Tea Party – “Deaf, deluded, deceptive”?

George Rebane

 

The cartoon by friend and RR reader RL ‘Balanced Bob’ Crabb appears in today’s (24may11) Union.  Balanced Bob is a self-proclaimed down-the-middle observer of our partisan puffings and pitfalls.  Here he administers a well-worn leftwing swipe at the tea party movement by taking it to task for being too focused as an organization.  The tea party attracts its members through the narrow door of small government, fiscal responsibility, constitutionality, and free markets.

The tea party members (and I am one) take these as a limited yet powerful set of goals for governance that many people can agree on.  We don’t cover the waterfront as a political party might by also espousing social goals, a foreign policy, and so on.  This doesn’t mean that tea party members don’t each have their own beliefs and ideas about all those things; it’s just that these are not germane to their membership in our particular organization.  Sorta like the National Organization for Women not taking a stand on free markets (maybe they do?).

But a standard tack of the left, when at a disadvantage on the main point of an argument, is to immediately defocus it in either the topical and/or the historical dimension.  To their mind this is a perfectly valid method of discourse, especially political discourse.  For example, if a proposition is made that ‘high school education would be improved by putting only qualified teachers into classrooms’, then a teachers' union progressive would deflect the argument by accusing his counterpart of not caring for the quality of grade school education by omitting that from his proposition.  Or even more egregiously, applying the historical gambit, ‘Yeah?  Well where were you guys when we tried to do that ten years ago?’  Examples of this abound in the comment streams of these pages.

So here we have Balanced Bob now tilting at the tea party from the left in order to keep his credentials in equilibrium.  But the part that I’m having trouble understanding is how are we being “deceptive” by constantly publishing our focused emphasis on the principles we espouse.  And just because they were never meant to be comprehensive does not mean that tea party members wear blinders and are ignorant about the other issues on which their candidates take a stance.

I may not be among the most knowledgeable of tea party members – for which I apologize – but I do invite anyone sharing Bob’s view of the organization to button hole a member and talk to him/her about their knowledge of candidates and other issues.   It is the tea party kind of large scale awakening of the American electorate that keeps slogan-slinging politicos awake nights.

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

I have friends who are "progressive" and they are not at all like Thornton or Enos or Frisch or Pelline. They are nice and respectful and we debate in a low temperament way. What happens with the above leftwingnuts is they are way way out there in left field and are unable to function in the real world. Yes I am not unhappy slapping them upside the head when they deserve it, that is true. But, after 35 years of them and their anti mantra's to America and its specialness, I will be just an unrelenting defender.

[Steve Enos]

"anti mantra's to America"... sorry Todd, but I love America, I love my Country and I'm proud of my Country.... got it?

[Brenda Cruz]

I've been waiting years for enos to positively contribute to a debate (here, city council, planning commission, etc). Thank God I did not hold my breathe.

Misery loves company and enos has attempted his entire life (for all I know) to bring down others to his hate, hate, hate worldview.

When asked to contribute solutions he attacks the messenger (insert 'shocked' face here). We get it you hate Pruett, you hate Rebane, you hate Juvinall.

To Enos: "How would you get the economy going again (if you cared)? How would you improve employment? How would you provide health care to the masses? How would you solve the pension, SS and medicare crisis? Would you fuel or temper the current class warfare in the USA?

Enough with the drivel, can you offer any solutions?"

Posted by: Brenda Cruz | 24 May 2011 at 08:44 PM

[Todd Juvinall]

Brenda, don't hold your breath, he is simply a "NO" person.

The disability payments are in jeopardy in America, the money is running out and maybe many liberals will have to get a real job?

[Steve Enos]

Just more personal, insulting attacks by Brenda Cruz... shows a total lack of ability to have a discussion of differing ideas.

FYI.. I don't hate Pruett, Rebane or Juvinall... I just don't hold the sameir same views on some issues.

Exit quesiton for George: is it possible to have discussions here of differing views without all the personal attacks that drag down your blog?

[Mike Thornton]

The really problem is that the regressives are so used to bullying people that they absolutely freak out when folks stand up to them. Especially when those folks use the same tactics that the regressives have been using for many years and getting away with.
After too many years people are finally getting fed up with the angry, phony persecuted regressive philosophy, strategy and tactics.
The "smackdown" has begun. Regressive politicians are getting their heads handed to them by folks who supported previously and now are beginning to understand who and what regressives really are. "Teahadist" rallies are down to double digit attendance, Right wing, hate talk radio ratings are dropping like rocks, the regressive funders are being exposed for who and what they are and now, we actually have the possibility of Sarah Palin, being the best candidate for President that the regressive party can muster.
Like an injured animal the regressives can be expected to get more vicious and more violent as their political death draws near.

[Barry Pruett]

Bob Crabb! You have generated well over 100 comments with your cartoon! When our portly liberal blogger says you are a right wing extremist and the local conservative contingent say you are a lefty, then you must be as "middle of the road" as it gets. The media's job is to inform and generate the conversation. My personal opinion is that when the media upsets both sides then, and only then, can they be considered middle of the road. Keep it up as your cartoons are an asset to our wonderful local community.

[Todd Juvinall]

Barry, how true. Cartoons have usually been one sided in the Lamestream media so when a Crabb draws from the "both sides now" perspective he gets slapped by both.

Regarding the resident whiners Enos and Thornton. I am constantly amazes at their denial of reality, mostly about their own corrupt beliefs. Enos thinks his record of trashing projects is a plus on his resume' for job creation and Thorton is stuck in 1853 Marx-Land and tells us how he loves freedom. Wow!

[Greg Goodknight]

Enos, you make a purely personal attack ("shows a total lack of ability to have a discussion of differing ideas") and then try to take the high road ("is it possible to have discussions here of differing views without all the personal attacks that drag down your blog?").

You really can't have it both ways. Neither can Thornton. If you want civility, try being civil for a change.

[Greg Goodknight]

Thornton wrote "the regressives are so used to bullying people that they absolutely freak out when folks stand up to them. Especially when those folks use the same tactics that the regressives have been using for many years and getting away with."

Thornton, many on the left have also been bullying people for as long as I've been old enough to have an opinion, and, as far as I can tell, it's been a virtual constant in your posts here.

[Mikey McD]

Enos, Mrs. Cruz sincerely asked for your solutions t what ails this country. Instead you attack Mrs. Cruz's request to share your solutions. Your response says a lot.

btw, your comments here often (always) attack todd, barry and george (me?) to no benefit to the debate/discussion at hand.

[Steve Enos]

No Mikey, read her two posts again, 90% of her two posts are just a personal attack vs. addressing an issue.

[Paul Emery]

Getting back to the Tea Party(s). I think they have put the Republican Party in an impossible situation because to accommodate their mandates would cause massive defeats at the ballot box unless someone a whole lot better than what they have now (the Republicans) could convince the voters otherwise. NY26 is just the tip of the iceberg. The Dems are licking their chops right now. Clinton and Newt were able to work together to create a balanced budget something that this crew (Republicrats) don't seem able to do. The various factions of the TP's don't talk to each other and will confuse voters as to what they believe in. No social agenda? Not from some factions. In the broad sense Crabb is right on the money. Ryan saying the Dems are using scare tactics admits they are losing the battle of opinion on his budget. The lack of details on the voucher system for Medicare is scary enough to those who have been paying into one thing for up to 35 years and are going to get something else if it passes to do all they can to stop it from happening and that may mean voting out those who support it. What a gift Ryan and crew gave the Dems.

[Mikey McD]

My bad, it does sound like there is a history with you two. I filtered through the personal history and focused on the request for solutions.

[wmartin]

When you get right down to it, it's rather hard to avoid this kind of thing:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3bGnkNeoPxk/SbEbx4MWJrI/AAAAAAAACfA/AIxIVAJ5tTc/s400/Government-Spending-Graph.PNG

I think that short term events like the NewtClinton budgets are less indicative of anything than you might think. It's like confusing weather with climate. In the end, it becomes a tug o' war between demographics, technology, resource depletion, etc. and I think that it's easy to have a serious overshoot in spending if it turns out we're less wealthy than we thought we were.

It always takes the Coyote a few seconds of peddling air before reality hits.

[Paul Emery]

wmartin

I am returning to the advise of former chief Bush economic adviser N. Gregory Mankiw who, while in favor of Bush's tax cuts did so with caution. He wrote this in 2000 Less wealthy? Yes. Poitical courage?
well...

"CBO's $2 trillion projection is based on reasonable guesses by some of the best, and least partisan, minds in Washington. But they are guesses nonetheless."

"So should the next President aim to enact a tax cut, and if so, what size? This question will dominate the presidential campaign. But it's not a very relevant one. More vital than choosing a President with the right tax plan is electing a President with the political courage to change course when events demand it. If we have learned anything from the past decade of fiscal history, it's that we shouldn't look too hard into any budget forecaster's crystal ball."