Tenets
1) Healthcare is a right of all Americans.
2) Healthcare should be debt/deficit neutral.
3) Our economy and workforce are strong enough to provide healthcare coverage to all
Americans.
4) All Doctors & Hospitals that wish to practice medicine and/or do business in United
States must accept SPHI benefits.
Acknowledgements
1) Estimation of total cost for Health Insurance costs & needed fund includes:
a. Anticipated savings from elimination of overhead.
b. Anticipated savings from elimination of fraud & waste.
c. Anticipated savings from elimination of need for profit.
d. Anticipated savings from SPHI’s ability to negotiate for bulk savings with
pharmaceutical companies.
e. Anticipated savings from reduction in government reimbursement to Emergency
Rooms for care of uninsured individuals.
2) Funding relies on a combination of:
a. New taxes
b. Budget savings
c. Revenue allocated from current Government Programs
d. Revenue allocated from current Government Assistance Programs
e. Revenue from current Medicare Trust Fund
Estimated Cost: 1,700,000,000,000 ($1.7 trillion dollars)
Revenue Sources
1) $2000 yr tax paid by each of America’s 150 million Workers.
a. This is offset by elimination of expenses for individual premiums of Private Health
Insurance, and should result in an annual savings of roughly $2400.
b. At 150 million Workers, this generates in ex $300 billion annually.
2) $2000 yr tax per Worker paid by Employers, calculated at $1/hr per Worker per year.
a. This is offset by the elimination of Employer Contribution to Private Health Insurance
Premiums, and should result in an annual savings of roughly $12,000 per Worker for
Employers.
b. At 150 million Workers, this generates $300 billion annually.
c. This figure may be exceeded, as many people both full and part time jobs, or multiple
part time jobs and would thus have multiple employers paying into the fund on their
behalf.
d. Additionally, though not ideal, this also would include revenue from Employers who
accidentally hire Undocumented Workers using fake social security numbers.
3) $300 Billion allocated from Defense Department Budget to SPHI fund.
a. US Defense Department budget is well beyond need defense needs of the country.
With lack of a Cold War-like Superpower enemy, with the end of the Iraq &
Afghanistan Wars, and with Anti-Terrorism work largely an Intelligence matter, we are
able to redirect these funds to better serve the needs of our country.
b. A healthy population benefits the DoD, and significantly reduces training costs.
c. All military personnel and their families would be covered under SPHI, thus eliminating
these lines in the DoD budget.
4) $300 Billion moved from Medicaid budget into SPHI fund
a. Federal Government would contribute $200 Billion of this, representing a savings of
$35.9 Billion.
b. State would contribute $100 Billion of this, representing a savings of $77.9 Billion, or
roughly $1.55 Billion per State.
5) $500 Billion from Medicare revenue streams.
a. $225 Billion would continue to be generated into the SPHI fund through traditional
Medicare HI (Hospital Insurance) revenue streams. This represents an $18 Billion
savings as compared to traditional Medicare
b. $275 Billion would continue to be generated into the SPHI fund through tradition
Medicare SMI (Supplemental Medical Insurance) revenue stream. This represents a $19 Billion savings as compared to traditional Medicare.
Total Revenue: 1,700,000,000,000 ($1.7 trillion dollars)
Additional Revenue
While the Revenue Sources listed above meet the goal of $1.7 trillion for the SPHI fund, it is necessary to provision for overages in cost. The reserve cash currently in the Medicare Trust is $287.6 Billion, which generates roughly $13 Billion per year in interest. These funds could be accessed may be accessed should costs exceed projection.
Additionally, SHPI may borrow funds from the reserve should interest revenues be insufficient. Doing so, however, will require a matching increase in the Worker & Employee tax rates so that these borrowed funds will be paid back within a year.
*All figures related to cost and revenues taken from SSA.gov and the Kaiser Family Foundation websites
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Physician, heal thyself
What do we call the movement that seeks to limit the rights of women, mandate prayer in school, outlaw the teaching and practices of other religions, deny people the right to unionize, allow for the killing of those who violate their religious dogma, limit the right to vote, oppress people based on their sexual orientation, and willfully deny science in the name of blind faith?
The Taliban?
The Muslim Brotherhood?
No, sorry – I’m talking about the Christian Right led Tea/Republican Party.
Before we try to play world police and wag our finger at the cultures of foreign countries, we should really look at the social agendas of our own elected leaders.
The Taliban?
The Muslim Brotherhood?
No, sorry – I’m talking about the Christian Right led Tea/Republican Party.
Before we try to play world police and wag our finger at the cultures of foreign countries, we should really look at the social agendas of our own elected leaders.
Friday, January 14, 2011
On Alan Gribben's new "Huckleberry Finn"
I write this recognizing that, as a white man, I will never and can never know the emotional impact of having the word “nigger” thrown at me. I wrestle with this being a “do-gooder” issue, wherein a lot of whites see a problem and rush in to try and fix it, all without ever seeking input from those we think we are trying to help. Some are going to argue for change because it will help people feel better, a noble aim that will open the doors of a book I love to many more people. Others, like myself, will argue against change, knowing that the harsh reality is that African American children assigned The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn will be required read and hear the word “nigger” 291 in/around an academic setting. This is not something I take lightly for, as anyone who knows me knows I abhor prejudice, discrimination, and derogatory/inflammatory language. But I must speak out against the actions of Alan Gribben, the Auburn Professor who took it upon himself to remove all 291 appearances of the word “nigger” in Huckleberry Finn and replace it with “slave”. His rationale for doing this is to make it easier for the teachers of today to teach it, easier for the children of today to read it, and more acceptable to the parents of today. I get it, but could not disagree more, with both his intent and his action.
All art is sacred, but when people use the phrase “Great American Novel”, they are talking about Huck Finn. It is us as a Nation, our history, and sadly our present for so many still. If we cannot face the ugly truths about this, it/they/we can never change. People talk about how the word “nigger” has changed in meaning since publication, but it hasn’t. It may be used in new ways, but when a bigoted white person still wants to debase, diminish, and dehumanize an African American or all African Americans, he or she will still use the word “nigger”. We don’t mean slave today, nor Twain back when he was writing his masterpiece. It is wholly unique word in the English language, meant to tear at the soul of those upon whom it is heaped, and because it carries with it the weight of America’s history of slavery, sharecropping, and the institutional attempts to subjugate and oppress African Americans, it is hurtful on a level that any who is not African American can truly understand. “Nigger and “Slave” aren’t synonyms, indeed Huck’s father calls a free African American “nigger” in the text. It’s a word meant to tell its victims “you are less than human”, and that meaning of hasn’t changed, which is why it must be read, and felt, and discussed by students, teachers, parents, and all readers alike.
Huck’s story, his journey, isn’t some nice little tale about two friends from different worlds going down the Mississippi on a raft. No, it is about Huck’s process of consciously rejecting the racist social indoctrination he’d gone through as a youth because of the example that Jim sets. The further South they get on the river, the more Huck lets go the traditional lessons on slavery and race. “Nigger Jim” becomes Jim, the only humane and moral male role model this 12 year old boy ever had. Jim then replaces Jimmy Finn (Huck’s biological dad), and becomes his real father figure, for it is surely no coincidence that those two men share the same name. That’s the beauty and the irony of this story, its characters, and its message. Without first seeing Jim as a “nigger”, as a being less than him, there is no reason for him to grow and change. It’s as simple as that. This is a book about a dramatic, huge, earth-shaking change, and if we sanitize it, we remove the impetus to make that change. It’s not Huck who helps Jim escape, but the other way around; if we change Twain’s words, soften them to our modern ears, we lose that fact.
It is so complicated, so deep, and so powerful. Every white adult Huck knew, from his birth to the end of the novel, told and showed him that slaves like Jim were worthless and less than human. If we take out the word “nigger” and say call him only “Slave Jim”, the story isn’t one about how people must recognize the humanity of those who are different than them, it become a tale about the need to end slavery. Certainly, the two are related, but you can free slaves without accepting them into your society, which explains how Buffalo, a key stop on the Underground Railroad, remains the 4th most segregated city in the nation. You cannot, however, enslave someone you see as human, as your equal. There is a difference, and if all of us make Huck’s journey, much more positive, powerful, and long lasing change will occur in America.
Now, I understand his motives, and I recognize Professor Gribben’s desire to be a “do-gooder” in the fight against racism. I get it. And with more than a twinge of shame, I admit that I, too, was once moved by those same motives. The first time I taught Huck Finn to my sophomore classes, I mistakenly gave my students the option of saying either “slave” or “black person” instead of “nigger” when reading aloud in class, so long as they chose what I or they felt, naively, was the correct substitute. I wanted to spare them the ugliness of hearing such an ugly word in a place of learning, or worse – having to say it themselves. I gave them all kinds of PC justifications for why Twain used the word, what he really meant, how times have changed, etc. In the end, I was just as guilty of mindless “do-gooder-ism” as Professor Gibben. I had no idea the impact this was having, and it was only after hearing a student say of the controversy surrounding Huck – “what’s the big deal, it’s just a story,” that I realized I’d stripped the power out of Huck’s journey and his transformation. It was not a mistake I repeated.
Again, I sympathize with Professor Gribben. It’s a difficult book to teach, especially as most come to it with preconceived ideas about Twain’s message. Rather than simply hitting the “Find” and “Replace All” buttons in MS Word however, Gribben could have devoted his time and energy to devising a good “How-to” guide for teaching Huck Finn. He could have hosted seminars that showed teachers and parents alike how to discuss its impact, its vision for the world, and ways to use it as a device for true change. To do what he has done, however noble his intentions might be, is to rob readers to the message of Huckleberry Finn, that if a ignorant poor boy, raised in the depths of the slaveholding south, can completely reject the prejudiced and oppressive teachings he’s had on race in America, then so can anyone else.
All art is sacred, but when people use the phrase “Great American Novel”, they are talking about Huck Finn. It is us as a Nation, our history, and sadly our present for so many still. If we cannot face the ugly truths about this, it/they/we can never change. People talk about how the word “nigger” has changed in meaning since publication, but it hasn’t. It may be used in new ways, but when a bigoted white person still wants to debase, diminish, and dehumanize an African American or all African Americans, he or she will still use the word “nigger”. We don’t mean slave today, nor Twain back when he was writing his masterpiece. It is wholly unique word in the English language, meant to tear at the soul of those upon whom it is heaped, and because it carries with it the weight of America’s history of slavery, sharecropping, and the institutional attempts to subjugate and oppress African Americans, it is hurtful on a level that any who is not African American can truly understand. “Nigger and “Slave” aren’t synonyms, indeed Huck’s father calls a free African American “nigger” in the text. It’s a word meant to tell its victims “you are less than human”, and that meaning of hasn’t changed, which is why it must be read, and felt, and discussed by students, teachers, parents, and all readers alike.
Huck’s story, his journey, isn’t some nice little tale about two friends from different worlds going down the Mississippi on a raft. No, it is about Huck’s process of consciously rejecting the racist social indoctrination he’d gone through as a youth because of the example that Jim sets. The further South they get on the river, the more Huck lets go the traditional lessons on slavery and race. “Nigger Jim” becomes Jim, the only humane and moral male role model this 12 year old boy ever had. Jim then replaces Jimmy Finn (Huck’s biological dad), and becomes his real father figure, for it is surely no coincidence that those two men share the same name. That’s the beauty and the irony of this story, its characters, and its message. Without first seeing Jim as a “nigger”, as a being less than him, there is no reason for him to grow and change. It’s as simple as that. This is a book about a dramatic, huge, earth-shaking change, and if we sanitize it, we remove the impetus to make that change. It’s not Huck who helps Jim escape, but the other way around; if we change Twain’s words, soften them to our modern ears, we lose that fact.
It is so complicated, so deep, and so powerful. Every white adult Huck knew, from his birth to the end of the novel, told and showed him that slaves like Jim were worthless and less than human. If we take out the word “nigger” and say call him only “Slave Jim”, the story isn’t one about how people must recognize the humanity of those who are different than them, it become a tale about the need to end slavery. Certainly, the two are related, but you can free slaves without accepting them into your society, which explains how Buffalo, a key stop on the Underground Railroad, remains the 4th most segregated city in the nation. You cannot, however, enslave someone you see as human, as your equal. There is a difference, and if all of us make Huck’s journey, much more positive, powerful, and long lasing change will occur in America.
Now, I understand his motives, and I recognize Professor Gribben’s desire to be a “do-gooder” in the fight against racism. I get it. And with more than a twinge of shame, I admit that I, too, was once moved by those same motives. The first time I taught Huck Finn to my sophomore classes, I mistakenly gave my students the option of saying either “slave” or “black person” instead of “nigger” when reading aloud in class, so long as they chose what I or they felt, naively, was the correct substitute. I wanted to spare them the ugliness of hearing such an ugly word in a place of learning, or worse – having to say it themselves. I gave them all kinds of PC justifications for why Twain used the word, what he really meant, how times have changed, etc. In the end, I was just as guilty of mindless “do-gooder-ism” as Professor Gibben. I had no idea the impact this was having, and it was only after hearing a student say of the controversy surrounding Huck – “what’s the big deal, it’s just a story,” that I realized I’d stripped the power out of Huck’s journey and his transformation. It was not a mistake I repeated.
Again, I sympathize with Professor Gribben. It’s a difficult book to teach, especially as most come to it with preconceived ideas about Twain’s message. Rather than simply hitting the “Find” and “Replace All” buttons in MS Word however, Gribben could have devoted his time and energy to devising a good “How-to” guide for teaching Huck Finn. He could have hosted seminars that showed teachers and parents alike how to discuss its impact, its vision for the world, and ways to use it as a device for true change. To do what he has done, however noble his intentions might be, is to rob readers to the message of Huckleberry Finn, that if a ignorant poor boy, raised in the depths of the slaveholding south, can completely reject the prejudiced and oppressive teachings he’s had on race in America, then so can anyone else.
Friday, February 19, 2010
A treatise on Darjeeling Fascism
I understand the Tea-Partiers are fired up, and I’m glad more people are getting involved in the political system. That’s generally healthy for America. However, the Tea Party phenomenon stands as exception to that rule, and it is alarming the rate at which an inherently negative, predatory, and exclusionary political ideology has been mainstreamed into our collective conscious. It’s great for liberals to take comedic shots at the Tea-Partiers and the Birthers, mocking their naïveté as we pat ourselves on the back for intellectually dismantling their rhetoric. However, this isn’t an intellectually based movement – it’s an emotionally based one, and mocking them is not going to make them go away; it will further entrench them in their stances and thus radicalize them even more. We have seen TP’ers carry guns to rallies, engage in vitriolic hate speech, and bandy around paranoid political gossip. When average, every-day citizens, those who would normally condemn political extremism, begin acting this way and/or excusing such behavior from their constituents, it signals that a dangerous movement towards Populist Fascism is spreading along out political landscape.
There’s no one definition of Fascism; you can read about it on Wikipedia, it’s a pretty good intro. However, when looking at the rhetoric and actions of this growing movement, it is clear that the TP’ers show signs, dangerous ones, of walking down the same roads as the Italians and the Germans in the 1930’s. The first is that it seems a movement not about the betterment of the country, but rather about the re-empowerment of its members. Its members express deep and powerful feelings that they were wronged, persecuted even, and that something was taken away from them. Like previous Fascists, the TP’ers offer broad generalizations about the loss of an idealized and romanticized way of life and how an evil force stole it from them. For them, the election of President Obama is the moment when the American dream died, and they blame Acorn, the Liberal Elite, minorities, the media, and foreign interests for their loss. This has resulted in fear and anger, the cornerstones of violent extremism, and when coupled with the stress of the largest recession in our nation’s history outside of the Great Depression, these emotions can easily turn dangerous. TP’ers feel their country and their traditional way of life have been taken away from them and they want them back. There are other issues tied in there which I’ll talk about later, but this sentiment of personal loss mirrors the emotions that Fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler played upon during their respective rises to power.
I know, no one in the Tea-Party movement is putting forth a final solution agenda, but it is undeniable that this movement, like all Fascist movements, is inherently linked to race. Recent cries for literacy tests in order to vote, strong anti-immigrant sentiment within the movement, racist depictions of the President at rallies, and the racial/ethnic demographics of the movement itself all point to the racist underpinnings of the Tea Party. Not to oversimplify, but this is predominantly a group of angry white people, one that is aware that its political power, economic strength, and population percentage in America is shrinking dramatically. Therefore, groups emerging into power, e.g. African Americans and Latinos, and those who challenge what they see as Christian superiority in America, e.g. Muslims and Atheists, are threats; threats to the American way of life, threats to the individuals in the party, and threats to the party itself. There is a reason pictures of Tea Party crowds are so homogeneous in nature; even if the whites in the group don’t realize they are spouting racist sentiment, minorities do, and they stay away. In short, it is a movement about purity, another hallmark of traditional Fascism.
That’s not to say all TP’ers are racists, they aren’t. However, it is a movement that harkens back to an earlier time and is, therefore, traditionalist. In America, the traditional power structure, political, social, economic, etc, has been one dominated by whites, and the TP’ers want a return to that system. Again, this all happens at the deep, subconscious level, but it’s called white privilege/entitlement and it is very real. This sentiment has come to the surface in the form of political rage and extreme activism because for the first time in American history middle and upper class whites are feeling disenfranchised. Snap judgment may cause people to sneer at this, but that is an extremely powerful sentiment. It is no coincidence that this movement arose in American soon after the inauguration of our first Black President and not too long after the Republican National Committee appointed Richard Steele as its first Black Chairman. It’s like the old Eddie Murphy joke about whites electing Jesse Jackson in a drunken stupor only to wake the next day and recoil in horror at what they’d done. Electing Obama and appointing Steele may have made sense to them intellectually, but the emotional reality is that those moves threaten their understanding of what America is as a nation. In other words, the TP’ers feel they lost both the Presidency and their traditional political party, and, again, they want those things back. Again, this is not to paint all TP’ers as being racists, but in America, we do view things racially. By wanting to go back to a more traditional, racially based model of political control, the TP’ers further align themselves with the quest for racial stratification that is prevalent in Fascist ideology.
This racial element is tied inexorably to anther Fascist tenet, xenophobic nationalism. This is reflected in both the extreme fears about outsiders (e.g. immigrants, Arab/Muslims, Kenyans, etc.) that the Tea-Partiers have vocalized and the talk during the last election of the so-called Real America. Logically, it is hard to understand why a nation of immigrants is so threatened by immigration. However, this, again, is not a movement based in logic; it is mired in the fear and ager that come from a perceived loss of power. It is those feelings that allow people to rationalize behaviors such as the denial of healthcare to the children of undocumented workers, all the while enjoying the fruits (sometimes literally) of their parents’ labors. Coupled with the anti-Muslim/Arab sentiment that is a hold over from 9/11 and the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this is a movement that sees threats coming at it from various foreign sources. In the case of terrorism, certainly there are legitimate reasons for this: we were attacked and we will likely be attacked again. However, the kneejerk and paranoid nature of those reactions by average Americans, e.g. the endorsement of torture, the construction of a wall across our border, the panic-based rejection of trials and/or incarceration of terror suspects on American soil, are one of the most alarming things about the TP’ers. This placid acceptance of behaviors that run contrary to the traditional moral code of America (not to mention the Geneva Convention), and this allowed treatment of “others” in inhumane ways in the name of the idealized America mentioned above, are clear indicators that the Fascist mentality of the ends justifying the means in terms of State protection is built into the TP’er belief system.
TP’ers also perceive domestic threats to their movement and their idealized America, hence, again, the rhetoric about “real America” during the last election. This, too, is linked to race, in that many who are now in the TP’er movement didn’t and don’t see President Obama as “a real American”. Not only was his ideology and style different from Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan, but he was also African America; in particular, an African American with a Kenyan father and a white mother. Again, I’m not trying to oversimplify and say all TP’ers are racist; they are not. However, it is undeniable that his story and racial background were completely unlike the previous US Presidents, and his candidacy, now Presidency, stood in stark contrast to TP’ers preconceptions of who can be President. Throw in his first and middle names, his left leaning politics, and his more intellectual and less folksy demeanor than his predecessor, and it’s possible to see how those who are now TP’ers saw him as being something completely “other”. He and his supporters weren’t viewed as “real” Americans to many because they broke the deeply entrenched mold, and it was the rumors that about him that lead the eruption of the Birthers so soon after the election – a movement that refuses to die despite the overwhelming evidence that Obama was, indeed, born in Hawaii. But again, Fascism is not intellectual in nature; it is built on fear and anger. It is this separation, this idea of a “Real America”, and the rejection of non-TP’ers as un-American that unites the TP’ers with the Italians and Germans of the 1930’s.
In that vein, it must be noted that in much of their rhetoric, TP’ers are now equating their movement with the State. As they perceive themselves to be the “Real Americans”, this is a natural phenomenon. What’s good for the movement, i.e. the election and empowerment of its candidates, is therefore good for the Country and vice-versa. Their election to office will rid us of usurpers and phonies like Obama and McCain and put power back in the hands of those who should have it. By claiming the Constitution as their own, by labeling those who don’t share their ideology as enemies and threats to the State, TP’ers have set themselves far apart from the majority of Americans. Theirs is the only way to do things, and if there is any doubt as to why attempts at bi-partisanship in Congress have failed, it’s because Republicans in Congress, those most closely aligned with the TP’ers see the danger in working with the Democrats. They have seen conservative members of their party attacked by the TP’ers and challenged in the Primaries, and they don’t want to risk the ire of this quickly growing group of political activists. To borrow from LBG, it is better for Republicans in Congress to be inside the tent peeing out than outside the tent being peed upon; Republican leaders know that if they seem Pro-Democrat, they will be viewed as anti-TP’er and will face similar revolt come election day. This a very dangerous place for TP’ers to be, intellectually and emotionally. This is witch-hunt territory ideologically, and while it may cause them to ultimately implode and feed upon themselves, it is more likely that it will solidify them and unify them against any form of dissent. Revisit the footage from the public forums last summer and see how the TP’ers interacted with those who disagreed with their beliefs and views and then extrapolate that out to if/when they are in office. When a Fascist movement assumes control, there is no dissent and there is no discourse, and it must be asked how the TP’ers will react to such scrutiny and objection when/if they come to power.
It is ironic, then, that among the many labels that the TP’ers ignorantly and incorrectly heap on President Obama, e.g. Racist, Socialist, Communist, etc, is that of being a Fascist. But this phenomenon, this wholly inaccurate use of complex political terms and flat refusal to use even the smallest of dictionaries to verify the terms they are using, is symptomatic of the strong anti-intellectual sentiment within the Tea Party, another cornerstone of Fascism. There is no curiosity or progressiveness in the movement’s ideology; they seek nothing new, only a return to previous models of government and traditional social structures. Intellectuals, such as the President, are mocked and vilified, labeled as elite and branded as being out of touch. It is a movement that speaks in platitudes, often false and/or misleading, and its leaders try to replace thought with the rote memorization of sound bites, knowledge with so-called common sense. The recent attempts by Limbaugh, Fox and Friends, Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Sean Hannity to dismiss Climate Change as a hoax because of two snowstorms in Washington is a perfect example of this. None of the afore mention TP’ers/supporters has any scientific credentials – none whatsoever. Yet, with a false air of superiority, they mocked the findings of Climatologists in a way that made it seem that science was trying to rob the American people of their god-given right to drive a Hummer down Main St. while breaking apart Styrofoam and spraying CFC based hair spray into the air. Al Gore was their whipping boy, and the message from these personalities was clear: “We’re on to you, Eggheads; you’re not going to trick us anymore.” Again, this isn’t about Climate Change; it’s about the castigation of intellectuals as a threat to the norm and to the movement. It is deliberate, it is easy, and it is an effective way to control the messages the TP’ers receive. It insulates the movement, gives it members the impression that their leaders are the keepers of some great secret truth, and it builds a psychological barrier against discourse, fact, and the truth. In short, it is mind control, and it is essential to the success of a populist Fascist movement like theirs.
The TP’ers blind devotion to leaders like Limbaugh, Palin, and Beck is another way in which they show signs of being a Fascist movement; i.e. theirs has become a cult of personality. All of the talk coming from these three, and others of their ilk, is that of threats posed to the American way of life by those outside the movement, from the liberals, to the Democrats, to the Unions, to the media elite. It’s us “real Americans” vs them to these three; they offer no real solutions to the problems America faces, but rather they play on the anger, fear, and resentment already felt by members of the movement. They speak of a reversion to traditional conservative political ideology, e.g. low taxes, small government, deregulation of industry, and, again, they paint themselves as being keepers of the deep truth. They have mastered the art of the quick, dismissive and often mean-spirited attack against their political opponents, and their followers adore them for it. Their comments are easily memorized and regurgitated, and their personalities are immediately recognizable as part of the American pop-culture catalogue. Limbaugh is the schoolyard bully: loud, smart, and unflappable. Palin is the popular girl no one wanted to cross in high school: pretty, petty, and mean. Beck is the preacher: seemingly pious, the everyman gossip, and full of apocalyptic warnings about the dangers around every corner. Their appeal is genuine, and like all good populist leaders, they have tapped into the emotional base of their followers.
During the last election, Republicans mocked Democrats for supporting Obama by calling him their messiah, but his harshest critics (i.e. those that question his policies, actions, and performance as President, not the extremists who question his citizenship or his faith) are on the Left. The same cannot be said of the TP’ers when it comes to their leaders; Rush, Sarah, and Glen are beyond reproach. Because of their temperaments and their ascension to the position of Demagogues, their rhetoric is immune to logic. It doesn’t matter that their inaccuracies and/or outright lies are often easily disproved; these leaders are bullet proof, so to speak, when it comes to the truth. To disagree with them is an insult to them and their followers because they don’t appeal to the intellect of the TP’ers, but rather to their emotions. When Palin made an ass of herself during the campaign with both Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, her followers didn’t think she looked bad, they felt the media was trying to do a smear job. Those I’ve mentioned can do no wrong in the TP’ers eyes, and as with Mussolini and Hitler, the more rabid and incendiary their comments, the more their followers love them.
Much, too, has been made recently about FOX News as being the “most trusted name in news”, which is odd for a network that intentionally makes little distinction between its hard news programs and those dedicated to commentary. Its ratings are astronomical, but the fact remains that opinion and fact are inherently and intentionally blurred on that network, to the point that it has become a propaganda machine for the TP’ers and the far right. FOX has directly entered the political arena, something most unfair and unbalanced, by sponsoring Tea Party events and Beck’s 9/12 march on Washington. They have even been caught several times using incorrect video footage to distort the size, impact, and overall importance of these events for their own benefit (i.e. legitimization of both the event and their reporting on it). Now, I actually have no problem with Conservative Commentary; I enjoy the O’Reilly Factor, and I think MSNBC often goes overboard in its waiving of the liberal flag. However, the methodology of FOX News is far more deceitful, and it speaks of yet another Fascist pillar: control of the media.
Obviously FOX News is not owned by the TP’ers, so I recognize that the movement does not dictate the network’s programming; that is not what I meant. However, the relationship between the two is undeniable, and, as the sponsor and the sponsored, it is reciprocal. FOX, with its blending of news and commentary clearly attempts to limit not only what is known by its audience, but also the way its audience thinks about what it knows. FOX is the TP’ers main, if not only source of news and information, and therefore the messages its members receive are undeniably controlled. On some levels, yes, that is a broad generalization, as FOX’s audience is much broader based than just the TP’ers. But, as the network fuels the fires of the movement in its reporting and commentary, as it is the primary carrier/reporter of its events, and as it provides the largest and most regular forum for its leaders to express their views, it can be argued that FOX News is indeed a part of the Tea Party movement. Its leaders are not held accountable for their errors or hypocrisies by either the reporters or the commentators, its stances are never questioned or criticized, and the personalities on FOX often go out of the way to both criticize Democratic/Liberal leaders and those who question the TP’ers. FOX, with its huge audience, is both a great recruitment tool for the TP’ers and an effective wall against those who would criticize its leadership and its positions. They beat the drum of we’re right, they’re wrong 24/7, blurring the line between the network being right and the movement being right. This, of course, is the purpose of propaganda, and that is why it fair to say that, in relation to the TP’ers and their message, the media surrounding them is controlled.
There are, of course, several ways in which the TP’ers do not fit the traditional mold of a Fascist movement, so perhaps Neo-Fascist or Pseudo-Fascist might be a more apt term for them. Many of its members, for example, are very religious, whereas Fascism is traditionally anti-religion because it sees religion as a threat to both the party and the State. Additionally, Fascists tend to be anti-Capitalist, and with its big business sponsors and anti-regulation stance, the TP’ers are definitely not anti-Capitalist. Indeed, in this respect, they are quite unique. Fascist movements tend to endorse Corporatism (a system whereby industry works altruistically for the betterment of the State) rather than Capitalism (regulated or non), but considering the demographics of the movement, again, primarily middle to upper-class whites who fear disenfranchisement, this difference is not surprising. Similarly, unlike the Italian model in which the government was a huge employer, the TP’ers are staunchly against bureaucracy and/or government spending, even if designed to end a recession. Women, too, are viewed much more favorably by the TP’ers than in past Fascist movements, and with Sarah Palin being the de Facto speaker for the group, it is clear that they are equals in the movement. These points are certainly valid. However, more than anything else, they may be more attributable to the cultural differences between 2010 America and 1930’s Europe.
So what, you may be asking. And you might wonder about my fascination with what is a small political movement. There are 350+ million people in the US; there can’t be more than what, two million TP’ers, less than one percent of the population, so why write all this? It wasn’t to mock them or belittle their points of view. These are American citizens; they have the right to political activism, and I firmly believe that discourse and discord are fundamental to the success of our great Democracy. That being said, I find this small but growing group so alarming because it shows a strong propensity towards using the primary tool of Fascist movements to spread it’s message: violence. This isn’t a movement interested in discourse; this isn’t a movement about bi-partisanship; this isn’t a movement about negotiation, compromise, or developing consensus. It is one that has a set agenda and has shown a willingness to reject out of hand any and all that do not share its ideology. Its members have brought guns to rallies, including one held 1000 yards away from the President; they have carried signs and worn t-shirts at protests saying, “I came unarmed…this time”; they have hung people in effigy at rallies, and one protester even carried a sign advocating the lynching of our President. Now, this could possibly be written off as a few crackpots in the group. However, not only have Tea Party leaders and Republican members of Congress not proactively disavowed such threats and calls to violence, but at a recent Tea Party meeting in Asotin County, Washington, a TP’er openly advocated the hanging of Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. Just yesterday at the CPAC convention, Governor Tim Pawlenty advocated for the taking of a 9-iron to the windows of Big Government. As the movement grows, then, this undercurrent of violence is quickly coming to the surface. The TP'ers are insular and insolated, and as more extremists are drawn into the group and are then emboldened by the rhetoric of the movement, it is easy to foresee a time when those threats and calls for violence will turn into definitive and destructive actions.
Obviously it is possible, and it is actually my hope, that that is a gross overestimation of the movement’s capacity for negative action. However, the most accurate barometer of Fascism, be it Italian, German, Brazilian, or Austrian, is when seemingly average people take part in, condone, and or excuse extreme sentiment or action on behalf of the movement or the State, sentiments or actions that they would normally condemn or oppose. This tendency is undeniably visible in the Darjeeling Fascists, and those in power must reach out to them in a more genuine fashion in order to more positively engage them in the American political system and process. That is not to say the TP’ers should be placated or appeased, but we must find a way to move forward together. Democracy is not easy, and at this point dialogue, not disrespect, is needed. Whether we agree with their anger or resentment is irrelevant; it is real, and it is driving the TP’ers to act. The antidote for extremism, potentially violent extremism, isn’t mockery or ostracization (sic); it is to act in ways that show movement members that extremism isn’t necessary. If it doesn’t work, then it doesn’t work; but the risks to this country are too great for us to simply dismiss the movement as a joke and its members as crackpots because it’s easier than including them in political discussions. This movement is a new and potentially very dangerous turn in American politics, and if we do nothing to positively address the TP’ers now, it could have dramatic and long lasting effects on our political system.
There’s no one definition of Fascism; you can read about it on Wikipedia, it’s a pretty good intro. However, when looking at the rhetoric and actions of this growing movement, it is clear that the TP’ers show signs, dangerous ones, of walking down the same roads as the Italians and the Germans in the 1930’s. The first is that it seems a movement not about the betterment of the country, but rather about the re-empowerment of its members. Its members express deep and powerful feelings that they were wronged, persecuted even, and that something was taken away from them. Like previous Fascists, the TP’ers offer broad generalizations about the loss of an idealized and romanticized way of life and how an evil force stole it from them. For them, the election of President Obama is the moment when the American dream died, and they blame Acorn, the Liberal Elite, minorities, the media, and foreign interests for their loss. This has resulted in fear and anger, the cornerstones of violent extremism, and when coupled with the stress of the largest recession in our nation’s history outside of the Great Depression, these emotions can easily turn dangerous. TP’ers feel their country and their traditional way of life have been taken away from them and they want them back. There are other issues tied in there which I’ll talk about later, but this sentiment of personal loss mirrors the emotions that Fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler played upon during their respective rises to power.
I know, no one in the Tea-Party movement is putting forth a final solution agenda, but it is undeniable that this movement, like all Fascist movements, is inherently linked to race. Recent cries for literacy tests in order to vote, strong anti-immigrant sentiment within the movement, racist depictions of the President at rallies, and the racial/ethnic demographics of the movement itself all point to the racist underpinnings of the Tea Party. Not to oversimplify, but this is predominantly a group of angry white people, one that is aware that its political power, economic strength, and population percentage in America is shrinking dramatically. Therefore, groups emerging into power, e.g. African Americans and Latinos, and those who challenge what they see as Christian superiority in America, e.g. Muslims and Atheists, are threats; threats to the American way of life, threats to the individuals in the party, and threats to the party itself. There is a reason pictures of Tea Party crowds are so homogeneous in nature; even if the whites in the group don’t realize they are spouting racist sentiment, minorities do, and they stay away. In short, it is a movement about purity, another hallmark of traditional Fascism.
That’s not to say all TP’ers are racists, they aren’t. However, it is a movement that harkens back to an earlier time and is, therefore, traditionalist. In America, the traditional power structure, political, social, economic, etc, has been one dominated by whites, and the TP’ers want a return to that system. Again, this all happens at the deep, subconscious level, but it’s called white privilege/entitlement and it is very real. This sentiment has come to the surface in the form of political rage and extreme activism because for the first time in American history middle and upper class whites are feeling disenfranchised. Snap judgment may cause people to sneer at this, but that is an extremely powerful sentiment. It is no coincidence that this movement arose in American soon after the inauguration of our first Black President and not too long after the Republican National Committee appointed Richard Steele as its first Black Chairman. It’s like the old Eddie Murphy joke about whites electing Jesse Jackson in a drunken stupor only to wake the next day and recoil in horror at what they’d done. Electing Obama and appointing Steele may have made sense to them intellectually, but the emotional reality is that those moves threaten their understanding of what America is as a nation. In other words, the TP’ers feel they lost both the Presidency and their traditional political party, and, again, they want those things back. Again, this is not to paint all TP’ers as being racists, but in America, we do view things racially. By wanting to go back to a more traditional, racially based model of political control, the TP’ers further align themselves with the quest for racial stratification that is prevalent in Fascist ideology.
This racial element is tied inexorably to anther Fascist tenet, xenophobic nationalism. This is reflected in both the extreme fears about outsiders (e.g. immigrants, Arab/Muslims, Kenyans, etc.) that the Tea-Partiers have vocalized and the talk during the last election of the so-called Real America. Logically, it is hard to understand why a nation of immigrants is so threatened by immigration. However, this, again, is not a movement based in logic; it is mired in the fear and ager that come from a perceived loss of power. It is those feelings that allow people to rationalize behaviors such as the denial of healthcare to the children of undocumented workers, all the while enjoying the fruits (sometimes literally) of their parents’ labors. Coupled with the anti-Muslim/Arab sentiment that is a hold over from 9/11 and the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this is a movement that sees threats coming at it from various foreign sources. In the case of terrorism, certainly there are legitimate reasons for this: we were attacked and we will likely be attacked again. However, the kneejerk and paranoid nature of those reactions by average Americans, e.g. the endorsement of torture, the construction of a wall across our border, the panic-based rejection of trials and/or incarceration of terror suspects on American soil, are one of the most alarming things about the TP’ers. This placid acceptance of behaviors that run contrary to the traditional moral code of America (not to mention the Geneva Convention), and this allowed treatment of “others” in inhumane ways in the name of the idealized America mentioned above, are clear indicators that the Fascist mentality of the ends justifying the means in terms of State protection is built into the TP’er belief system.
TP’ers also perceive domestic threats to their movement and their idealized America, hence, again, the rhetoric about “real America” during the last election. This, too, is linked to race, in that many who are now in the TP’er movement didn’t and don’t see President Obama as “a real American”. Not only was his ideology and style different from Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan, but he was also African America; in particular, an African American with a Kenyan father and a white mother. Again, I’m not trying to oversimplify and say all TP’ers are racist; they are not. However, it is undeniable that his story and racial background were completely unlike the previous US Presidents, and his candidacy, now Presidency, stood in stark contrast to TP’ers preconceptions of who can be President. Throw in his first and middle names, his left leaning politics, and his more intellectual and less folksy demeanor than his predecessor, and it’s possible to see how those who are now TP’ers saw him as being something completely “other”. He and his supporters weren’t viewed as “real” Americans to many because they broke the deeply entrenched mold, and it was the rumors that about him that lead the eruption of the Birthers so soon after the election – a movement that refuses to die despite the overwhelming evidence that Obama was, indeed, born in Hawaii. But again, Fascism is not intellectual in nature; it is built on fear and anger. It is this separation, this idea of a “Real America”, and the rejection of non-TP’ers as un-American that unites the TP’ers with the Italians and Germans of the 1930’s.
In that vein, it must be noted that in much of their rhetoric, TP’ers are now equating their movement with the State. As they perceive themselves to be the “Real Americans”, this is a natural phenomenon. What’s good for the movement, i.e. the election and empowerment of its candidates, is therefore good for the Country and vice-versa. Their election to office will rid us of usurpers and phonies like Obama and McCain and put power back in the hands of those who should have it. By claiming the Constitution as their own, by labeling those who don’t share their ideology as enemies and threats to the State, TP’ers have set themselves far apart from the majority of Americans. Theirs is the only way to do things, and if there is any doubt as to why attempts at bi-partisanship in Congress have failed, it’s because Republicans in Congress, those most closely aligned with the TP’ers see the danger in working with the Democrats. They have seen conservative members of their party attacked by the TP’ers and challenged in the Primaries, and they don’t want to risk the ire of this quickly growing group of political activists. To borrow from LBG, it is better for Republicans in Congress to be inside the tent peeing out than outside the tent being peed upon; Republican leaders know that if they seem Pro-Democrat, they will be viewed as anti-TP’er and will face similar revolt come election day. This a very dangerous place for TP’ers to be, intellectually and emotionally. This is witch-hunt territory ideologically, and while it may cause them to ultimately implode and feed upon themselves, it is more likely that it will solidify them and unify them against any form of dissent. Revisit the footage from the public forums last summer and see how the TP’ers interacted with those who disagreed with their beliefs and views and then extrapolate that out to if/when they are in office. When a Fascist movement assumes control, there is no dissent and there is no discourse, and it must be asked how the TP’ers will react to such scrutiny and objection when/if they come to power.
It is ironic, then, that among the many labels that the TP’ers ignorantly and incorrectly heap on President Obama, e.g. Racist, Socialist, Communist, etc, is that of being a Fascist. But this phenomenon, this wholly inaccurate use of complex political terms and flat refusal to use even the smallest of dictionaries to verify the terms they are using, is symptomatic of the strong anti-intellectual sentiment within the Tea Party, another cornerstone of Fascism. There is no curiosity or progressiveness in the movement’s ideology; they seek nothing new, only a return to previous models of government and traditional social structures. Intellectuals, such as the President, are mocked and vilified, labeled as elite and branded as being out of touch. It is a movement that speaks in platitudes, often false and/or misleading, and its leaders try to replace thought with the rote memorization of sound bites, knowledge with so-called common sense. The recent attempts by Limbaugh, Fox and Friends, Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Sean Hannity to dismiss Climate Change as a hoax because of two snowstorms in Washington is a perfect example of this. None of the afore mention TP’ers/supporters has any scientific credentials – none whatsoever. Yet, with a false air of superiority, they mocked the findings of Climatologists in a way that made it seem that science was trying to rob the American people of their god-given right to drive a Hummer down Main St. while breaking apart Styrofoam and spraying CFC based hair spray into the air. Al Gore was their whipping boy, and the message from these personalities was clear: “We’re on to you, Eggheads; you’re not going to trick us anymore.” Again, this isn’t about Climate Change; it’s about the castigation of intellectuals as a threat to the norm and to the movement. It is deliberate, it is easy, and it is an effective way to control the messages the TP’ers receive. It insulates the movement, gives it members the impression that their leaders are the keepers of some great secret truth, and it builds a psychological barrier against discourse, fact, and the truth. In short, it is mind control, and it is essential to the success of a populist Fascist movement like theirs.
The TP’ers blind devotion to leaders like Limbaugh, Palin, and Beck is another way in which they show signs of being a Fascist movement; i.e. theirs has become a cult of personality. All of the talk coming from these three, and others of their ilk, is that of threats posed to the American way of life by those outside the movement, from the liberals, to the Democrats, to the Unions, to the media elite. It’s us “real Americans” vs them to these three; they offer no real solutions to the problems America faces, but rather they play on the anger, fear, and resentment already felt by members of the movement. They speak of a reversion to traditional conservative political ideology, e.g. low taxes, small government, deregulation of industry, and, again, they paint themselves as being keepers of the deep truth. They have mastered the art of the quick, dismissive and often mean-spirited attack against their political opponents, and their followers adore them for it. Their comments are easily memorized and regurgitated, and their personalities are immediately recognizable as part of the American pop-culture catalogue. Limbaugh is the schoolyard bully: loud, smart, and unflappable. Palin is the popular girl no one wanted to cross in high school: pretty, petty, and mean. Beck is the preacher: seemingly pious, the everyman gossip, and full of apocalyptic warnings about the dangers around every corner. Their appeal is genuine, and like all good populist leaders, they have tapped into the emotional base of their followers.
During the last election, Republicans mocked Democrats for supporting Obama by calling him their messiah, but his harshest critics (i.e. those that question his policies, actions, and performance as President, not the extremists who question his citizenship or his faith) are on the Left. The same cannot be said of the TP’ers when it comes to their leaders; Rush, Sarah, and Glen are beyond reproach. Because of their temperaments and their ascension to the position of Demagogues, their rhetoric is immune to logic. It doesn’t matter that their inaccuracies and/or outright lies are often easily disproved; these leaders are bullet proof, so to speak, when it comes to the truth. To disagree with them is an insult to them and their followers because they don’t appeal to the intellect of the TP’ers, but rather to their emotions. When Palin made an ass of herself during the campaign with both Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, her followers didn’t think she looked bad, they felt the media was trying to do a smear job. Those I’ve mentioned can do no wrong in the TP’ers eyes, and as with Mussolini and Hitler, the more rabid and incendiary their comments, the more their followers love them.
Much, too, has been made recently about FOX News as being the “most trusted name in news”, which is odd for a network that intentionally makes little distinction between its hard news programs and those dedicated to commentary. Its ratings are astronomical, but the fact remains that opinion and fact are inherently and intentionally blurred on that network, to the point that it has become a propaganda machine for the TP’ers and the far right. FOX has directly entered the political arena, something most unfair and unbalanced, by sponsoring Tea Party events and Beck’s 9/12 march on Washington. They have even been caught several times using incorrect video footage to distort the size, impact, and overall importance of these events for their own benefit (i.e. legitimization of both the event and their reporting on it). Now, I actually have no problem with Conservative Commentary; I enjoy the O’Reilly Factor, and I think MSNBC often goes overboard in its waiving of the liberal flag. However, the methodology of FOX News is far more deceitful, and it speaks of yet another Fascist pillar: control of the media.
Obviously FOX News is not owned by the TP’ers, so I recognize that the movement does not dictate the network’s programming; that is not what I meant. However, the relationship between the two is undeniable, and, as the sponsor and the sponsored, it is reciprocal. FOX, with its blending of news and commentary clearly attempts to limit not only what is known by its audience, but also the way its audience thinks about what it knows. FOX is the TP’ers main, if not only source of news and information, and therefore the messages its members receive are undeniably controlled. On some levels, yes, that is a broad generalization, as FOX’s audience is much broader based than just the TP’ers. But, as the network fuels the fires of the movement in its reporting and commentary, as it is the primary carrier/reporter of its events, and as it provides the largest and most regular forum for its leaders to express their views, it can be argued that FOX News is indeed a part of the Tea Party movement. Its leaders are not held accountable for their errors or hypocrisies by either the reporters or the commentators, its stances are never questioned or criticized, and the personalities on FOX often go out of the way to both criticize Democratic/Liberal leaders and those who question the TP’ers. FOX, with its huge audience, is both a great recruitment tool for the TP’ers and an effective wall against those who would criticize its leadership and its positions. They beat the drum of we’re right, they’re wrong 24/7, blurring the line between the network being right and the movement being right. This, of course, is the purpose of propaganda, and that is why it fair to say that, in relation to the TP’ers and their message, the media surrounding them is controlled.
There are, of course, several ways in which the TP’ers do not fit the traditional mold of a Fascist movement, so perhaps Neo-Fascist or Pseudo-Fascist might be a more apt term for them. Many of its members, for example, are very religious, whereas Fascism is traditionally anti-religion because it sees religion as a threat to both the party and the State. Additionally, Fascists tend to be anti-Capitalist, and with its big business sponsors and anti-regulation stance, the TP’ers are definitely not anti-Capitalist. Indeed, in this respect, they are quite unique. Fascist movements tend to endorse Corporatism (a system whereby industry works altruistically for the betterment of the State) rather than Capitalism (regulated or non), but considering the demographics of the movement, again, primarily middle to upper-class whites who fear disenfranchisement, this difference is not surprising. Similarly, unlike the Italian model in which the government was a huge employer, the TP’ers are staunchly against bureaucracy and/or government spending, even if designed to end a recession. Women, too, are viewed much more favorably by the TP’ers than in past Fascist movements, and with Sarah Palin being the de Facto speaker for the group, it is clear that they are equals in the movement. These points are certainly valid. However, more than anything else, they may be more attributable to the cultural differences between 2010 America and 1930’s Europe.
So what, you may be asking. And you might wonder about my fascination with what is a small political movement. There are 350+ million people in the US; there can’t be more than what, two million TP’ers, less than one percent of the population, so why write all this? It wasn’t to mock them or belittle their points of view. These are American citizens; they have the right to political activism, and I firmly believe that discourse and discord are fundamental to the success of our great Democracy. That being said, I find this small but growing group so alarming because it shows a strong propensity towards using the primary tool of Fascist movements to spread it’s message: violence. This isn’t a movement interested in discourse; this isn’t a movement about bi-partisanship; this isn’t a movement about negotiation, compromise, or developing consensus. It is one that has a set agenda and has shown a willingness to reject out of hand any and all that do not share its ideology. Its members have brought guns to rallies, including one held 1000 yards away from the President; they have carried signs and worn t-shirts at protests saying, “I came unarmed…this time”; they have hung people in effigy at rallies, and one protester even carried a sign advocating the lynching of our President. Now, this could possibly be written off as a few crackpots in the group. However, not only have Tea Party leaders and Republican members of Congress not proactively disavowed such threats and calls to violence, but at a recent Tea Party meeting in Asotin County, Washington, a TP’er openly advocated the hanging of Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. Just yesterday at the CPAC convention, Governor Tim Pawlenty advocated for the taking of a 9-iron to the windows of Big Government. As the movement grows, then, this undercurrent of violence is quickly coming to the surface. The TP'ers are insular and insolated, and as more extremists are drawn into the group and are then emboldened by the rhetoric of the movement, it is easy to foresee a time when those threats and calls for violence will turn into definitive and destructive actions.
Obviously it is possible, and it is actually my hope, that that is a gross overestimation of the movement’s capacity for negative action. However, the most accurate barometer of Fascism, be it Italian, German, Brazilian, or Austrian, is when seemingly average people take part in, condone, and or excuse extreme sentiment or action on behalf of the movement or the State, sentiments or actions that they would normally condemn or oppose. This tendency is undeniably visible in the Darjeeling Fascists, and those in power must reach out to them in a more genuine fashion in order to more positively engage them in the American political system and process. That is not to say the TP’ers should be placated or appeased, but we must find a way to move forward together. Democracy is not easy, and at this point dialogue, not disrespect, is needed. Whether we agree with their anger or resentment is irrelevant; it is real, and it is driving the TP’ers to act. The antidote for extremism, potentially violent extremism, isn’t mockery or ostracization (sic); it is to act in ways that show movement members that extremism isn’t necessary. If it doesn’t work, then it doesn’t work; but the risks to this country are too great for us to simply dismiss the movement as a joke and its members as crackpots because it’s easier than including them in political discussions. This movement is a new and potentially very dangerous turn in American politics, and if we do nothing to positively address the TP’ers now, it could have dramatic and long lasting effects on our political system.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Healthcare reform - wtf?
Ok, a short one today. I am a liberal first and a democrat second, and I am heartbroken (yes, that's the term - I feel personally let down by the President I helped elect and the Representative and Senators I voted for) that, because Brown will likely win today, Healthcare Reform is likely dead.
Seriously? The Dems held a Supermajority for about a year, and this is the best that could come out of it; a mandate to pass the Senate's watered down, big-business dole out ladened piece of crap before Brown takes office. Wow
Seriously? The Dems held a Supermajority for about a year, and this is the best that could come out of it; a mandate to pass the Senate's watered down, big-business dole out ladened piece of crap before Brown takes office. Wow
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The $20 Bill
Coming out of the Revolutionary War we, as a nation, were broke. We’d put the War on our Colonial Express Card and had two options: pay the bill or, in essence, file for bankruptcy. Now, it would have been easy to walk away from our creditors. It wouldn’t have been shocking to anyone, considering the enormity of the task we’d just completed – after all, it was the British Empire we’d defeated. Who knows, considering the chinks in the armor we’d just uncovered, our creditors may not have even held it against us. We still had untold natural resources to exploit – we would have been fine.
But we didn’t walk away. We paid those bills and we established ourselves as an honorable nation. Why, because a tough, arrogant, and supremely honorable man named Alexander Hamilton demanded that we meet our financial obligations. We paid taxes, we paid fees, we paid higher prices, and we did without. Why? Because we had to in order to do what was right. He devised a plan, Congress passed it, President Washington signed it into law, it was enacted, and it worked. Our nation started honorably and it/we rose to unprecedented heights in the modern world. Yes, we exploited, we abused, we stole, and we manipulated on our way to world dominance – many, many books have been rightly written about the abuses and the ugliness perpetrated by this country and its government. However, what makes this nation so great is that we also have found ways, time and time again, to rise to the challenge our forefathers built into the language of the Constitution.
Why is this relevant? Hmm…, let me think. We pay $10 Billion a month to fund the occupation in Iraq. We just committed $700 Billion to bail out the greedy bastards that caused our current financial mess. Oh yeah, and 8 years ago we elected the guy who promised to piss away a $1.5 Trillion surplus by giving us $300 rebate checks as opposed to either paying down our enormous national debt or bolstering our crumbling Social Security/Medicare programs. The result is that our national debt is now $10 Trillion dollars on the books, and around $50 Trillion off the books. Again, $50 Trillion - for crying out loud, we broke the damn debt clock in Times Square.
And what do the politicians propose to fix this mess? Tax cuts. Capital gains cuts, income tax cuts, canceling taxes on cash taken out of IRA’s, etc. How does bringing in less money help us when we’re spending more and more? Now I get it, and no, I’m not naïve – I know these are moves designed to put more cash into the economy. But what the fu(K, we’re talking $50 Trillion here. We might want to start making some principle only payments soon before things really get out of control.
Which brings me back to the election. At the VP debate, (insert snarky comment here) Palin slammed Senator Biden for his assertion that a fair tax system, in which the richest (shockingly) pay a larger share of the tax burden, is patriotic. Whatever their issues were on that, and whichever tax plan gets enacted, is irrelevant – neither will do enough. Point blank, it is patriotic to pay more taxes, for everyone to pay more taxes. We need another Alexander Hamilton to come along, grab us by the scruff of our collective neck and force us to pay until it hurts so that we can reestablish our national honor, not to mention credit rating in the world.
Yes, I said it: we need to raise taxes across the board. Now, you can give me all the accounting and theoretical BS you want, but once we have the current market and banking situation stabilized, we to significantly raise taxes, tighten our belts, and dramatically cut government spending. Look, I don’t want to pay more taxes. I hate taxes, not to mention all the ridiculous fees I’m now paying for things my taxes used to cover. But you know what I enjoy? Being an American and all the opportunities that privilege affords me. I like having enough police and fire fighters to protect me. I like the idea of public education and want to improve it. I like having agencies to make sure the foods I eat, the medications I take, the water I drink, and the air I breathe won’t kill me. I like having a strong military and intelligence operation to keep me safe from external and internal threats. But those things cost money, and if we want to have those things and pay down the ridiculous debt our leaders, democrat and republican alike, have saddled us with, I know I’m going to have to pay more taxes – as are you. But you know what, it’s the right thing to do, just ask the guy on the $20 bill you just handed over to pay for your morning coffee and donut.
But we didn’t walk away. We paid those bills and we established ourselves as an honorable nation. Why, because a tough, arrogant, and supremely honorable man named Alexander Hamilton demanded that we meet our financial obligations. We paid taxes, we paid fees, we paid higher prices, and we did without. Why? Because we had to in order to do what was right. He devised a plan, Congress passed it, President Washington signed it into law, it was enacted, and it worked. Our nation started honorably and it/we rose to unprecedented heights in the modern world. Yes, we exploited, we abused, we stole, and we manipulated on our way to world dominance – many, many books have been rightly written about the abuses and the ugliness perpetrated by this country and its government. However, what makes this nation so great is that we also have found ways, time and time again, to rise to the challenge our forefathers built into the language of the Constitution.
Why is this relevant? Hmm…, let me think. We pay $10 Billion a month to fund the occupation in Iraq. We just committed $700 Billion to bail out the greedy bastards that caused our current financial mess. Oh yeah, and 8 years ago we elected the guy who promised to piss away a $1.5 Trillion surplus by giving us $300 rebate checks as opposed to either paying down our enormous national debt or bolstering our crumbling Social Security/Medicare programs. The result is that our national debt is now $10 Trillion dollars on the books, and around $50 Trillion off the books. Again, $50 Trillion - for crying out loud, we broke the damn debt clock in Times Square.
And what do the politicians propose to fix this mess? Tax cuts. Capital gains cuts, income tax cuts, canceling taxes on cash taken out of IRA’s, etc. How does bringing in less money help us when we’re spending more and more? Now I get it, and no, I’m not naïve – I know these are moves designed to put more cash into the economy. But what the fu(K, we’re talking $50 Trillion here. We might want to start making some principle only payments soon before things really get out of control.
Which brings me back to the election. At the VP debate, (insert snarky comment here) Palin slammed Senator Biden for his assertion that a fair tax system, in which the richest (shockingly) pay a larger share of the tax burden, is patriotic. Whatever their issues were on that, and whichever tax plan gets enacted, is irrelevant – neither will do enough. Point blank, it is patriotic to pay more taxes, for everyone to pay more taxes. We need another Alexander Hamilton to come along, grab us by the scruff of our collective neck and force us to pay until it hurts so that we can reestablish our national honor, not to mention credit rating in the world.
Yes, I said it: we need to raise taxes across the board. Now, you can give me all the accounting and theoretical BS you want, but once we have the current market and banking situation stabilized, we to significantly raise taxes, tighten our belts, and dramatically cut government spending. Look, I don’t want to pay more taxes. I hate taxes, not to mention all the ridiculous fees I’m now paying for things my taxes used to cover. But you know what I enjoy? Being an American and all the opportunities that privilege affords me. I like having enough police and fire fighters to protect me. I like the idea of public education and want to improve it. I like having agencies to make sure the foods I eat, the medications I take, the water I drink, and the air I breathe won’t kill me. I like having a strong military and intelligence operation to keep me safe from external and internal threats. But those things cost money, and if we want to have those things and pay down the ridiculous debt our leaders, democrat and republican alike, have saddled us with, I know I’m going to have to pay more taxes – as are you. But you know what, it’s the right thing to do, just ask the guy on the $20 bill you just handed over to pay for your morning coffee and donut.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)