The problem, as political analyst and George Mason University professor Bill Schneider has pointed out, is that it's "not just that tea partyers are anti-government.... They are anti-politics. They believe that politics is essentially corrupt — that deal-making and compromise are an abandonment of principle. The tea party is a political fundamentalist movement. Like religious fundamentalists, its members do not tolerate waverers (like Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah). They drive out heretics (like Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida). They punish unbelievers (like Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware). And they believe in the total inerrancy of scripture — in this case, the U.S. Constitution as originally written in 1787."
President Franklin D. Roosevelt's epoch-changing New Deal coalition survived only so long as its constituent groups agreed not to discuss the one difference between them they could not reconcile — race. When the civil rights movement made that silent, and shabby, accommodation impossible, the coalition shattered.
The tea party's internal contradictions are so numerous, it's difficult to see its coalition of discontent surviving a single Congress.
That's a point I've made before, but the larger problem is that the amount of damage the Tea Party can do during that single Congress, and it's significant. Best case scenario is that simply no real legislation is passed, and Democrats have to consistently fight off efforts to undo everything Obama has accomplished in the last two years. Worst case scenario, well let's see, endless investigations, government shutdown, Obama actually signs into law crazy Tea Party legislation, you name it.
I'm hoping that the Republicans, should they gain power, completely overreach. It's cold comfort, but let's be honest here: the Republicans are going to gain at least some seats in the House and Senate. And as Blue Texan reminds us, anyone who thinks a booming economy would placate the Tea Party has forgotten Clinton's second term completely, where a President who listened overwhelmingly to the Centrist Daleks (TRIANGULAAAATE!) and cut spending to not only balance the budget but give us a budget surplus, "reformed" welfare according to the wishes of the right and gave us such social conservatism gems like DADT was still impeached for the crime of being a Democrat.
What will Obama do? There is literally nothing he can do that will stop the Republicans from trying to remove him from office, roll back the last two years, and attack him relentlessly. Clinton was put on trial in the best economy we've had since WWII. What hell will Obama face with Republicans in charge?
Let's remember why America threw these lunatics out in the first place.
Posts
5 comments:
It would be fun, in the time until the next election, to infiltrate some of the factions and mess with their ideology. It would probably make Karl proud.
And as Blue Texan reminds us, anyone who thinks a booming economy would placate the Tea Party has forgotten Clinton's second term completely, where a President who listened overwhelmingly to the Centrist Daleks (TRIANGULAAAATE!) and cut spending to not only balance the budget but give us a budget surplus, "reformed" welfare according to the wishes of the right and gave us such social conservatism gems like DADT was still impeached for the crime of being a Democrat.
Hate to burst your bubble, but DADT was passed in 1993 when Democrats had control of the House and the Senate. And Clinton was impeached because he lied to a judge, something that is usually frowned upon. It's also a crime. Unless, by the standards of liberals, it's done by a Democrat.
The bigger point Steve was that DADT was indeed signed into law by Clinton. Of course Democrats had something to do with it.
Clinton also signed into law the removeal of Glass-Steagall, his other massive mistake that led directly to our current financial crisis.
And if I recall, Clinton was acquitted of that charge by the Senate.
The bigger point Steve was that DADT was indeed signed into law by Clinton. Of course Democrats had something to do with it.
You're only point was to blame Tea Party types for Clinton signing DADT. You even preface it by trying to say it was something that happened in Clinton's second term after Republicans had taken control of Congress. Clinton signed DADT during his first term (his first year) when Democrats had a majority in the House and the Senate. Therefore, DADT was and is, in its entirety, a Democratic Party policy.
And if I recall, Clinton was acquitted of that charge by the Senate.
It is a fact that he committed perjury. The fact that he was acquitted in the Senate by politicians was due to politics, not the rule of law. Even the Bush-era DoJ shares some of the blame due to politics; they completely ignored Clinton's transgression to avoid any potential political fallout.
Clinton also signed into law the removeal of Glass-Steagall, his other massive mistake that led directly to our current financial crisis.
Not by a long shot. Government was at fault, but not because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Who fact checks this blog?
Post a Comment