the world, also does not promote policy that would preclude him from paying taxes, dismantle government, or flee his responsibility to society for the great privilege he has to make money in America. In this regard, he is of the spirit of Buffet and Gates even though more politically involved.
The concerns/fears of America becoming a “socialist country” are exaggerated. Certainly, for the purpose of a political wedge, the fact that it’s one of the bugaboos used with Communist, Marist, Fascist and don’t forget the frightful liberal to make you very afraid. We in fact already have social programs which need to be made more equitable, such as healthcare, and made more efficient. But you can’t legitimately pin the socialist-liberal label on Obama without suspending some critical-thinking faculties. He’s made no one happy, left or right, a testament to his center-leadership in one of the most alienated societies ever. Of course, the obstructionist in their false narrative painted him otherwise, and has barred real-reformations needed on many issues. Anything slightly to the left of the tea party’s chanting is made to be extremely liberal.
Just what would a tea party representative have done and what will they do once in office? What’s their platform? Taxes and deficits, maybe, are the crux issues of tea partiers. Ezra Klein writes: “But at the end of the day, eliminating runaway deficits means one - actually, a few - of the following things: Tax hikes, Medicare cuts, Social Security cuts and military spending cuts. Which do the tea parties favor? Actually, let me rephrase: Which will they insist on? That's the hard stuff. That's when we'll see whether the tea parties are really something new in American politics, or just more of the same weak brew.”
If the right’s answer on everything continues to be “no taxes/cut taxes” and those who have had the privilege of getting rich continue to dodge their patriotic duty, we the people of government will surrender to a chaotic society. (It is the extremist view to excessively cut programs, but few say what, except some of the tea partiers openly advocate closing departments of government: Education, EPA, Housing, Energy; abolishment of Medicare and privatizing Social Security.) The top’s growth in income will continue to increase disproportionally to the middle and lower class, and thereby no one has money to make the top richer. In 2007 the super-rich grew even richer, the imbalance grew ever worse. The top 1% of all U. S. earners took home nearly a quarter of all income. Between 2000 and 2008 only 2% of all American workers, only those with postgraduate degree such as doctors, lawyers and MBAs, saw gains in their “mean real money income.” (The Great Reset by Richard Florida) And this chart from Washington Post shows breakdown of who saw the most income growth, 1979 to 2007.
It is understandable large corporation must show good returns for their shareholders; therefore, the largest expenses must be cut first: The axing of workers by the millions is where we are today. But many top executives continue Stuffing Their Pockets. The average CEO’s pay in 1980s was 40 times the average worker’s pay. Today it’s over 400 times! Now I’m not against the rich man; I love him just like I love the pauper. But money, tax cuts, solely as a motivator, for the upper echelon or the lowest worker, to ensure a vibrant economy is a misnomer. If that were true, we would not have many dedicated employees in our society that continue to go beyond the call of duty, in some cases enduring the workload of those laid off. In the case of the 400x average worker, “greed” is fittingly descriptive. Forbes magazine reported in 2004, the federal corporate tax rate was less than 10%. Corporate tax evasions are widespread, much of it by stretching legality of an unfair tax-law, according to former Senator Bryon Dorgan. It’s been reported that overall taxes are the lowest since 1950s. The main point: only people who make money are able to pay taxes; everyone, however, has a stake in the economy, from the bottom-up either by sheer sweat-equity or cash dollars to put something back into American’s well-being safety-net; put something back on the wood pile, whether through volunteerism, charitable contributions, and yes to support a more effective government. And that undergirding must be by all privileged to live and work in the freedoms of this nation, including those having the opportunity to amass enormous wealth. (It is an observation by some of us: seemingly those least able to give back are those who support the less fortunate most.) I am reminded of what the son of a local downtown clothing merchant once told me, quoting his dad: Mr. Huntley said, “Without all the poor people that trade with me I would not make money.”
Newt Gingrich, the gaga boy with all his craziness, trying to become relevant as a presidential candidate, seems to be somewhat emblematic movement of the tea party. “Gingrich was excoriated by right-wing bloggers, who said he had lost all credibility and didn't support true conservatism. He's since made amends by attacking President Obama's "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior" a term he picked up from an irresponsible article in Forbes which has now been widely denounced by some on the right as irresponsible journalism. Newt’s irrationality and that of many tea-party adherents seems mindless, because their consequential offenses, their anathema to taxes/fair taxing and disdain for government, naively or prejudicially mount the Koch’s and hard-right ideology crusades, which, I believe, they’ll learn works against their own interest, not an abolishment of government but a more effective and accountable government.
The right has let itself (Capitulation to Rush, Glenn and their ilk; the right’s politicians catering to, mimicking their screenplay.) be “turned on its head” causing many of the older, highly respected senators to retreat to the quite shadows of the Capitol. The old voices of wisdom such as Lugar and Hatch and most all of the other Republican moderate voices, including Collins and Snowe of Maine, have been relegated to the backseats of a mysterious political progeny. No doubt the extreme right’s shenanigans have been an embarrassment to many ladies and gentlemen, highly ethical Republicans.
Do give Republican Senator Orrin Hatch an award for being “The Most Courageous.” Against all odds, he seems to be saying “enough is enough”: For he has broken ranks with Republicans and is supporting the “Ground Zero mosque.”
After all, the tea party’s battle-of-frustrations and mysteriousness is not in ambiguity to any diligent free -thinker. Just think back to when our president was elected, immediately the right set the narrative and the mantra “Take back our country.” Think of all the “NOs” and John Boehner’s “Hell No.” Think of all the Limbaughnites and Beckanites and their multiple chanters around the country. Think of the Lee Atwater bequest (Even though, at least, he was repentant on deathbed.), Karl Rove, Roger Ailes, Fox tea-party promotions, and now we are thinking of the Koch brothers and their under-the-radar deconstruction of anything progressive. And if you are thinking unethical, you are probably on a more-sound moral-ground and wise mind!
When Bob Inglis, a 93% conservative rated Republican U. S. House of Representative member from S. C., was defeated by a tea party candidate, in this interview, Confessions of a Tea Party Casualty: And when he thinks about what lies ahead for his party and GOP House leaders, he can't help but chuckle. With Boehner and others chasing after the tea party, he says, "that's going to be the dog that catches the car." He quickly adds: "And the Democrats, if they go into the minority, are going to have an enjoyable couple of years watching that dog deal with the car it's caught."
In these austere times, conservatism should be our guide, i.e. “progressive conservatism” as opposed to “regressive conservatism.” By any measure what the tea party is conferring could not in the traditional definition be called conservatism; it is radical opposition to anything pragmatic. “What’s distinctive about the Tea Party is its anarchist streak—its antagonism toward any authority, its belligerent self-expression, and its lack of any coherent program or alternative to the policies it condemns.”
Many candidates may get elected on this anti-everything-everybody wigwag-strategy. But they’re in for an enormous disappointment if they think they can effect a quick-turnaround of this economy. (I doubt that’s their goal.) For according to Richard Florida who compares the current economic downfall to the depressions of 1870s and 1930s, we are now in an era of “The Great Reset”: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity. Inadequately expressed, our dilemma is to find the best answers for a reordering of innovative jobs in a geographical fix, effected by where and how we live, by new-high-speed-rail systems and/or transportation systems that increases connectivity and proximity to thriving markets. Economic geography “is that a good way to get rich (or make a good living) is to be near other rich places; remoteness is costly.” This will not come quickly or easily. It may be an evolvement of twenty, thirty years or longer. Some of Generation Y and Generation X, our youngest generations, may comprehend this seismic shift and be reassessing their values predicated on this premise. My young, 26-year-old, married grandson lives in London, has no automobile, most of the time rides his bike six miles to work, and yet makes an excellent salary with BofA. These youthful age groups, in their vision, are ahead of the upper-middle age and an older generation, mostly male and mostly white tea partiers who are in the fearful throes of “losing something.” Their suspicions are stirred by the limbaughbecks!
To sum it all up as Jim Wallis, Christian writer and political activist, reminds us of what Mohandas Gandhi warned against decades ago, the seven social sins: politics without principle; wealth without work; commerce without morality; pleasure without conscience; education without character; science without humanity; worship without sacrifice. So as our nation is scourged by many of these social sins, some of which have become rife of our nation’s social fabric, so goes our nation into the future. Can that be corrected?
Now, I yield to those who revel on the perilous waves of Limbaugh, Beck, and other trumped-up negative air-waves, who for the most part are the creators of tea party, to extract whatever good or honor may residually lie within. And, I’ll have my eyes open to be flashed a book cover-title, When Darkness Turns to Light, which will be written about those who followed the antics of limbaughbecks, some innocently down a dark terrifying dead-end road. In the meantime, whatever our political persuasions, let us reclaim our ethical mores, attuned to the better angel of our soul, as we are the voice of reason, respect, and goodwill for all people. Let us never despair that man can’t be and do better!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“‘God is always good’ but in reality God is as good as we are GOOD for God, and as Christians expressed through our relationship with Christ, our interpretation of Biblical scripture or lack thereof, ironically, good or evil may be evoked.” Cornell Cox; Verily God will not change the condition of a people until they change themselves" (Qur'an 13:11).
No comments:
Post a Comment