Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
February 18, 2011
POLITICS: I Don't Want No Tea. It Gives Me A Headache.

Vodkapundit sums up the difference between Tea Party protests and the protests in Madison Wisconsin.

Posted by Baseball Crank at 7:32 PM | Politics 2011 | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Funded by the Koch family?

Posted by: Berto at February 18, 2011 8:08 PM

I don't have to read it, but let me guess.

The Tea Party rallies are all attended only by god-fearin', church-goin' patriots who seek only to return to the fundamentalist intent of the founding fathers as told by the apostles Scallia and Thomas.

The Wisconsin rallies are comunist, islamists who don't rcognize american exceptionalism and wnat nothing more than to destroy capitalism.

I nailed it, right?

Posted by: Magrooder at February 18, 2011 10:34 PM

The economic elites, through their reckless actions and fraud, crashed the economy in 2008, leading to a huge decrease in the value of public pension funds.
Despite the fact the economic elites haven't been held to task for what they have wrought, they now want to blame the problems they caused on the working class.
"Tea Party Member" is too kind of a moniker for anyone foolish enough to fall for such nonsense.

Posted by: Berto at February 19, 2011 12:47 PM

Off-topic, but I wish LifetimeNRAMember were still here. I'd like to propose we work together to get gun sale booths set-up outside every theater which shows the documentary "Inside Job".

Posted by: Berto at February 19, 2011 12:55 PM

LOL! Close minded dimwits to afraid to read link.

Posted by: PaulV at February 19, 2011 6:15 PM

The Tea Party is frankly just a louder version of everyone else. Let's assume the Tea Partiers simply believe that too much government debt leads to ruin, and therefore, get it under control, that would be fine. If they actually laid out some real plans, that would be finer. Instead, they cloak their so called economic values under a Christian Cloak, meaning they really are just a bunch of loud mouthed bigots. And in Wisconsin, the real fight is over just what it should be over: the mega time bomb over pensions. Because the Tea Baggers are no different than any other big mouthed group: sure cut taxes, but when you ask them what to cut that THEY could give up, the answer is silence.

So hear is Daryl's new economic plan, one the original Tea Party folks (well except for Samuel Adams, who was really a loud mouthed complainer, while his quiet but super duper smart family dude John did the heavy lifting behind the scenes after things got going):

1. Social Security: Starting next year, add one year to the retirement age before you can get benefits. And keep adding one year every three years, until you hit one year BEFORE the actuaries say the average death age is. Meaning a different age for men and women. I would make it black, hispanic and white, but that would never clear the courts. But it should be, since minorities do live shorter lives, and that is just wrong.

2. The military: First, get the hell out of the Middle East. That won't happen anymore, but get the combat troops out. Second, we aren't fighting the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces over the Wieser River, so we don't need ground forces like that. Any war we fight will be against smaller forces. But we DO need the Navy and Air Force, to project what we need. Up their budget, lower the Marines and Army, cut 15-20 % of that budget.

3. Change the damn tax code. Eliminate the religious exemptions, either that, or add an atheist one, because it's against the First Amendment to support any religious institution with guvmint funds. Keep charitable deduction, and few others. Make the return what Bill Bradley wanted: something confined to one page. The tax rates could probably be cut by 1/3 that way.

4. Solve the medical insurance issue. This is actually the easiest of all. How? By mandating that being a member of Congress does NOT give you medical insurance. You have to pay for it, and no longer do you keep it for life. And you have to shop for it on your own. Trust me, this will then be solved in 30 seconds.

Posted by: Daryl at February 20, 2011 9:40 AM

The Tea Party is frankly just a louder version of everyone else. Let's assume the Tea Partiers simply believe that too much government debt leads to ruin, and therefore, get it under control, that would be fine. If they actually laid out some real plans, that would be finer. Instead, they cloak their so called economic values under a Christian Cloak, meaning they really are just a bunch of loud mouthed bigots. And in Wisconsin, the real fight is over just what it should be over: the mega time bomb over pensions. Because the Tea Baggers are no different than any other big mouthed group: sure cut taxes, but when you ask them what to cut that THEY could give up, the answer is silence.

So hear is Daryl's new economic plan, one the original Tea Party folks (well except for Samuel Adams, who was really a loud mouthed complainer, while his quiet but super duper smart family dude John did the heavy lifting behind the scenes after things got going):

1. Social Security: Starting next year, add one year to the retirement age before you can get benefits. And keep adding one year every three years, until you hit one year BEFORE the actuaries say the average death age is. Meaning a different age for men and women. I would make it black, hispanic and white, but that would never clear the courts. But it should be, since minorities do live shorter lives, and that is just wrong.

2. The military: First, get the hell out of the Middle East. That won't happen anymore, but get the combat troops out. Second, we aren't fighting the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces over the Wieser River, so we don't need ground forces like that. Any war we fight will be against smaller forces. But we DO need the Navy and Air Force, to project what we need. Up their budget, lower the Marines and Army, cut 15-20 % of that budget.

3. Change the damn tax code. Eliminate the religious exemptions, either that, or add an atheist one, because it's against the First Amendment to support any religious institution with guvmint funds. Keep charitable deduction, and few others. Make the return what Bill Bradley wanted: something confined to one page. The tax rates could probably be cut by 1/3 that way.

4. Solve the medical insurance issue. This is actually the easiest of all. How? By mandating that being a member of Congress does NOT give you medical insurance. You have to pay for it, and no longer do you keep it for life. And you have to shop for it on your own. Trust me, this will then be solved in 30 seconds.

Posted by: Daryl at February 20, 2011 9:40 AM

Daryl,
Your assumption that the Tea Party really believes in lower government debt and smaller government is faulty. They pleaded for extension of the Bush tax cuts* (allowing them to expire would have reduced the debt to less than 3% of GDP in one fell swoop), and they want the government to control every womb in the country.
*Any minute now, PaulV will come along to blame the tax cut extension on Obama and the Dems. I'm not saying they are blameless, but I look forward to reminding PaulV that it was his beloved Tea Party (A.K.A. GOP) who held the 9/11 First Responders Healthcare bill hostage in order to get that tax cut. If you really want a laugh, ask them how important 9/11 is to them. That should break the hypocrisy meter.

BTW, I don't think raising the retirement age makes much sense in a time of 9+% official (and 20% real) unemployment rates.

Posted by: Berto at February 20, 2011 2:48 PM

Berto, I can understand wanting to not keep people in the workforce, but that is the French method. 60 and out. I am more of a capitalist, believing the market will work. I am a bit different maybe. I do feel strongly that health care should be a right and administered by the government, but do not believe social security should be a public pension. It should be there for the last year of your life when you can't work anymore, and it's only something that helps prevent starvation at the last. Diverging viewpoints I grant you, but I don't believe in retirement, at least not subsidized retirement. Except for our soldiers, anyway. Pension bombs are the WMDs of our economy that are coming due, and it's going to take an act of Congress to change the conditions of them. And in the end, the only way is for it to be a very large sweeping bi-partisan vote, so nobody gets voted out for taking the gutsy but necessary call. Since, let's face it, COngress ain't gutsy.

They lost on the 9/11 stance once they refused to help First Responders. And most people, especially the tea baggers and GOP seem very big on tax cuts, as long as, uh, it doesn't affect them. Or their parks, or their anything.

Posted by: Daryl at February 20, 2011 4:36 PM

While the linked article focused on the behavior of the two groups, there is also a very stark and divergent difference between the two groups desires. Basically the Tea Party protesters are protesting out of fear of what burgeoning debt will do to our country. The union protesters are protesting out of fear of responsible action to stop increasing the debt.

Or put more simply and with much more snark, the Tea Party protesters love their (and other peoples) grandchildren and the union protesters feel it is appropriate to steal from generations to come after us.

Posted by: Largebill at February 21, 2011 9:39 AM

Eliminate the religious exemptions, either that, or add an atheist one, because it's against the First Amendment to support any religious institution with guvmint funds. Keep charitable deduction, and few others

Could you elabprate on this?

Posted by: spongeworthy at February 21, 2011 10:48 AM

Sure Sponge. Religion is, and always should be, a personal one. The First Amendment certainly keeps government out of it. Yet, we allow tax deductions, which is a civil stamp on a private, religious matter. And while such deductions are permitted for religious organizations, you can't do the same for atheist ones, which is discriminatory. And for that matter, just try donating to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (I am a proud member, BTW), and not get audited. We take this deduction away, and you will hear howling that makes Wisconsin look tiny.

It IS in the state interest to see charities supported, so I fully support that. And if a church of some kind does charitable activities, then that part of the donation should me deductible.

In truth, I am against all deductions, and believe that everyone should be able to fill out a postcard and pay your taxes. Businesses too. Won't happen of course.e you pay.

Posted by: Daryl at February 21, 2011 11:28 AM

Largebill,
That's some high comedy you got there.
Do you have any raw numbers of Tea Party members who protested the tax cut extension which will shaft their (and other people's) grandchildren?
Anyone who tells you the Tea Party is serious about debt is either willfully ignorant or lying through their teeth.

Posted by: Berto at February 21, 2011 1:00 PM

Berto,

Of course, I don't have raw numbers for Tea Party support of/stance against any particular tax cut or spending measure. All people with even a rudimentary understanding of math recognize we have an incredible problem. Some of us may differ on various specifics regarding solving the problem. Just taxing the rich will not solve the problem. You could take every penny that Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and the rest of the Forbes 500 make and it would not fix things. Most folks realize we all will have to pay more to reduce the deficit and pay down the debt. We know we're in a hole. However, we want them to put down the shovel before we give them more money. And when we give more money we want it to not just be spent. Getting to Daryl's point about deductions most folks in tea party want a simpler tax system. Personally, I'd prefer a flat tax or a sales/consumption tax. Current system favors dishonesty. Those of us who fill out the forms truthfully believe most others don't. Also, current system excludes most cash transactions. So, drug dealers and other crooks are exempt from our tax system. Even the far left should agree that the system should be simplified. Biggest obstacle to tax reform is Congress (both R & D). A true flat tax or sales tax greatly reduces reason to bribe a congress critter. How they get money and how they spend money are primary reasons to "wine & dine" (bribe) congressmen.

Posted by: Largebill at February 21, 2011 1:31 PM

THe only way to attack the deficit is to drastically cut Defense, Social Security and Medicare, in that order. We have a wonderful country, where we have loads of people who want oodles of services, but aren't willing to pay for them. As I wrote earlier, we have an armed force that is really set up to defend our European buddies from a Soviet invasion across the Wieser River. I'm willing to take the risk now that that is not going to happen.

Posted by: Daryl at February 21, 2011 6:12 PM

Or, we could just make sure that the next time the neocons want to go to war for trumped up reasons, that they have to pay for it, both in hte form of adequate tax re venues and the madatroy service of at least one of their children as a grunt.

Posted by: Magrooder at February 21, 2011 11:39 PM

Berto, who controlled the House, Senate and POTUS when the Bush Tax cuts were enlarged and became the Obama tax cuts? The Germans say that the multiplier for deficit stimulus is 0.6, which means that $900 billion Porkulus cost the US economy $360 billion in GDP as well as puting our children and grandchildren in debt. Obama panicked as he realized that slow recovery was his fault. Why did your democrats demonized W when he tried to reform SS? It is how they lie and try to win votes. Even AL Gore realizes now that gasohol requirements are a fraud and hurt energy independence and caused food prices to explode. Your ignorance is laughable. If you did not hate so much you could think clearer.

Posted by: PaulV at February 21, 2011 11:55 PM

Paul, attacking the opposition is as old as the Republic, and let's face it, you rightwingnuts do it better than anyone. ANd what Bush wanted was not so much to privatize Social Security as much as invest it in the stock market. You see, our Harvard MBA president shared the same assumptions as so many others: that the biggest Ponzi scheme in history (at least since the Netherlands 400 years or so ago)was going to go on forever. Is that Bush's fault? Hell no. Nor was it Clinton's, or Bush's (HW), or Reagan. It was 1. The morons who actually believed they could keep buying mansions on a cleaning lady's salary (I really don't feel sorry for them), and 2. The idiots (geniuses?) on Wall Street who repackaged these new junk bonds as the modern tulips, and then resold them to bigger morons, who are 3. the real frakking fools who bought this shit.

What then do I blame Bush for? Going to war in Iraq? Well, let's face it, I do cast Rumsfeld as Macnamara II, another warmongering fool who treated kid soldiers as chess pieces with no real end game in mind. So yes in a way to Bush, but the big blame was, like LBJ, in deciding to fight a series of wars and not ask the public to actually pay for them. In 2001-3, the people were ready to band together and commit was would have been needed for Afghanistan. And the wars were not counted by Bush in his deficit budgets. The perfect storm.

And Social Security? Why is it the third rail? Because we have all been led to believe that it is our public pension system, we paid in, then we get out. Except this is a Ponzi scheme too. Because we Boomers are just too damn big to have our kids support us. My generation is a fat group of lazy spoiled brats. Spoiled by our parents, who went through depressions and world wars to make sure WE wouldn't. Which is why I call for a phasing age change to social security, to probably have it pay in at age 78 and not 65. or 67. or whatever it is now.

And cut defense by 10% and make the armed forces lean and mobile.

And make medicare available to everyone as the big public option, which would help me as a small business. Because whatever I pay as a public option would help in the end considering what I pay as a private one. And no matter what I pay, I still get roadblocks from my PRIVATE insurance company. So stop that bullshit. OUr doctors and equipment are great. Our delivery system is not. Yet my mom, my father in law and other elderly I know get great care, and Medicare really does work well.

Posted by: Daryl at February 22, 2011 9:03 AM

Paul, attacking the opposition is as old as the Republic, and let's face it, you rightwingnuts do it better than anyone. ANd what Bush wanted was not so much to privatize Social Security as much as invest it in the stock market. You see, our Harvard MBA president shared the same assumptions as so many others: that the biggest Ponzi scheme in history (at least since the Netherlands 400 years or so ago)was going to go on forever. Is that Bush's fault? Hell no. Nor was it Clinton's, or Bush's (HW), or Reagan. It was 1. The morons who actually believed they could keep buying mansions on a cleaning lady's salary (I really don't feel sorry for them), and 2. The idiots (geniuses?) on Wall Street who repackaged these new junk bonds as the modern tulips, and then resold them to bigger morons, who are 3. the real frakking fools who bought this shit.

What then do I blame Bush for? Going to war in Iraq? Well, let's face it, I do cast Rumsfeld as Macnamara II, another warmongering fool who treated kid soldiers as chess pieces with no real end game in mind. So yes in a way to Bush, but the big blame was, like LBJ, in deciding to fight a series of wars and not ask the public to actually pay for them. In 2001-3, the people were ready to band together and commit was would have been needed for Afghanistan. And the wars were not counted by Bush in his deficit budgets. The perfect storm.

And Social Security? Why is it the third rail? Because we have all been led to believe that it is our public pension system, we paid in, then we get out. Except this is a Ponzi scheme too. Because we Boomers are just too damn big to have our kids support us. My generation is a fat group of lazy spoiled brats. Spoiled by our parents, who went through depressions and world wars to make sure WE wouldn't. Which is why I call for a phasing age change to social security, to probably have it pay in at age 78 and not 65. or 67. or whatever it is now.

And cut defense by 10% and make the armed forces lean and mobile.

And make medicare available to everyone as the big public option, which would help me as a small business. Because whatever I pay as a public option would help in the end considering what I pay as a private one. And no matter what I pay, I still get roadblocks from my PRIVATE insurance company. So stop that bullshit. OUr doctors and equipment are great. Our delivery system is not. Yet my mom, my father in law and other elderly I know get great care, and Medicare really does work well.

Posted by: Daryl at February 22, 2011 9:03 AM

OK thread hijack here. Sorry, but I think it's important. The 4 US citizens kidnapped by Somali pirates were just killed, and the Navy boarded the ship, killed two pirates and captured 17 others. Am I missing something, or should we have an international treaty granting the signatory nations the right to stage an immediate onboard tribunal, with full rights to, after giving them a quick trial, then quick executions?

Here is the wording: Should the navy of (insert signatory of nation here) capture pirates, whether on board a captured ship, or their own, the pirates will be tried for the crimes of A. Piracy on the high seas, and B. Murder/Assault/whatever. It shall be the agreement of these nations that any crime stemming from piracy be a capital offense, punishable only by death. The purpose of the trial is to determine soley if the captured "alleged" pirates were party to the action. Upon being found guilty, the pirates shall be executed by either firing squad, or tossing overboard with their hands shackled behind them. The other purpose of the tribunal shall be to determine the home base of the pirates, and then all signatory nations shall agree to bombard this base with a disproportianate response. This shall be called "The shores of Tripoli" solution."

Have I missed anything?

Posted by: daryl at February 22, 2011 12:53 PM

Largebill,
It gladdens me that (finally) we all know deficits matter. Another Reagan lie that's been exposed. BTW, when will we, at last, dig up his grave so the whole country can enjoy pissing on the body of the worst POTUS in the history of the nation?

Taxing the rich, as you mention, won't solve the deficit problem alone--but since we're calling for shared sacrifice, what better way to show how serious we really are. (i.e ANYONE can F*** the poor, you will only be taken serious if you are willing to fight those who are powerful).

I could agree with a flat tax or sales/ consumption task if it's set-up properly (a zero % rate on the first $50K, and then a scale which ramps up the rates on every $50K over that, for example).
I'm all for taking money out of Congressional elections (and all elections for that matter), but SCOTUS' Citizens United decision is a pretty large roadblock to that action.
There IS a lot of waste, but I've seen no one from the Tea Party try to really address it. Where is the call to end the useless and hugely wasteful Drug War (another Reagan relic which has been disastrous)? How about the no-bid contracts we gave out in Iraq and the corruption of the contractors there, which have proven to be extremely wasteful too (as well as dangerous to our soldiers)? Again, nothing but crickets from the serious Tea Party deficit hawks. Instead they want to take away bargaining rights from public union members, and I'm supposed to take them serious why, again?
I disagree with Daryl, however, that Social Security is a problem. SS has a $2.6 trillion surplus. And isn't associated with the deficit in any way. As for the money that was borrowed from the SS surplus, it wasn't spent. It was given to the top % of earners as a tax break. Recouping that give-away is a start, and as for future projected shortfalls--removing the cap on FiCA will solve any foreseeable problems for the next 75 years at least.
Now let's talk seriously about reducing healthcare (MedicAid and MediCare) costs which is the serious entitlement issue. I like single-payer healthcare, and think it will go a long way in reducing the out of control healthcare costs saddling the nation and citizenry, but I'm willing to look at other serious ideas out there which will do the same.

Posted by: Berto at February 22, 2011 1:15 PM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg