Remember One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (there were very few explosions or vampires in it so it may be difficult)? Specifically, the scene where "Cheswick" decides to take a stand over his confiscated cigarettes:
Encouraged by MacMurphy's flamboyant rebelliousness, Charlie Cheswick vents a marginally coherent but volcanic rage at the corrupted authority of Nurse Ratched. It is explosive, sloppy and ultimately a condemnation that speaks less to the institution's systemic insensitivity and more to the howling man's lack of self-awareness.
Given the perpetual fear/reward roller coaster of his world, Cheswick has committed his real but misguided passion to a fight which, by virtue of its vagary and volatility, can only end in his defeat. Had he been better able to articulate his anger in support of a more grounded and defined cause, he would have probably had a much better chance of getting his beloved cigarettes back.
Well, the Charlie Cheswick of political movements is similarly shrieking "no, no, no!", shaking its head with clenched eyes and urine-stained pajama bottoms and clinging white-knuckled to a populist delusion of oppression. To the degree that no Teapublican candidate has the credibility or intellectual capacity to offer any cogent suggestions as to ameliorating the problems plaguing this country without betraying an actual, palpable stupidity speaks less to the problems they cite than to the shriekers themselves.
The Republican party has thrown its legendary loyalty behind a cadre of low-brow would-be leaders, whose lack of ability and wisdom is paraded like a badge of honor to the mass of similarly adulterated disciples.
Of course, the joke is (as it has always been) that the angry horde being exhorted to go gloriously over the top are the very ones who will be shot (and in this case, in the back).
After a while, the strategy becomes as clear as "A Pledge to America" is muddled. It is a strategy that exploits the indoctrinated fears of the soon-to-be fodder and bespeaks the planners' own cynicism, desperation and, worst of all, cowardice.
Which comes as no surprise as bullies are invariably, for all their swagger, pussies.
And it's not only so-called progressive legislation that is being affected by the Republican's berserker tactics (legislation which would justly repair the eight-plus years of right-wing wrongdoing) but the Tea Partiers themselves, who, incredibly, fight against the very things they would benefit from, but who have obediently swallowed the pills and taken the shots their pretty masters proffer.
Master marketeers from Hearst to Murdoch, from Atwater to Rove have historically taken legitimate anger and focused it on mythical malignancies, amassing an audience not of citizens but of technology consuming, xenophobic, fear-addicts.
But today, the current crop of PR savants rely not just on the spinning of actual events but on agents who are themselves spun versions of American icons; the list (Carl "The Hit Man" Palladino, Christine "Hands Off The Meat, Infidel!" O'Donnell, Sharron "I Never Said That But I Did" Angle, "Dr." Rand Paul and "The Duchess of Doof" herself -- Sarah Palin) grows with every swallow of the machine's un-kool aid, and these would-be envoys are really kamikaze kandidate kooks who act on behalf of those who think that any regulatory mechanism which would presume to preserve the welfare of the citizenry (i.e., government) would impede their own profiteering interests.
At the end of Cuckoo's Nest, MacMurphy is dead, the inmates all resume their routine passivity and the shrewdly autocratic authority settles back onto its perch, once again vigilant against any uprising.
I suppose it's only fitting then, that the lone escapee from the asylum -- Chief Bromden -- is the one who in the larger sense had been oppressed the longest and suffered the deepest of all the inmates and who, having observed all intelligently, finally acted with the decisiveness and clarity that eluded the misguided fury of Cheswick's thwarted rebellion.
If Tea Party patriots could wrest themselves from the grip of their misleading leaders, they could learn a lot from this real American rebel in their midst, one who had the sense to fly over the cuckoos rather than do their bidding.
Follow Steven Weber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@TheStevenWeber
To my amazement I've had no takers. A few people have posted right wing platitudes. Partial credit to those who at least made reference to the Ryan "roadmap," but no one actually spoke directly from the budget. No one stated specifics. I did get lots of attitude, insults and defensiveness. This is quite meaningful. I believe the Tea Partiers are math phobes. They are frightened to actually look at a real budget and sort out the obvious facts. In the discretionary budget it's quite obvious that the only area where meaningful cuts can happen is the bloated defense budget. Since we spend more than the rest of the planet combined we could cut hundreds of billions and lose no strategic advantage.
The non-discretionary budget is more problematic. The largest expenditures are the entitlements (Medicare/social security). They are supposed to be linked to payroll tax revenues. Unfortunately Medicare's 2 1/2 percent slice is pathetically inadequate for future costs of an aging society. Social security is solvent indefinitely, but I personally hate the regressive payroll tax that supports these programs.
Reform requires both a nuanced approach and more money as the predicted Medicare shortfall over 30 years is about $35 trillion. Americans must get real about those programs. How unfortunate that the Republicans have buried Ryan's critique and chosen to demagog over the "$500 billion Obama cuts" in Medicare (actually eliminating the bounty given Medicare HMO's). We need adult conversation here not slogans.
PS, I would not only end the Bush cuts for the top brackets I would raise the top level bracket to 45% and eliminate tax preferences like dividends and capital gains. On the other hand I believe the corporate income tax should be eliminated and all corporations made to function as pass-throughs such that public companies keep minimal retained earnings (working capital) and must distribute all unreinvested profits as fully taxable dividends to shareholders. In addition I would retain the inheritance tax but exempt real small businesses and set the 55% rate on estates in excess of $5 million.
The most important point about eliminating the deficit is that it requires restimulating the economy without triggering inflation. Consequently tax increases on individual income at the top is a necessary part of the package. Monkeying with money that goes to folks at the bottom of the pyramid simply damages the economic recovery. I would love to eliminate the payroll tax altogether and finance everything with income taxes. This would boost consumer spending and give corporations another big break--in exchange for which they would lose any rewards for outsourcing jobs. Fair enough?
Here's an excerpt from the Obama Clinton debate ( a question by Charles Gibson) that pretty much proves the problems of the left's "solutions" for our deficit etc. Love Obama's answer.. "fairness"? It makes no sense. Yeah, we'll be "fair" and we'll ALSO be bankrupt. This is why Republicans are getting another chance. & I for one feel A LOT better about that.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4670271&page=3
An honest accounting of defense spending has to include amortized costs of past military actions--probably 80% of our interest payments and other costs such as the VA, medical costs and pensions for vets. In short it exceeds one trillion.
The 1.7 trillion deficit for 2009 was a gift from president Bush. Root causes included:
400 billion decreased revenue from recession
300 billion decreased revenue from tax cuts
200-300 billion of off the books costs of wars.
Subsequent chnges in the deficit mainly reflect poor revenues due to the recession. the impact of TARP is almost a wash. The stimulus saved 3 million jobs but its magnitude is hard to calculate.
My short term proposals for balancing this dismal budget.
1. Use Keynesian stimulus to boost employment and accelerate money flow in the economy (increase revenues).
2. Slash defense spending by fifty percent. (Close overseas bases, eliminate mercenery contractors, etc.)
3. Means test the entitlements--sliding scale fees for affluent elderly.
4. When unemployment hits 5.5% amortize the current debt over 30 years, targeting the average ratio of debt to GDP from 1950-80. (That's still a wartime number compared to earlier 20th century peacetime).
5. Drastic changes in our system of taxation to make them progressive but create a competitive advantage worldwide. (MOre in another post)
You Tea Partyiers could have easily dont the math I put in these posts. Obviously you know nothing about the targets of your contrived fury.
1. Use Keynesian stimulus to boost employment and accelerate money flow in the economy (increase revenues)."
The government is not capable of adequately predicting supply and demand.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/the_keynesian_stimulus_dogma.html
After two days no one has answered my challenge to sketch out the federal budget and show where the "runaway" spending can be slashed. I give partial credit to the two persons that referenced Ryan's roadmap, but it is notin the Pledge so its status is speculative at best. There are lots of ways to slice and dice a budget but here goes.
Est 2010 (Est deficit 1.4 trillion)
Receipts 2.38 trillion (-11%)
IRS 1.06
Payroll tax 940 billion
corporate 222 billion
Other (160 billion)
Spending 3.8 trillion
Non-discretionary 2.18 trillion
SS 695 billion
Medicare 453
Medicaid 290
other mandatory (eg pensions) 571
Interest 187
Discretionary 1.4 trillion
Defense 895
DHHS 79
VA 52
States 51
other 450
Note the following:
Receipts are roughly equal between IRS and payroll taxes, but the latter is supposed to go only to SS and Medicare. Since Reagan surplus payroll taxes have been internally "borrowed" to offset income tax defecits and constitute about 4 trillion of our current 14 trillion debt. The canard that fifty percent of Americans don't pay taxes stems from the fact that 47% don't make enough money to pay income tax. Moreover, although income tax revenue predominately comes from the top 20% the payroll tax is the highest tax on 75% of workers. Reducing spending in non-discretionary programs will only create further surplus revenue and trnsfer the cost of government onto the bottom income levels.
Granted.. most of the Tea Partiers have conservative views but the key point here is that they WANT to keep personal and political views separate. They WANT to keep the government out of our personal lives.. they believe in live and let live... that's a good thing for those who do not share their same views. This just proves that to the left it's not about freedom.. it's about personal disagreements/ differing views... views "other" than theirs are what they are REALLY fighting against. And they are trying to use the government to stiffle those "other" views. that's the real problem/ struggle going on here.
Simply put.. bottom line... the left (liberal minded people) have no respect of another's rights... NONE. Their narcissistic desire is to control / stiffle / silence others who don't agree with them and they are trying to use the government to do it... It's obscene. And the right are not going to let you get away with it.. sorry.. NOT in this country!
Again facts absolutely destroy your "argument" so you demand your own version of them.
I seem to have missed those items.
Please elaborate on how your "facts" "destroy" my argument.. because I fail to see it. Again, the Tea Party's main goal is to keep government OUT of our personal lives... prove me wrong with your..."facts".
They dont even know that much.They have representation they are just sore losers.And they fight for corporate power.So they are really the anti-teaparty when you look at it logically.
But it seems that the stupid and greedy have one tool - screaming! And unfortunately, for our dumbed down society (xbox, reality tv, inability to produce coherent sentences) it works! It's a lot less effort to actually get away from the above, and do some research. It has become the American Way for this right wingnut supporters.
You talk and talk and talk about debt and deficits and "big government." Do you now understand that these are meaningless talking points implanted into your brains? If you can't meaningfully summarize the budget you have no business criticizing it. You know nothing of that about which you blather endlessly. Puleeeeeeze prove me wrong. Go back to my post this AM and answer it.
She got so blustered- going on and on about not wanting to become a socialist nation- then I advised her that the horrible "socialist" Europe has all of the tax payers paying nearly 40% in income taxes- nearly double of what we scream about here...but for that they get full health coverage, 1 year maternity leave- fathers get paid paternity leave as well- disability benefits that blow ours out of the water... again she went on and on with Fox News one liners - but at the end of the day couldnt substantiate her point nor offer solutions of the party she stands so strongly in alignment with. Then again she also though a combined income of $250k+ was still middle class so there ya go! No concept of the real issues- what these Repubs actually want to do and how it will HURT the majority of middle class America that truly needs help!
Ignorance has overtaken so many in our country, its truly frightening!
Your suggestion that eliminating the deficit is an "easy task" is the kind of sarcasm that makes the future of our country look bleak. Whichever side you are on, you should recognize the real trouble that we are in and the serious need for solutions.
I come at this from the left but recognize the flaws in our current programs--especially Medicare's projected liabilities. this begs for a resolution, moreso since the right wing demagogues feel no qualms about stirring the mob without proffering realistic solutions to the problems THEY CREATED. And yes, I've read the roadmap. I have many disagreements, although I do like Rep. Ryan. He strikes me as the only House Republican with a brain in his head. Love to share a beer with him. Boehner and the rest, bah humbug! Slogan spouting fools.
I was simply saying thank you to New Jersey for not attending the Glenn Beck Tea Party rally on October 1, 2010 at 6 Flags. The arena had an 8,000 person capacity and only 700 people showed up and a quarter of those were conservative journalists. The remaining (non press) attendees were all over 55 years old and most were in their late 70s.
I actually went to 6 Flags that day (their website did not post the event with the Tea Party *shocking*) and upon entry was hit with nearly dead citizens handing out newspapers and other Tea Bagger propoganda. I declined their handouts and advised them to explain to me what America they wanted to restore to? The good old days with slaves? Or the times of no regulation when thousands of citizens perished while working due to unsafe conditions? I asked if the old lady in her wheelchair enjoyed her health care and her social security benefits because if her party won, those would be taken away. I didn't get any response.
In closing, I did not see ONE Tea Bagger under the age of 55 and most were in their upper 70s. I did, however, see about 10 children who were crying as their grandparents pulled them along to the rally area.
Thank you, New Jersey, for showing that we are not going to buy into extremist and regressive policies.
We'd probably see a Congress without a party majority and then they would have to work together. Plus it would better represent the cross-section of positions in this country.
"We have to rip open this two-party duopoly and have it challenged by a serious third party that will talk about education reform, without worrying about offending unions; financial reform, without worrying about losing donations from Wall Street; corporate tax reductions to stimulate jobs, without worrying about offending the far left; energy and climate reform, without worrying about offending the far right and coal-state Democrats; and proper health care reform, without worrying about offending insurers and drug companies."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/opinion/03friedman.html?_r=1&ref=columnists
"Whatever it is, I'm against it!
No matter what it is
Or who commenced it,
I'm against it!"
Liberals are strongly committed to a strict class system. They believe that the "smart" people should rule those who have to be led, and need help to survive. They believe that "the rich" are keeping the rest of us down. They gain power by exploiting this class struggle.
Thus the Belief system espoused by conservatives is based on MYTHS and fairy tales rather than DATA and logical conclusions based on that data.
There are over 6 BILLION people in the world, 6,000,000,000...of that 6,000,000,000 only ten million 10,000,000 households in the WORLD have assets OVER 1 million dollars. OUT of over 6 BILLION people there are only 1011 Billionaires in the ENTIRE WORLD.
Do you honestly believe that less than 1% of the worlds population REALLY is that much more lucky, smarter,motivated than the rest, or perhaps there are other factors at play???
Conservatives seem to be in the EXCEPTION to the rule not the rule. Horatio Alger stories are STORIES OF those RARE exceptions.
BTW...there is a reason that economists includes concepts such as externalities and luck in the study of economics.
AS such, they don't tend to "believe" arbitrarily without some sort of proof, most tend to be rather realistic in how they view life. As a result they realize that there are very bad people out there who exploit others for their own personal gain. Most liberals find the exploitation of other living organisms to be a rather repulsive concept, AND not good for life on this planet as a whole.
Liberals, in my experience, are BIG picture thinkers and tend to look outside their own best interests.