I just finished reading Elena Kagan’s college thesis -- all 134 pages of it. If anyone's interested, it can be found at http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/05/13/breaking-we-have-elena-kagans-college-thesis/. Or contact me and I'll email it to you.
First, I understand how Jews felt emigrating to the US in the early 1900s. Strange land, strange ways and all that. They migrated to the Lower East Side and found — not the promised land they'd been led to believe existed here — but miserable living conditions. There, Jewish clothing company owners took advantage of Jewish workers and put them to work as slave laborers. It's no wonder they turned to unions and socialism.
Interestingly, though, Italian and Irish immigrants advanced in other ways. They did not embrace socialism. Instead, they chose politics, their faith and cultural ties as ways of staying together, keeping their dignity, building coalitions and getting a toehold in the new country.
Kagan’s current view — well, her view at the time — can be best seen in the conclusion of her thesis where she embraces “radicalism.” What her views are today, I can't say. Hopefully, though, she's matured from her college years. But she’s Obama’s good friend, or at least that’s what he said when he nominated her and he should know.
But Obama, the Democrats and Kagan are all our fault. We rejected Bush and his Republican buddies and elected an unknown social activist from Chicago president of the United States. Now we’re reaping the benefits of that foolish (but perhaps necessary) misstep in national politics.
As Kagan noted in her thesis, it’s easier for people to fight their own kind than the enemy. That is precisely what’s going on in America today. Conservatives in the TEA parties are fighting their own kind (other conservatives) rather than the left. Unless things change, score another win for the dark side.
While it's still possible to turn things around, I doubt that will happen. That’s because the more things change, the more they remain the same. Of course, this argues against the socialists too, so anything can happen. Maybe it's time to pray.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
What TEA-parties?
In the beginning I supported the concept of TEA-parties. I still do, mainly because I agree that Republican and Democrat politicians alike have driven this nation far too deep into debt. But once TEA-parties began attracting more than a few followers, I saw something that bothered me – the quest for power by "politicians" among the TEA-party ranks. But let me back up a bit.
Where were TEA-parties when Ronald Reagan and the two Bushes were building up big government, huge deficits and a monstrance national debt? Where were these groups when Congressional corruption was rampant? They were non-existent, that's where. It wasn’t until Obama became president and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took over Congress that Middle America woke up and began to take notice.
But as always when groups organize, individual goals take over. In Woodland Park and Teller County, TEA-partiers split when a handful of members violated – in principle at least – an agreement to interview but not endorse political candidates.
And just recently, another TEA-partier, in what appears to be an attempt to gain influence, sent out what the state GOP calls a false email asserting that former Alaska governor Sarah Palin would speak at the state assembly. He even suggested that people contact him for tickets to the event.
For all their good intentions, I believe the TEA-parties and 9-12 groups will disappear in a year or two. That's because movements without an underlying cause célèbre can’t sustain themselves. That's not to say voter anger isn't justified, but bear with me.
Consider movements that have succeeded. The biggest in recent memory was the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, which succeeded because the cause was right – there was institutionalized injustice in this country and people didn’t like it.
TEA-partiers do not have a cause célèbre. They say they are for fewer taxes and less government, but are they really? Are they really opposed to Social Security and Medicare Part B for seniors on fixed incomes? Are they really against public schools where teacher unions lobby, not for students, but for greater benefits for teachers?
Are TEA-party families really ready to give up second jobs and all the benefits the extra income brings – bigger homes, second or third cars, new HD TVs – so one parent can stay home and raise the kids?
I think not.
What TEA-parties will do is pressure Republicans to move back to the center right, after which the TPs will go away and the GOP will go back to business-as-usual, which is talking about smaller government and fewer taxes while voting the other way.
The TEA-partiers and Republicans, if they would work together under the GOP banner, would also send the Obamanistas packing. Pelosi, Reid and liberal Democrats would be out of a job and government growth would slow down. But not for long because people have grown used to the government teat and they’re not about to give it up.
People, cities and states like those federal programs and Republican and Democratic politicians know it. No Republican administration since FDR has overturned programs enacted by a Democrat administration or liberal Congress. No matter how costly or foolhardy, such programs go on and on. Everyone wants a piece of the action.
Is there an end in sight? It depends on which end we’re talking about. Do I think what appears to be the impending collapse of Greece and other socialistic governments will cause this country to back away from its march toward financial insolvency? No, because we think it can’t happen to us. Besides, we’re too greedy ourselves to worry about the future.
So give TEA-partiers a thumbs-up for effort if nothing else. Just don’t expect them to make a difference in the overall scheme of things. Republicans -- hopefully with TEA-party support -- will revel over taking back the government just like they always have. Democrats will go back under their rocks until the GOP screws up again – which it will because that's what political parties do after they've been in power awhile.
But in the meantime Republicans and most independents will go on doing what they’ve always done: working and making a living for themselves and their families. Liberals will go on depending on government programs to look out for them, the poor and the disenfranchised.
People are what they are – mostly Republicans, Democrats and voters who don't like either party. And that's not likely to change. But what is likely to change is the demographic makeup of this country as we go from mostly white to mostly brown. That will change who we are as a nation.
What will be the implication of this? Only time will tell but it's something political strategists wrestle with every day.
Where were TEA-parties when Ronald Reagan and the two Bushes were building up big government, huge deficits and a monstrance national debt? Where were these groups when Congressional corruption was rampant? They were non-existent, that's where. It wasn’t until Obama became president and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took over Congress that Middle America woke up and began to take notice.
But as always when groups organize, individual goals take over. In Woodland Park and Teller County, TEA-partiers split when a handful of members violated – in principle at least – an agreement to interview but not endorse political candidates.
And just recently, another TEA-partier, in what appears to be an attempt to gain influence, sent out what the state GOP calls a false email asserting that former Alaska governor Sarah Palin would speak at the state assembly. He even suggested that people contact him for tickets to the event.
For all their good intentions, I believe the TEA-parties and 9-12 groups will disappear in a year or two. That's because movements without an underlying cause célèbre can’t sustain themselves. That's not to say voter anger isn't justified, but bear with me.
Consider movements that have succeeded. The biggest in recent memory was the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, which succeeded because the cause was right – there was institutionalized injustice in this country and people didn’t like it.
TEA-partiers do not have a cause célèbre. They say they are for fewer taxes and less government, but are they really? Are they really opposed to Social Security and Medicare Part B for seniors on fixed incomes? Are they really against public schools where teacher unions lobby, not for students, but for greater benefits for teachers?
Are TEA-party families really ready to give up second jobs and all the benefits the extra income brings – bigger homes, second or third cars, new HD TVs – so one parent can stay home and raise the kids?
I think not.
What TEA-parties will do is pressure Republicans to move back to the center right, after which the TPs will go away and the GOP will go back to business-as-usual, which is talking about smaller government and fewer taxes while voting the other way.
The TEA-partiers and Republicans, if they would work together under the GOP banner, would also send the Obamanistas packing. Pelosi, Reid and liberal Democrats would be out of a job and government growth would slow down. But not for long because people have grown used to the government teat and they’re not about to give it up.
People, cities and states like those federal programs and Republican and Democratic politicians know it. No Republican administration since FDR has overturned programs enacted by a Democrat administration or liberal Congress. No matter how costly or foolhardy, such programs go on and on. Everyone wants a piece of the action.
Is there an end in sight? It depends on which end we’re talking about. Do I think what appears to be the impending collapse of Greece and other socialistic governments will cause this country to back away from its march toward financial insolvency? No, because we think it can’t happen to us. Besides, we’re too greedy ourselves to worry about the future.
So give TEA-partiers a thumbs-up for effort if nothing else. Just don’t expect them to make a difference in the overall scheme of things. Republicans -- hopefully with TEA-party support -- will revel over taking back the government just like they always have. Democrats will go back under their rocks until the GOP screws up again – which it will because that's what political parties do after they've been in power awhile.
But in the meantime Republicans and most independents will go on doing what they’ve always done: working and making a living for themselves and their families. Liberals will go on depending on government programs to look out for them, the poor and the disenfranchised.
People are what they are – mostly Republicans, Democrats and voters who don't like either party. And that's not likely to change. But what is likely to change is the demographic makeup of this country as we go from mostly white to mostly brown. That will change who we are as a nation.
What will be the implication of this? Only time will tell but it's something political strategists wrestle with every day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
