Category Archives: Tea Party

The Kings and Queen of Mean.

Posted on by

So far, the debates between Teapublican presidential candidates have been very entertaining. Watching them is somewhat like watching Voldemort, Simon Legree, the Joker, Scrooge, Alfred E. Neuman, Lex Luthor and the Wicked Witch of the West face off to see who can be nastier, more spiteful, more repugnant and more snide.

Yet the sentiments of the audiences have been even more revealing.

In one debate, an audience of upper middle class white Californians actually broke out in applause upon the mere mention of Gov. Perry’s 234 executions. In another debate, when confronted with the question of whether or not the government should allow a hypothetical uninsured young American die, members of the pitchfork crowd in Tampa screamed “yes.”

And these are the religious so-called “values” people?

If voters are unwise enough to put them in charge of our country, we won’t have to build a bigger fence to keep immigrants out of our country. We’ll have to build one to keep our own citizens in.

Teapublican Lie #6.

Posted on by

“President Obama’s economic stimulus failed.”

You’ve heard this over and over again from the mouths of virtually every Teapublican. They all loudly proclaim President Obama’s stimulus plan “a complete and utter failure.” They make it sound as if Democrats wasted $787 billion of taxpayer money. But as you’ll see, it’s just another Teapublican lie. To learn the truth, I turned to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

In the second quarter of 2010 (one year after it’s passage), CBO estimated that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) had:

– Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent
– Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points
– Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million
– Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 2.0 million to 4.8 million

Similarly, in the second quarter of 2011, the CBO estimated that ARRA’s policies had the following effects compared with what would have occurred otherwise:

– Raised real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product by between 0.8 percent and 2.5 percent
– Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.5 percentage points and 1.6 percentage points
– Increased the number of people employed by between 1.0 million and 2.9 million
– Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 1.4 million to 4.0 million

And even though CBO has said that the employment effects will wane in 2012, it estimates “ARRA will raise real GDP in 2012 by between 0.3 percent and 0.8 percent and will increase the number of people employed in 2012 by between 0.4 million and 1.1 million.”

Some failure!

The real question about the economic stimulus is, “Where would we now be without it?”

Teapublican Lie #5.

Posted on by

“Regulations are bad for business.”

Teapublicans have been slinging this bovine excrement around for years. “Businesses face mountains of government red tape that make it impossible for them to operate,” they say. I admit it sounds plausible, but it’s just not true.

Certainly, every industry faces government regulations. But those regulations are not necessarily bad. For example, food growers must meet food safety regulations. They must maintain sanitary conditions and monitor the use of pesticides and chemicals. Not exactly onerous regulations, unless you don’t mind getting food borne illnesses. Similarly, restaurants must pass inspections for cleanliness and food preparation. Hotels must meet standards for safety and cleanliness…the list of such examples is long.

Contrary to the Teapublican talking point, a recent study by McClatchy Newspapers found that small business owners don’t feel that regulations and taxes are strangling their businesses at all. As a matter of fact, many of the business owners surveyed felt that the regulations actually create consumer confidence which is good for business.

So, if small business owners don’t oppose government regulations, who does?

One can conclude that the businesses most harmed by government regulation are those that don’t care about consumer safety. Companies that want to trash our environment without repercussions. Companies that want to cut corners to save money. Companies like BP, which apparently cut corners on a blowout preventer resulting in the worst environmental tragedy in history. Companies that buy toys painted with lead because they’re cheaper. Companies that purchase ingredients for pet food without testing them.

These aren’t small businesses. They’re huge, multi-national conglomerates that are more concerned about their bottom lines than their customers. If they don’t care about us, why on Earth should we care about them?

Teapublican Lie #4.

Posted on by

“The national debt was created by President Obama.”

I’ve addressed this figment of the Teapublican imagination before. They know it’s a lie, but they’re fond of saying it anyway. Indeed, they’re fond of blaming President Obama for everything bad and taking credit for everything good.

Who created the Great Recession? According to Teapublicans, it wasn’t Bush. It was Obama.

Who’s responsible for the high unemployment rate? Why Obama, of course, even though 8 million jobs were lost on Bush’s watch while the Obama administration has overseen a net increase in jobs.

Who was responsible for tracking down Osama bin Laden? According to Teapublicans it was certainly not Obama. Bin Laden’s death was the direct result of Bush/Cheney policies. You’ve heard all these lies and more.

Now, back to the national debt:

No less an authority than Bruce Bartlett, Ronald Reagan’s former policy adviser, has said that of the more than $14 trillion national debt, more than $7 trillion is a direct result of George W. Bush’s policies – most especially his tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Only $1.4 trillion is the result of President Obama’s attempts to get our economy moving in the right direction! The remainder can be credited to all of the presidents prior to Bush.

I’ll finish by quoting David Stockman, Reagan’s Director of the Office of Management and Budget who began a NY Times op-ed by stating, “How my GOP destroyed the US economy.”

Apparently, at least some Republicans are willing to speak the truth.

Teapublican Lie #3.

Posted on by

“Cutting deficits and the national debt will create jobs.”

This is the most fashionable load of bull excrement being sold by Teapublicans. But nothing could be further from the truth.

Certainly, the debt has a chilling effect on the long-term prospects of our economy. But the debt does not constitute a crisis. In fact, the total debt equals roughly one year of the US GDP. To relate that to a family’s finances (as Teapublicans are so fond of doing), it’s akin to a family earning $100,000 per year holding a $100,000 mortgage.

Now let’s look at what severe cuts to our deficit and debt will do to our economy in the short term.

When the government cuts spending it cuts the budgets of government agencies. That forces those agencies to lay off many of their employees. So, inevitably, there’s a net loss of jobs. Further, the decrease in employees results in less oversight of banks, food and drugs, Medicare payments, etc. – all of which make our economy and taxpayers less safe. 

Moreover, government cuts can have a negative effect on private companies that act as vendors to those agencies. For example, large cuts to the Department of Defense will cause the DOD to suspend weapons acquisition and development. That means defense contractors will have to make dramatic cuts to their payroll.

Part of the reason for our jobless recovery from Bush’s Great Recession is that state and local governments are experiencing a loss of revenue from taxpayers. As a result, those governments have been laying off workers even faster than private companies can hire them.

So, in the short term, what do you expect a $1 trillion cut to our deficit will do to our economy? Obviously, it will cost tens of thousands of people their jobs. Maybe yours!

Are We Still Fighting The Civil War?

Posted on by

As I was reading a book about the Civil War, I was struck by the many similarities between the run-up to the war and today’s political climate. The Confederate States of America were sparsely populated and dominated by slave-owning plantation owners who resented any interference by the federal government. As one historian said, they likely would have seceded earlier, but it took 6 years for the plantation owners to convince the poor dirt farmers to fight their war for them.

On the other side, the Union was more densely populated with a recent influx of European immigrants. Many of these people had faced persecution themselves in the Old Country, and their religious beliefs were at odds with slavery. Moreover, as a result of the density of population, those in the North tended to understand that regulations and laws were necessary for everyone to thrive. Not just a few.

So the Civil War was as much the result of a conflict of philosophies as it was slavery. This conflict continued when, following the war, many former Confederate soldiers fled westward to get away from the law and order imposed by the victorious North. Unfortunately for them, they eventually ran out of real estate as settlers who believed in the law followed them west. But the philosophies of the former Confederates never entirely disappeared.

Fast forward to today. Our politics are now roughly divided into red states and blue states. The red states strongly oppose any “interference” by the federal government. And where are most of those red states? In the South and West.

And where are the blue states? In the heavily populated East, Upper Midwest, California and Northwest.

Certainly, there are pockets within the South and West where voters understand the necessary role of government. Those tend to be large population centers. But in the rural areas and smaller cities, government – especially the federal government – is viewed with disdain and suspicion.

Particularly in the West, many people identify with the cowboy mentality of old (not realizing that the term “cowboy” was originally a perjorative akin to calling someone a rustler or bandit). These people see themselves as modern day gunslingers who are standing up for their individual rights. They mostly could care less about anyone else, including the less fortunate. After all, to these people, everyone has the responsibility to pull themselves up by the bootstraps no matter the odds against it.

In the South, the story is somewhat different. Certainly resentment of the federal government continues. But now it’s wrapped in the cloak of religion. The new Christian right stems from churches that believe the Bible is literally the word of God. They selectively choose Bible verses that support their narrow views. They are anti-government (it’s the government that prevents openly Christian prayers in public schools and other public venues), anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-abortion, anti-education, anti-environmentalism, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, etc. If the government is for it, particularly the federal government, they are against it.

So here we are, politically not much further ahead than we were 150 years ago. But at least for the moment, we’re fighting with ballots. Not guns.

Politics of God.

Posted on by

Is God a Democrat? Or a Teapublican? Teapublicans like Michelle Bachmann would have you believe the latter. After all, she claims that God told her to run for president. But He apparently also told Rick Perry to run. And He’s currently negotiating with Sarah Palin. What kind of confusing message is that?

If He truly wanted a Teapublican to win the White House, wouldn’t He just annoint one of them?

And why would God send an earthquake and hurricane as a message for the Beltway to change as Bachmann suggests? One would think if God really wanted change, He’d just pick out a modern day Moses and carve some new stone tablets rather than send messages like Irene that can so easily be misinterpreted.

Even if you accept that the earthquake and Irene were God’s messages to Washington, D.C., why did God-fearing people in North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachussets and Vermont have to suffer?

Of course, Bachmann isn’t the first to push the idea of Divine intervention in politics. The space-alien-like Pat Robertson told his thought-challenged followers that Hurricane Katrina was sent by God in retribution for the Godlessness of New Orleans. More specifically, he said that God felt there were too many gays in the city.

So where does God really stand politically? Does He stand with corporate profits, big money lobbyists and the military-industrial complex? Or does He stand with working people, the poor and the disenfranchised? And if He’s pro-American as so many Christian right-wingers would have us believe, why does He encourage his Teapublican followers to ship jobs overseas to dictatorships populated by non-Christians?

It’s all very confusing.

Yee Haw! Another Texass Evangelical For President.

Posted on by

In 2000, an evangelical governor from Texas was awarded the office of President of the United States. He ran as a compassionate conservative promising to cut federal spending and to get the US out of the business of “nation-building.”

Instead, he cut taxes, eliminated financial and environmental regulations, ignored direct warnings of threats by al-Qeada to use hijacked airliners to attack the US, and started two wars costing as much as $3 trillion. His policies failed to create a single private-sector job in the US and led to the worst economic collapse since 1929. In the process, he doubled our national debt.

Now we have Rick Perry following in his footsteps. As Lieutenant Governor, he replaced Bush as Governor of Texas. Like Bush, he talks about his faith all the while promoting an agenda that favors the rich and attacks the poor. And like Bush, he brags about his “accomplishments” as governor. Foremost in his braggadocio is the so-called “Texas Miracle.” The miracle, as the story goes, is that Perry created 80 percent of the jobs in America over the past three years.

Rrrrrrright!

If you examine his claim, you find that it’s a complete and utter fraud just like the cowboy boots he wears. Certainly, Texas did create more jobs in the last year than any other state. But all of them were in the public sector;  i.e. they were government jobs, many of which resulted from Perry extending his hand to Washington in order to receive a disproportionate number of the stimulus funds. Indeed, Texas actually lost jobs in the private sector over the past three years!

And, if you look further, you see rising unemployment in Texas in addition to overcrowded homeless shelters and public schools facing billions in budget cuts. And that’s not even the scary part.

More frightening about Perry (as well as Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin) are his way-out-of-this-solar-system religious beliefs. These were put on display just days prior to his announcement that he is running for president. On August 6, he spoke at The Response, billed as a day of prayer and fasting. In fact, it was a day of lunacy with some of the nation’s most radical evangelical “religious” figures. These are people who believe the US should be a Christian theocracy; who believe in the end times and the necessity to prepare the Earth for the rapture by cleansing the Seven Mountains (arts and entertainment, business, family, government, media, religion and education) from demonic influence. These are people who believe Oprah is the precursor of the AntiChrist; who believe that gays are controlled by demons; who believe that Islam is a demonic spirit.

Just the kind of people you want in the White House and a presidential administration.

Can’t you imagine a US run by a President Perry or a President Bachmann or a President Palin? The administration would begin with a hands-on healing of gays followed by the threat of bombing every non-Christian nation unless they converted. The FCC would command that all sex (violence is okey-dokey) be banned from TV. Public broadcasting would be forced to carry Christian-only programming. All schools would be openly Christian. Every business logo would have to incorporate the symbol of a fish. And all cathedrals, synagogues, temples and mosques would be converted to New Apostolic churches.

In other words, the US would become a Christian version of Iran.

What If FDR, Truman Or Eisenhower Faced This Congress?

Posted on by

Despite the fact that our economy was in freefall when President Obama entered office, people are fond of blaming him for our current misery.  Instead of supporting Obama’s attempts to right our sinking ship, Teapublicans have chosen to fight him every step of the way. 

No matter that the record number of Senate filibusters paralyzed our government.  No matter that the cries of “Socialist” have further divided our nation.  Teapublicans seem only to care about ensuring that Obama is a one-term president.

And just when it appeared that the economy was growing again, Teapublicans chose to turn the debt ceiling into a “crisis” resulting in a downgrade of US Treasury Securities and further despair.

All this got me wondering: What if today’s Teapublicans had been around following the Great Depression? Would they have been willing to fund Social Security? Would they have opened the US Treasury to build our infrastructure? Would our nation’s most iconic structures have ever been funded? Would there be a Hoover Dam? Would the Tennessee Valley Authority exist?

What if Teapublicans had been around following WWII? Would they have approved the post WWII-era top tax rate of 91 perecent? Would they have approved of the billions spent to expand our Universities? Would they have supported the GI Bill? Would they have approved of Eisenhower’s interstate highway system?

Looking at more recent history, would they have approved of raising the debt ceiling as Reagan was tripling the national debt? Would they have approved of his tax increases?

I think you know the answers. 

Now ask yourself this: What would have become of the US if today’s Teapublicans had been around during the founding of our nation? Would they even have been willing to spend their money to fund the Revolution?

The “I’ve Got Mine, You Don’t Deserve Yours” Crowd.

Posted on by

According to a recent MSNBC.com article by Brian Alexander, lower class people are more likely to have empathy and compassion while the rich are more likely to think of themselves.  

The article confirmed my own observations. 

As an advertising executive, I’ve often listened to wealthy and powerful clients talk about how their success is the result of their own hard work, determination and risk-taking. They rarely give credit to the many other factors that have played a role in their success. 

They tend to forget that their educations were subsidized by local, state and federal governments. They forget the scholarships and low interest government loans that helped them pay for college. They forget about the Small Business Administration loans that provided the seed money for their companies.  They forget about the Tax Increment Financing that resulted in a no-interest, no-property tax loan for their company headquarters.  They forget about the contributions of their employees and suppliers. And they tend to forget about the contributions of their family, teachers, coaches and mentors who helped shape their lives.

One of my former clients, who received more than $50 million/year in compensation, once demanded that his managers fire 10 percent of their workforce after a year of record profits and then hire new replacements.  His reasoning?  He wanted to make certain that his employees would not “rest on their laurels” so he could make even more money the next year.

Fortunately, he was an exception. But an uncomfortable number of people are similarly driven. And because they are so firm in their belief that they “made it on their own,” they are often unwilling to help others reach for success.

It is this mindset that is at the very heart of the Tea Party movement. Their anti-tax, anti-deficit, anti-government, anti-Obama rants are driven by a philosophy best expressed by a quote from their hero, Ayn Rand, “It is the morality of altruism that men have to reject.”

That philosophy clearly explains their opposition to social safety nets such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. It explains their opposition to the extension of unemployment benefits and any government spending to stimulate our moribund economy.  It explains why are they so opposed to the very government institutions that made their success possible.

But according to the MSNBC.com article, “Rich people may not be selfish as much as willfully clueless.  Research at Duke and Harvard universities showed that regardless of political affiliation or income, Americans tended to think wealth distribution ought to be more equal. The problem? Rich people wrongly believed it already was.”