“Occupy Wall Street”

[Beavah]

Yah, it's true, eh? Da demographic of the Tea Party movement (and da Fox network) is Grandma. Old folks, like me. And like many of da elderly, they got duped into votin' against their own interest, as they discovered when Representative Ryan and the Tea Party Congress proposed dismantling Medicare. And then Grandma made a stink to them, too.

 

So functionally, I think da Tea Party have long since abandoned their roots in Ron Paul's fiscally conservative libertarianism. Instead, they're a populist movement of old, white, rural folks who are being manipulated by a savvy media message of fear. Quite sad, really. A bit like da folks who prey on us old folks financially in other ways. Lots of advertising buzzwords, but no substance. And yah, advertising buzzwords and fear can win yeh an election, sure. They just aren't much use when it comes to governing effectively. So yeh get tom-fool populists who would rather push da government into default than work with fellow Americans to do what's best for the nation.

 

In that way, they resemble da populists that might come out of the OWS stuff. Mind yeh, the OWS folks are more likely to be young and more urban/suburban in demographic, and the Gospel of Fear doesn't play as well with that crowd as the da Robin Hood theme. And young folks act differently, eh? More likely to become physically violent, perhaps. Much less likely to be racist in their overtones, though, and a bit less likely to be just plain rude in the way that some of the TP'ers have been at public events where they were guests. Remember da town halls? More likely to wear funny clothes and look like bums, though.

 

Problem is, da Tea Partiers in some way have a reason to be fearful. Their demographic and way of life is goin' away. Not because of the "government" or da "liberals", but because of more ordinary changes in economics. America has become an urban country, with a big automated farm out back. I read that even da majority of Nebraskans now live in the urban areas around Lincoln and Omaha. That rural, self-sufficient, free to pollute, pay-your-local-physician-in-cash, ethnically homogeneous, god-fearin' protestant lifestyle is never coming back. As climate change continues, da droughts are goin' to hammer it even harder. I reckon in a lot of ways that's sad, but I don't tend to over-romanticize it. So yeh can understand where it's comin' from, eh? And sympathize, even though yeh know that it's doomed in the long run and da only question is how much damage they'll do to what they love on the way out.

 

Yah, sure, and da problem is da OWS folks have similar complaints, eh? Their way of life as urban, working middle class and unionized labor is goin' away. Not because of "corporations" or "conservatives" but because of more ordinary changes in economics. America has become a high-end, automated manufacturer with a centralized billing and distribution system. We no longer need legions of unskilled workers operatin' bolt guns, and increasingly care less and less about maintaining a lot of local shops and shop-owners when we can get what we want online, delivered to our doorstep for less money. That urban, hard-workin, get-good-benefits-from-your-union, work-for-da-government-for-stability lifestyle is never coming back. So when they see da "suits" not just rakin' in more money than ever while they lose their jobs, but gambling and being irresponsible and getting bailed out even while they pay lower taxes than ever to support da teachers and bus drivers and cops and firemen, yeh can understand where they're comin' from, eh? And sympathize, even though yeh know that unionized labor is doomed in the long run and da only question is how much damage they'll do to what they love on the way out.

 

Too many folks fightin' to preserve da old. Tea Party, unions, record companies, oil companies, politicians and lobbies. In da end it never works, though it can cripple yeh for a while. Leadership involves doin' the Steve Jobs thing and embracing the new, even though it's goin' to fundamentally change things. Not with fear, and not without a touch of nostalgia for what was either. But with hope, and spirit, and a willingness to work together to do it right.

 

Beavah

 

[skeptic]

My, My!!!

 

"My child would "never" do such a thing. I was not there, but I know better, because he is my son. I did not raise him that way!"

 

There are crazies in both camps folks. Just admit that not everyone in your sphere of belief is as perfect as you think. Fools abound; and they are not limited by party, age, color, or any other commonly used group dynamic.

 

Both sides of this head butting discussion have valid points. And likely most of those for or against each, are rational and civil for the most part. We seldom take note of the ocean around the cresting wave. Suffice it to say, our representatives are not doing their jobs most of the time; and that includes both sides.

 

It is just tiresome how the idea of common ground is such an anathema to people. For a scouting board, where the posters purport, for the most part, to actually be scouters, some responses are very disappointing. As leaders we need to set good examples. And I hope that some of the things displayed on here are not shared with the youth for whom we are responsible. One of the reasons that political participation in official Scouting capacity is not allowed.

 

Now, maybe it is time for that pie.

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

Democrats like Beavah have been spouting this line since 1980, when they confidentally predicted Regan could never win.

 

Since that time, Republicans have won 5 Presidential elections and lost three.

 

The fact is that the huge boomer generation is moving into that older demographic while the Baby Bust generation is filling in behind.

 

But keep it up! Nothing is better for Republicans than over confident Democrats.

[Beavah]

Yah, yeh keep gettin' it wrong, SeattlePioneer. I was a Reagan Republican. Voted for the Gipper in both elections, GHWB in both elections, Dole and (God help me) GWB in 2000. In fact, my votin' record is strongly Republican, especially on da national level. (Locally I just vote for competence, which doesn't seem to correlate at all to party).

 

That's what da modern Republicans/pseudo-conservatives don't seem to get, eh? In an effort to appease their whacky "base", they've alienated and driven away a good chunk of da rest of us folks who were long-time supporters and who actually decide elections in areas where da districts haven't been completely gerrymandered. They just can't understand that da world is not "us vs. them" and anybody who doesn't agree with the latest ideological policy decision must be "them".

 

I don't consider myself a Republican anymore, partly for that reason, and partly because they've become the party of anti-intellectualism and fear. I find da behavior of too many of 'em lacking in honor. But I'm certainly not a Democrat.

 

Beavah

 

[CalicoPenn]

I accept as true that a congressperson was spit on by someone in an angry crowd of tea party protestors because I accept a judicial standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I accept the statements of the victim and witnesses to the act over the video taken at one angle and statements by members of the angry mob because A) video can't capture every moment at every angle so it's as likely as not that the particular video was never in a position to actually capture that particular part of the moment, and B) the credibility of the victim and witnesses in his support far outweigh the credibility of anyone in the angry mob. The so-called reward is just a stunt unless they're willing to accept a notarized, sworn affidavit from a witness that would be accepted in a court of law as proof, and they won't do it.

 

I'm sticking with ignorant or lying.

[vol_scouter]

Beavah,

 

I agree with much of what you say. Neither party is intellectual. The country is changing. The problem that I have with what I understand of your stance is that the only possible way to right the ship is to cut spending which is what the Tea Party has caused to happen. We both agree that some increased taxes - preferably the fair tax - might be a good idea. The spending problems however cannot be corrected by taxing alone since I have read many times that if the government taxed away all of the 'wealthy' folks income, it would not balance the budget. So the Tea Party is needed to get some cuts - the Republicans and Democrats have shown no will or enthusiasm to do so. Is the fear made up on the right or is it real? It seems to me that if the current direction is followed the country will be forced to default because it will have over spent any chance of correcting the problems. So however I look at it, the Tea Party's input is essential. If the right is predicting what will happen, then it is not playing upon fears.

[JoeBob]

Gee Calico,

 

Seems you don't want to know the truth. But I do, so will you please provide a link to the witness or "a notarized, sworn affidavit from a witness" that you referred to in your last post?

 

You do know that the 'victim', my congressman, John Lewis, refused to take a simple lie detector test that would have netted the United Negro College Fund $10,000?

 

Irony is rampant this month in that it was the same 'victim' congressman, John Lewis, that was turned away by the OWS group in Atlanta.

 

Oh, I don't expect you to take the word of an 'ignorant liar' like me. Here's your link to more video:

http://www.eurweb.com/2011/10/video-john-lewis-dissed-by-occupy-atlanta-protesters/

[Beavah]

Yah, vol_scouter, I'm with yeh. Social Security needs to be restructured to reflect today's lifespans and the aging demographic. Medicare (and indeed da health care system more generally) needs to be overhauled in a thoughtful way. Defense needs to be judiciously pruned. And there has to be reasonable increases on da revenue side. Expire the Bush tax cuts and then jigger 'em a bit to keep the bits that still make sense, but then add da gas tax from Simpson-Boles with a gradual increase provision. Along the way I'd drop the CAFE nonsense if I could; it's silly to tell the car makers what to build, yeh just increase the gas cost and the market will work it out. Maybe people still want big cars but will move closer to work.

 

But there is an issue with timing and confidence. Timing, in that yeh don't make big cuts when interest rates are at record lows and so many people are unemployed. That's just idiotic. All it does is reduce your revenues more than what you cut, by further slowing a weak economy. Confidence is yeh don't make cuts by announcing cuts and leave it to a commission to decide down the road what they will be. That kind of uncertainty means that anybody with a brain stops investing and holds cash, waiting to see where the hammer is goin' to fall. So again, it just tanks the markets, reducing jobs and revenues and increasing deficits. Idiotic.

 

Yeh borrow money when interest rates are at historic lows, and invest in research, energy and transportation infrastructure, and other areas that will employ people, encourage private investment in parallel, and lead to long-term economic growth. We should be borrowin' like mad right now ... not for entitlements, but for real projects. And at da same time dealin' with SS and Medicare. Those are things that the Tea Party haven't really made any gains on at all, because adjusting entitlements takes being responsible and buildin' relationships and workin' with other people. Down the road, as unemployment drops and confidence builds, then yeh phase in da tax increases and cuts to balance da budget as interest rates rise.

 

By fixating on no taxes and cuts and deficits at this time, and doin' so so belligerently that they've created market uncertainty and an inability to work with da other side, they have fundamentally harmed the nation... and increased deficits in da process. Just foolishness. And then to make matters worse, they've supported da banking lobby in resisting prudent regulation, and so have increased da likelihood of needing a second bank bailout. Madness!

 

Yah, yah, many of 'em are well-meaning folks with their hearts in da right place, but they're absolutely being manipulated by others because they're not thinkin' through the problem. Yeh can't solve da economy with a "spending cuts" sound bite.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[CalicoPenn]

I'm quite aware that John Lewis refused to take part in that little lie detector stunt - I don't accept that as proof the incident never happened, I take it as proof that John Lewis is a smarter and better man than every single one of the teabaggers that came up with the lie detector stunt combined.

 

The lie detector stunt and the offer to pay for video proof (again, they won't accept a notarized, sworn, affidavit as proof for the reward) is just a stunt created by folks who are trying to muddy the waters (which has succeeded with a small subset of people) because they know it happened and are trying to squirm out of it like the little worms they are.

 

It comes down to credibility. John Lewis has it - the witnesses who saw it happen have it. The protestors don't have it, and the twits who came up with the reward scheme weren't there, and will never have any credibility with rational people.

 

But I suppose we can just go ahead and use the tea bagger standard of proof and tell every Vietnam Veteran who has claimed they were spit on when they returned that it never happened and they can't prove it did unless they can provide video evidence, or pass a lie detector test.

 

Speaking of which, about the accuracy of polygraph tests, if you truly believe something has happened, then you'll pass the polygraph test with flying colors.

 

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

And I believe that, too --- which is perfectly clear from any and all of your posts.

 

In all practical ways you are making the arguments of liberals and Democrats. I'm not interested in what you may label yourself.

 

 

>

 

 

Right. You don't make cuts during recessions when you don't have the tax revenue, and you don't make cuts in good economic times because additional spending is popular and you can afford it then. That's why we are in trouble.

 

 

Politics often involves difficult choices --- and spending levels are an example of that. The Tea Party has made the point that spending needs to be cut now, regardless of counter arguments.

 

You don't agree with that, and choose to vote for Democrats ---fine.

 

 

>

 

 

Ahh yes --- anti-intellectualism. That means that Republicans are attracting a lower middle class and working class base that doesn't appeal to your intellectual biases. Your vote has been replaced by someone elses.

 

Well --- you are certainly entitled to find a new political home. Personally I moved from Dem to R in 1984. If I found good reason, I'd move back to the Dems.

 

 

And it may be that current Tea Party politics will prove to be a loser, and Republicans will look for different ideas that will work at the ballot box.

 

Time will tell. For good or ill, the Republican Party is experimenting with Tea Party politics. We will see how that pans out.

[BadenP]

SP

 

In this last debt ceiling crisis the Tea Party showed its true colors as the obstructionist party. Their show boating for the press proved that they are a party without a cohesive vision, and their games almost put our country into serious economic jeopardy. The American people have witnessed them in action first hand and are already starting to distance themselves, even the Repubican main stream are no longer impressed with them.

[SR540Beaver]

Being the grownup in the room and cutting up the credit card to stop insane spending is not "obstructionist". It's tough love and common sense.

[JoeBob]

Calico,

 

Did you get so caught up in your rant against wormy ignorant lying Tea Partiers that you forgot to include your link to 'a notarized, sworn, affidavit as proof' of spitting on John Lewis?

 

I know you don't want to undermine your own credibility, so this is just a friendly reminder to post a link to your proof.

 

Thank you,

JoeBob

[SeattlePioneer]

Hello Baden P,

 

 

Politics is often not a straight ahead kind of game.

 

It's not unusual for either party to do power plays on the other. If this one over the debt limit increase offended you --- you are entitled to your resentment.

 

Looked at another way, it gave notice that there was a serious new issue in town that wasn't going to be sidelined by conventional politics.

 

 

I think it's reasonable to argue that "more of the same" politics is more dangerous to our future than this kind of line drawing in the sand.

 

But no doubt opinions will differ.

[Beavah]

In all practical ways you are making the arguments of liberals and Democrats. I'm not interested in what you may label yourself.

 

Nah, I'm just not agreein' with da arguments of Tea Partiers. There's a difference. If you've watched my postings, I also haven't agreed with da arguments of Democrats, as Calico and NJ have yelled at me on many an occasion.

 

It's only the "modern" Tea-Party right that wants to label anybody who disagrees with 'em on any point as a Democrat and a Liberal. Good way to shrink da party in the long run.

 

Right. You don't make cuts during recessions when you don't have the tax revenue, and you don't make cuts in good economic times because additional spending is popular and you can afford it then. That's why we are in trouble.

 

Did yeh read what I wrote? I said yeh don't pass up borrowing at negative interest rates and spendin' the money on infrastructure that leads to economic growth. And yeh don't announce unspecified but enormous cuts because that's irresponsible.

 

I also said that yeh can make prudent long-term adjustments to entitlement programs now, and we should. That sort of "cut" doesn't affect the current condition and increases confidence and stability for da longer term. And I fully advocated for both increased taxes and decreased spending as the economy recovered.

 

But yeh see, rather than listen carefully to fellow Americans, the "us" vs. "them" thing means yeh hear what yeh want to hear once you've identified even a conservative fellow American as "them."

 

The Tea Party has made the point that spending needs to be cut now, regardless of counter arguments.

 

And in that they are morons who never learned enough about business and economics to be trusted with an allowance. Sorry, that's just da truth of the matter. Same as believing that yeh can balance da budget just by cuts in discretionary programs. It makes a point about ignorance, but not about good economic policy.

 

Ahh yes --- anti-intellectualism. That means that Republicans are attracting a lower middle class and working class base that doesn't appeal to your intellectual biases.

 

Yup. That's what I mean by anti-intellectualism. People who think having knowledge is a class-based bias to be avoided instead of somethin' that people of every walk of life should work hard to obtain.

 

Only you liberals resort to that tiresome class-warfare nonsense. We conservatives believe everybody can work hard and study hard and learn things. And yah, sure, we tend to fault people who are too lazy to do the work to understand somethin' and instead just take the dole from special interest lobbyists and bloggers.

 

Beavah