Fiscal Cliff: Republican Primaries Eyed By Conservatives After Deal: via HuffPost

Fiscal Cliff: Republican Primaries Eyed By Conservatives After Deal: via HuffPost Why is the press pandering by describing uneducated anarchists as conservatives? They aren’t conservative in any sense of the word. Most of them receive funding from billionaires to win over their hillbilly crowd so any pretext that they support the common man is hypocritical. It’s the opposite of a grassroots movement. It’s about letting fat cats do whatever they please and appealing to the basest prejudices of the lower class to get a mandate to do that. The candidates may be different than the norm, but not in an improved way. Candidates are sought out who have no standards. Some tea party people were stating that people would stay below the proposed $250,000 tax bracket to minimize their taxes, showing a lack of even rudimentary understanding of how taxes work, some after several years in office. That is appalling. That they would not have discussed tax issues with any of the millions of republican accountants or lawyers before arriving at positions with serious consequences underscores how these people think. Or their capacity for deception if the object was to mislead. The supreme irony of the “tea party” is that its objective is diametrically opposite from the objectives of the Boston tea party. The objective of the tea party is taxation without representation. The objective is that all public money, all public decisions be solely for the benefit of a tenth of one percent of us, the richest of the rich. They want the rest of us to be powerless, reduced to slaves and stripped of our country, serfs catering to the whims of a powerful clique. At least as a dual citizen I can park myself somewhere else if things get too stupid. But I think of myself more as an american.


Tea Party does something useful

The Tea Party helped vote down a continuation of the Patriot Act.

Good to see that they’ve shown some sign of being more than puppets of Goldman-Sachs and the military industrial complex.

Someone has to be.

Done with Palin

The Joe Miller camp knows that Murkowski has more votes.   Now they are talking about trying to win on a technicality by looking for excuses to exclude ballots where the intention is clear.
That seems to be the opposite of the whole tea party premise, one of the few things going for them, of bringing more honesty, transparency etc. to government.  Trying to defeat the will of the people on a techicality shows an interest only in winning at any cost by any means.
Palin donated to Miller’s recount lawsuit fund.   The reaction of somebody who was what she was pretending to be would have been to cut all ties with him.  Instead, she is joining Miller’s “defeat the people” campaign.   It is difficult to imagine a more cynical (and un-teapartylike) move.
That’s just a dealbreaker.  What it shows about character can’t be undone.

Media, not Tea Party, sends the loudest message about who is in charge

So the turnout of voters under 30, disproportionately Democrats, was something around 13% in this election.  Having been convinced by the media that the Republicans were unstoppable, why would they show up?
So the right wing media have again shown an ability to generate a self-fulfilling prophecy through misleading journalism.  That at all times the population eligible to vote had a much lower view of the Republicans was consistently suppressed, and instead soft numbers about probable voters instead of eligible voters was used to generate the self-fulfilling prophecy.
If the media had done the same thing to affect the price of a stock there would probably be arrests, but deliberately misleading the public with false news to generate an election outcome for some reason is tolerated.   That kind of behaviour by the media belongs in Stalinist Russia.
The election is portrayed by the media as being about the economy, but it couldn’t be about that. The results were a large swing in favor of the party that destroyed the economy, and other polls that were published stated that the voters were aware that Bush and Wall Street are mostly to blame for the economy.   Electing people that want to repeal the new constraints on Wall Street is an unintelligible response.
The media did it’s best to generate a climate of alleged “voter anger” directed at the Democrats, and pimping the Tea Party, while making no effort to educate voters that the Tea Party and Republicans generally want to go against the voters’ stated objectives.
The 2008 collapse, which had been building since 2004, was a direct result of corporate lawlessness and a failure of the government to adequately regulate.  Only a complete idiot could honestly believe that an excess of regulation and too much government interference were what led to the economic collapse.
Again, I don’t see the people in charge of the Tea Party as people that believe in freedom from government.  Quite the opposite, they are about oppression by fraudulent government, seeing government as little more than a propaganda organ of big business.   Much like Stalinists, but  in favor of big business rather than big labor.   Given the facts, the position that the economic problems are a result of too much regulation is Orwellian.  It is what Goebbels would say.  The Tea Party does not represent a return to honest government and honest government is the worst fear of their leadership.
Polls suggest that the electorate want jobs, and again the right wing have successfully confused them.  The right wing is about closing jobs here and sending them to East Asia.   The right wing is famous for “jobless recoveries”.   If you want jobs, don’t vote for a Republican.  Ever.
The Tea Party people now want to cut government spending.  If there is a way to do that to a meaningful degree without cutting lots of jobs, I’ll be duly impressed.  The only way that the Tea Party and Republicans can do what they’ve said they are going to do is if they do the opposite of what the country wants- cut even more jobs, which will take more money out of the economy, lead to more foreclosures, and speed up the economic death-spiral.   Selective cuts, especially to things like military junk, may be manageable.
For the most part stimulus spending is a waste of time- a trillion dollars now so that we delay the collapse for a year or two and make every subsequent year worse, is just a bad idea.  Better to take the medicine now althought it is never politically popular to tell the public that doing nothing is the best option.  There may of course be some specific cases where the cost-benefit is there and in particular we can’t lose track of spending on preventative maintenance on infrastructure now will probably save greater expenses in the future.
The central problem of the few Tea Party and Republicans who want the country to improve is that it is not possible to turn the country around with their model.  Central to any recovery has to be that anti-dumping and anti-subsidy laws apply in the same manner to low minimum wages as they do to government subsidies.   The Fordism model for building America cannot work if every business can opt out of it without consequences and move production offshore.   Whether a company has an advantage through a subsidy by the people through the government or is subsidized by the people by low labor costs is only a difference in semantics.
The right wing is creating an environment in which it will only be possible for America to compete by reverting into the equivalent of a third world country.
This global “race for the bottom” doesn’t make a lot of sense.  Better to tell corporations  that if they break with the program, they break with it completely, and if they want to make shoes with laborers in Thailand making 10 cents per hour, then they can go see how much they sell to the Thais.   Otherwise they are freeloaders being carried by everyone else.
Another problem, the demographic bulge with the baby boomers, can only be resolved by going against the other right wing agenda and opening up immigration.  A good immigration policy can smooth out the demographics.   A number of billionaires have called for an improved immigration policy for presumably this reason. If you have too much of your population retired there is a huge burden on the remaining workforce.  The longer the wait to open the borders the worse the problem will be as people aren’t going to just walk into the country and immediately pick up all of the slack.
The “Tea Party” types have tied their hands by confusing empirical issues with philisophical issues and have said, essentially, that they will vote against anything that could possibly work.   Doing more of what got America into this hole in the first place is just going to dig that hole deeper.

“Tea Party” will be more of the same and worse

About the only Tea Party candidate that is broadly known that I take seriously is Rand Paul, and that largely on account of his father.  I suspect this is a case where genius has skipped a generation.  I take him seriously as a Tea Party candidate, not so much for his views.    I.e. he really believes that stuff as opposed to being a rank opportunist.
You have to distinguish between the Tea Party itself vs. people that are running for office that identify as being “Tea Party” candidates.   The candidates have been in large part shown to be politically experienced to the extent of having held or run for other offices.
That horrible Angle woman in Nevada is probably the most evil person in America that isn’t a serial killer, although I may be making a big assumption there.  Almost everything she has said is hateful and she has come dangerously close to the line where a person should be prosecuted for suggesting armed insurrection.
Christine O’Donnell is a fraud that has consistently lied about her qualifications and in a relatively stupid and easily falsifiable manner.  She approaches the election as little more than a reality T.V. contestant who will do anything to get airtime.  She realizes that the more extreme she gets, the more airtime she gets.  So among other things she believes that rapists should have greater reproductive rights than their victims.  She should go join the Taliban.
Using a voice double of a prominent and popular Democrat and stating on the record that he has endorsed your campaign, only retracting the claim on election day so that most voters will only hear about the retraction after they have voted, is appallling.
So much for “Tea Party” candidates bringing truth and honesty to Washington.
The hangover effect of all of this is that before long the people that thought they were electing someone that stood for Tea Party principles [as lightweight as those are], will find in a lot of cases that they have been manipulated by a political cockroach into voting based on being told what they wanted to hear.   In most cases I think that the voters will find that all they are doing is voting more cockroaches into the public cereal box.
Of course the big beneficiary of all this is likely to be Obama 2012.    The older brand of cockroach was more cunning and elliptical.  The new Republican cockroaches are from the “Reality TV” generation and most of them make the borderline retarded Bush Jr. look sauve and sophisticated by comparison.  The first thing that comes into their head comes out.  They peaked two years early and now they have two years to hang themselves, and they will do it.

Palin and Beck Orwellian

Some 30 years on in the right wing economic agenda, with nothing to show for it but disaster after disaster, and a steadily declining standard of living, we now hear from such luminaries as Palin and Beck that we need to exercise our “second amendment rights”- (i.e. kill our fellow citizens?) to have a revolution so that we can have…exactly the same policies as we have for the past 30 years that have led to nothing but failure and impoverished billions.
How it would be a revolution to take up arms to do what is little more than defending and furthering a corrupt existing order, I don’t know.  It is hard to see it as anything other than Orwellian doublespeak.
One of the more common delusions is of a “free market”.  The operational definition of “free market” seems to be an arrangement where privately owned businesses take great risks and if they make money by fair means or foul, they keep all of it, but if they run into trouble, they morph into socialists.   Proper regulation could avoid both ends of the problem.  The lack of appropriate regulation creates needs for bailouts and even more interference by government than if there had been an appropriate level of interference in the first place.
The right wing has been consistently preaching financial responsibility for 30 years while the left wing has been practicing it.   Put a democrat in power and the balance sheets usually tend to adjust quickly.   Put Republicans in and the finances spiral out of control.    But because they replace Democratic expenses that help people and give ordinary people jobs with far more expensive programs that center on killing people, the military, they consider themselves more responsible.
When Bush and friends left office, they had created a stimulus plan that was supposed to turn the country around.  The incoming Congress and President had little alternative but to ratify what the previous administration had already planned unless they were to stall and take more time for debate.  Obama has huge problems to deal with, most of which he inherited from the younger Bush.   Now a plan formulated under a Republican administration [yes, in consultation with a number of Democrats who are also guilty of it] is being rebranded as a Democrat abomination.    Never mind that 30 years of terrible decision making by mostly Republicans came to a head with the crisis, or that the Democrats were continuing policies arrived at by Bush and his appointees.    Of course the stimulus plan was a terrible idea with many Democrat (and Republican) backers, but rebranding it as a Democrat idea is pure fiction.
The key underlying problem with tea party types is exactly the same as the key problem with Stalinists.   Utopians of every flavour tend to follow a similar trajectory.
The first step is to have a simplistic world view and believe that if everybody adhered to this ideal that all conflict would magically dissipate and everybody would live in peace and happiness.
The second step is, because the utopian’s simple solutions never work, to create a mythical fall from grace and scapegoats.   The fall becomes due to women because Eve ate an apple, or Jews, or some other race or alleged conspiracy.   Utopians are generally fanatics.  Their reasoning goes that if everybody was on the same page, their system would work.   The system does not work, and therefore that is because not everybody is on the same page, not everybody is pure enough.   That leads to purges, threats of violence and an insistance that if only more people would follow the dogma everything would be fine.   The solution proposed is usually even more extreme than that which is already not working.    Decades of setbacks do not prove that the idea is refuted, they prove that the “wicked” have been getting in the way and only through purification can there be progress to the utopian ideal.
Utopianism seems to be more of a defect of the white race, the others don’t seem to get as confused or stay confused for as long.
Utopians tend not be great students of history.    There was a time when the economy was almost unregulated.   It was not a Utopia.  In the early Industrial Revolution the conditions were so bad that if not for the reforms in the early 20th century it probably would have been better if there had never been an industrial revolution at all.   Lack of regulation led to great boom and bust cycles, to the detriment of everybody, including most business owners.    The conditions were so horrific that Marxism gained a great deal of traction.   And if the majority of the population is subjected to those conditions again, Marxism or something like it will spring up again for the same reasons.   We have all the empirical evidence that we could ever need that blanket deregulation or lack of regulation is a disaster.
Utopians tend to not be good with facts or common sense.   Henry Ford was no Marxist, actually reputed to have been a Nazi sympathizer, but he realized that workers have to make enough money to buy products.   There is no use having an assembly line that makes cars if almost nobody has the resources to buy a car.  Notwithstanding his unsavoury politics, his economics is basic common sense:
A country without a middle class cannot have a thriving economy.   Yet eradicating the middle class and reducing the bulk of society to subsistence wages so they can’t buy anything but subsistence products is the primary objective of the right wing in western civilization since Reagan.
You see, the battle is not between left wing economics and right wing economics, it is between the “supply side” and Reaganomics people vs. Ford economics.  Ford economics built America and Reaganomics and supply side economics destroyed it.
There have been a number of Tea Party type movements in the past, with usually mixed results at best.  The Nazis were one such movement.  They put a guy like the new Glenn Beck in charge and that didn’t go so well.   The French did a little better but Robespierre got drunk on power and paranoia and after he took out the trash he started taking out everything else, including former allies.  Once people get a taste for doing things that way the genie doesn’t go back in the bottle.  Maybe the best outcome of such a movement was with Julius and Augustus Caesar, albiet again resulting in the appointment of a dictator.
Not really something to aspire to.  Is there anything wrong with going back to what worked?

Glenn Beck jumps the shark

I used to like both Glenn Beck and George Soros, as two of the exceedingly few honest or credible right of center figures.  Beck used to be a Jon Stewart of the right.  Now he’s degenerated into a lunatic or attention whore or both.  A few years ago almost everything that he said was right, now nearly everything that he says could hardly be believed by a sane person.   Everybody is trying to kill him?  The oil drilling moratorium had nothing to do with the largest environmental disaster in US history and was really just a convoluted plot to make George Soros money?  What kind of a retard believes these things?  How do you get a previously honest man to flip so completely?  A honey trap with an underage hooker? Or is he just off his meds?
Fox better get him off the air before the men in white coats come to take him to the asylum while he’s on the air.
Making George Soros out as a communist?  I doubt if he is even a Democrat, although he probably donates both ways.   George Soros is about making money.  Unlike most right wingers, George Soros is honest.    The unholy trinity of Reagan, Thatcher and Mulroney ushered in a tragic era of ever worsening conditions for the western world.  At the end of Carter’s era 80% or so of the workers still had pensions.  Very few can honestly say that they are better now than they were under Carter.
George Bush senior, before he sold out by silence, foresaw this.  He called the new economics of the right “voodoo economics”, because it was.  It was never anything other than a fraudulent campaign to steal from the poor and the middle class to make a very few people far richer and every person at the top that had any understanding of the subject matter knew it was a fraud from the start.
George Soros has tried to educate the public.  He and the old Glenn Beck would be friends you would think.  George Soros has talked about things like “market fundamentalism” and how a mindless globalization of the economies governed only by right wing dogma was going to cause problems.   And he was right.  Mr. Soros’ only crime is telling the truth.  I would make a reference to the parable of “The Emporer’s New Clothes” but today’s degenerate illiterates probably wouldn’t get it.   Soros is blacklisted by the rest of the right wing for telling the truth and right now Beck is the mouthpiece of the extremists.
I think my ideal presidential ticket would probably be Lou Gerstner of IBM fame with George Soros.  I don’t know that anybody with less firepower is competent to run the country.  Trump would be a disaster, he can’t even run his own life.  The Tea Party types sure aren’t a solution- if it were possible to fix every problem by waving a magic wand somebody would have done it already.  The left can’t do it.  The right can’t do it.  I can’t do it.  There is no magic wand, just tough choices, some trial and error and mostly administrative decisions for which one’s politics are totally irrelevant.
I am so disappointed in Beck.  He used to be a good man.  Now he’s Goebbels.