Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Just Venting

In the fair city of Waco there has been a lot of going back and forth about the whole "Tea Party" thing.  There was a fairly recent column in that bastion of liberalism, the Waco Herald Tribune, essentially calling out the "Tea Party" over perceived racism.  Of course there are many replies in the letters to the editor.  What follows is my perception --

I would caution those of you with a more conservative persuasion or who really liked President Bush -- you might find this a bit irritating.  This particular post is but a small diversion for me....just chalk it up to more liberal rant.

The “Tea Party” party espouses many things that make a great deal of sense. They talk about fiscal responsibility, freedom, free enterprise and constitutional rights. They worry about deficit spending and government over reach. They are active, loud and proud of their positions. I appreciate their fervor, if not their ideas


I don’t think I know any of these people, but I don’t think they are full of hate. I don’t think all of their positions are based on President Obama’s race. But, (you had to know but was coming) its’ hard to avoid the inevitable perception that if not race, certainly political affiliation has something to do with their fervor. I do have some questions that might help me with this perception.

I agree with them on deficit spending, it’s been an issue for me for 9 years. Where was the “Tea Party” when President Bush was running up record deficits and letting Wall Street plunder this country? Where were you guys when we had a President commit us to two wars costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars, in debt? Did I just miss the protests and the signs or did you just become aware that President Bush accumulated more debt than all other presidents combined?

Why weren’t you protesting and carrying your flags when the previous administration decided to start eavesdropping on ordinary citizens? You clearly care about protecting freedom, but you guys were apparently on vacation during all of the debate on the Patriot Act and warrantless wiretaps.

Why do you now support a health care system that has nothing to do with free markets and everything to do with letting large corporations decide who gets health care? You say you want to support free enterprise but when large corporations can pick and choose who gets what medicine and what care, you support oligarchy, not democracy.

Why do you, if not embrace, allow groups to co-opt your message with racist signs and rhetoric? Why don’t you condemn this and make sure they are not part of your message? Why would you condemn and rally around keeping a sitting President of the US from addressing school children? Why would you embrace a lunacy that says a sitting President was born in Kenya? Why would you constantly say that a sitting President has a different faith than what he says?

I know you guys are probably very sincere, caring people. People who disagree with you are also caring sincere people. I know you are extremely passionate and patriotic people.  There are people who see things differently than you that are just as passionate and patriotic as you.

These are just some of the reasons some view the Tea Party protests as late, short sighted and disingenuous; at the worst they seem angry, hateful and racist. I just want to know if it’s not about the current President’s race, or if it’s not about party affiliation, where were you nine years ago?

2 comments:

Robbie said...

You know the tea party movement originally came out in response to the bail-outs and stimulus packages for the big corps and banks that caused our economic downturn. Those policies did not begin until the 11th hour of the Bush admin. It would have been terribly difficult to respond to them in the years before they happened. President Obama continued those bail-out policies and heavy spending. It makes no sense, and things have gotten much worse than even President Obama suggested. Remember when he promised that we would not see unemployment above 8% if we passed the stimulus? The big-spending on government programs does not work, and it puts an excedingly unsustainable debt upon this and future generations of Americans. What is good about this? Should we be so focused on what point in history the tea parties popped up, or should we be concerned about opposing the dangerous spending that will enslave all Americans to burdens of debt?

Unbeknownst to much of the general public, health care is already, essentially, run by the government. The companies are there as a proxy. 2,500 government regulations control the handling and benefits in your health insurance. Those regulations place a cost burden upon health insurance companies (such as the regulation preventing sale of policies across state, and in some cases, county lines). Additionally, it is ver expensive for medical professionals to maintain malpractice insurance against often frivilous legal action. I don't think anyone is suggesting that health care not be changed. I needs it badly. But it needs the government and lwyers out of it if the costs are ever going to come under any sort of reasonable control.

Matt said...

Robbie says: "the big corps and banks that caused our economic downturn."

Matt replys: "Your grammar causes some ambiguity in that statement. Is the 'that' in your statement a reference to the bailouts or the banks/corporations? Are you suggesting that the bailouts are the cause of the current economic situations?"