Letter to the Tea Bag-, I mean, Partiers
You guys intrigue me with your deep reservoirs of self-pity and shallow pond of substantive argument. I’m not saying that you are not good people or that you are not smart people. It’s just that your complaints don’t seem to have much to do with politics governance. It’s more about finding a place to belong.
I have a handful of Tea Party friends. Two are on disability. They sit at home all day, watching Fox and collecting government checks. Another one is retired and spends much of the day visiting doctors, courtesy of the taxpayers. Another left his wife for his girlfriend and now thinks that the liberal culture is why his kids are messed up. I consider them all friends, but I can’t get a coherent political discussion from any of them.
Jason and John: If you’d rather see a Democrat win than a moderate Republican, your wish is being fulfilled.
Peter, M Heiss and Phelps: If you don’t believe me that I didn’t know the slang meaning of “tea-bagger,” that’s okay. Be aware that you are almost driving me to use it again.
Abe: All this talk of insular media elites not knowing the real folks in the heartland got old long ago. Ohio has a Democratic governor and U.S. Senator, and it sends more Democrats than Republicans to Congress. With all due respect, you are not exactly the voice of Ohio.
Vivek: You suggest that I should be calling the Tea Whatevers “people who are mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore.” I would consider that if someone would just tell me what “it” is.
Tags: American culture, Conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, Tea Party, Washington
November 7th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
well, I haven’t been to a Tea party, so I am not an authority on them, but I suspect they are protesting the drunken sailor aspect of spending by Congress.
All I was pointing out was that there is no reason to mock people by using a term which doesn’t apply to them. Sure, it is good for a quick laugh for those using them, but it doesn’t serve any purpose.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Froma Harrop writes: “Jason and John: If you’d rather see a Democrat win than a moderate Republican, your wish is being fulfilled.”
No, I’d rather see win a candidate that demonstrates in living color traditional conservative values and I couldn’t care less anymore if that candidate is Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Independent.
(For the record, I see no functional difference between “moderate Republicans”, “neo-conservative Republicans” and their step-siblings in the Democratic party. Both the Democrat and Republican parties have been taken over by two ends of the same rope.)
I think it is intellectual dishonesty (or deficiency) to believe a bigger government — with its attendant more taxes, higher tax rates, and fewer liberties — is a sustainable model on which to build our future if we are to continue to give at least a perfunctory nod to the Constitution.
We can focus on how we wish things were, or we can acknowledge the way things actually are. For instance: taxes are generated when a dollar moves from buyer to seller. When taxes and regulations are less burdensome, buyers will naturally have more dollars to spend when cashing their paychecks and, thereby, generate more gross tax revenue when they spend that cash. The end result is the Treasury has money to spend on things that, for the most part, do not benefit those who put it there in the first place.
Higher taxes and burdensome regulations put less dollars into the pockets of buyers. The rest is a simple math equation.
So far as I can see, only traditional conservatives and some libertarians openly acknowledge the natural order of things above. “Moderates” and “neo-conservatives” — or, as I call them, “Democrat(s) Lite” — are all for bigger government and higher taxes to pay for it.
No thank you.
And no, I am not in favor of electing a Democrat instead of a moderate Republican because, to me, they are one in the same. The difference is if I assist in electing the moderate Republican, the GOP learns nothing since it is axiomatic that you get more of the behavior you reward.
However, temporarily installing a Democrat instead of a moderate Republican punishes and warns. Consider it the spanking a childish GOP is desperately in need of these days.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Hi Froma,
From a blog on NYT, “According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care?…”
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/lawmakers-detail-obamas-pitch/
If the president is stooping down to this level, then liberals should not have conniptions when someone calls him a liar.
Th very people who complain about the coarsening of our public discourse contribute to it by playing these sophomoric word-games…
November 9th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Again with the ’self-pity’. It’s almost as though you’re unable to engage with what you percieve as political opponents without some perjorative.
And “shallow pond of substantive argument”. See above.
I didn’t come here asking or seeking agreement, in fact I expected to leave here without either of us ’substantively’ altering out positions. I was trying to get at least one person out there to remember that they are an adult and there is a certain level of decorum that should be observed. And even if you don’t want to be that adult, you should remember that one person’s bad act or speech doesn’t automatically justify a similar response. That was the entirety of my point. For the record, I will accept that you didn’t know what ‘teabagger’ meant. In the future, you should look that sort of thing up first. If you’re going to catch heat for it, you might as well have earned it.
I’m not a tea partier. I have no intention of attending any of their events. I had more than my fill of chanting and sign waving during the Vietnam War, thank you.
The tea partiers that I know all work for a living. One couple, admittedly, seems to parrot the Fox mantra of ‘Obama this and Obama that’, but the remainder are concerned more by the fiscal irresponsibility that started in the Bush years and has been seemingly accelerated during the current Administration.
I would submit that’s a ’substantive’ concern. That you seem to reject that out of hand would speak more to your inability to listen rather than an inability to state a position.
Here’s a perhaps heretical thought: the people you support aren’t your friends, they aren’t necessarily looking out for your interests, and they will act against you if it benefits them. A topical example would be the criminal and civil penalties that are part of the health care bill passed in the House this past weekend. This would certainly suggest (at the very least) ‘compliance’ and ‘control’ more than ‘reform’. Should you be convicted of willful noncompliance with the proposed insurance plan, you will lose forever both your right to arms and your right to vote as a convicted felon. An older exemplar is of course the Orwellian named Patriot Act. Neither side is to be trusted with either our ‘liberties’, however you define those, or our money.
As for the tea party as a movement or a phenomenon, now is the time to start keeping an eye on them. For awhile, they weren’t allowing elected officials to speak at their events, but Michelle Bachman, et al, this past weekend might be the start of their co-option by the Republicans. Time will tell.
So, in closing, try to be nice, Froma. There’s plenty to disagree about, and calling each other names isn’t going to help an already difficult conversation.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Let me get this right. You want to engage those who hold different beliefs and ideas, in order to explain your point of view. As an editorial writer, your job is persuade. You want to bring people around to your side.
So you do this by using a term coined by Anderson Cooper, with the basest and most sarcastic meaning possible. You go out of your way to insult your readers. When they ask for your understanding, rather than apologize for being offensive (I didn’t know! I had no idea!), you double down.
I don’t get it. I also won’t believe your future complaints that the political conversation has gotten course and divisive. You are rude and disrespectful.
I’ll be curious to see if your readership drops off. It should.
November 10th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Please explain how adding 30 million people (or whatever the number is..) to the insurance rolls, without adding more DRs is going to cost me less?? Or, make my (or anyone elses) medical care better?
It will cost me more. It is not that I am unsympathetic or greedy or an ogre. Its just I cant afford any more taxes. I am taxed out. That’s what everyone is angry about. We cant afford it anymore. 10.7% unemployment (more likely 17%) And Froma you want MORE from me?
As they say, the problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money!
Presently, if you are not covered by insurance you can go to any ER and receive health care.
While I agree that the medical situation needs to be improved, why would Froma think that the government is the solution. Government is the problem. Government cant count the votes, cant secure the borders, cant run the post office, cant run Amtrak, and the list goes on! So please manage MY healthcare.
And the costs; You take money from me for 3 years and then the benfit kicks in and it still cost 1.3 Trillion or 980 billion. When was the last time a government program cost LESS than predicted? (answer- NEVER!)
Also, If there is waste in the present Medicare system then why are we waiting to fix it. Lets fix it NOW! use the saving to LOWER medical costs.
Here is an novel idea.. let’s begin Tort reform. Of course not … special interests .. Froma, how bout hoppin’ on that train ride??? Of course not! you’d rather be condescending, arrogant, and insulting!!
November 12th, 2009 at 9:29 am
So here it is, a payroll tax hike to pay for this colossal piece of health care. Of course it is only on high income earners, above 250K. Of course that is today.
Maybe next year or when the system goes broke the ceiling will continually be reduced… has that ever happened before?? (HINT: Social Security)
Again Froma, this is why we are angry! We are not nut cases, or selfish and self-absorbed, as you allude to in this column. We just can’t afford to pay anymore. PLEASE promote a reduction in spending. When taxes are raised that is what I have to do. Let us live within our means.
What if we we had to sit down and write out a check every month on the taxes we pay. You know, payroll tax, sales tax, munincip[al taxes, property tax, tax, tax, tax. Nothing was taken out of our pay, nothing was ever added on at the store, but ta the end of the month we received a bill titled, “taxes”. there would be a revolution ion this country! If taxes and Governement spending keep rising there will be another one!