Tweet
I’ve made a lot of fun of the tea party people on our show. The main reason is that I think they’re being led around the nose by corporate interests while mistakenly believing they’re fighting the powers that be. They’re being used as tools by the same exact people they think they are battling against, i.e. the elites that screw over the little guy.
But now, I’d like to change course and welcome them in. I believe portions of the movement are redeemable (we’ll find out soon enough if I’m smoking crack on this one). Yes, some of them are full-blown crazy with their birther theories and lunatic signs about holocausts and fascism. A lot of them are actually mad because they think they have lost their privileged position in the country (hence, the cries of "I want my country back"). But many of them are populists that have simply been led in the wrong direction.
I’m going to be so bold as to say they can work with us. And we can work with them. But they have to do something first — prove they are not tools of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country. Fight the banks!
See, here’s my theory. The people who fund the tea-parties (their buses, websites, signs and yes even their donuts) have absolutely no interest in fighting the banks. They have no interest in pointing out that the banks took massive amount of taxpayer money through TARP, AIG backdoor bailouts and secret Fed loans. When it comes to protecting health care companies, they’re in. When it comes to fighting the government if it tries to help the poor and middle class, they’re in. But if you challenge corporate America, they’re out, way out. No interest.
But those are the right-wing groups funding these efforts, not the actual people in the protests. The right-wing groups are not redeemable. And the tea party protestors can mark my words. Those conservative organizations will never lead a protest of the big banks that took government money. You watch. And when you see I’m right, then see if you’re ready to answer my challenge.
I issue a challenge to the tea-party movement. If you’re true to your word, and you believe in protecting the American people and principles, and you think government is too big and hands out money to the wrong people, then join us in fighting against the biggest giveaway to biggest culprits. Fight the power of the banks with us.
Don’t listen to your leaders that tell you that liberals aren’t capitalists. That’s nonsense. We’re the real capitalists. Just like you, we don’t think the government should be in the business of handing out taxpayer money to people who didn’t earn it. And if you’re against handing out government money, you certainly have to be against giving that money to the richest people in the country and the ones that caused the economic collapse in the first place. You’re not a sucker, are you? Why would you want to give away your money to those people?
The bank executives who are responsible for our terrible recession are about to walk away with record setting bonuses. Where did they get that money in these tough economic times? From you! They picked your pocket.
You know who helped them do it? George W. Bush and Hank Paulson. But also Tim Geithner and Barack Obama. I told you we agreed. See, I wasn’t kidding. Hey, why don’t you ask your organizers who have been so busy protecting private insurance companies how come they never organize any protests against Tim Geithner? Wouldn’t he be a natural target as the Treasury Secretary when the economy is in recession and the banks are getting away with billions? Have you ever wondered why those well-funded tea party organization websites never have buses going to protest at Wall Street or the Treasury Department?
Join us. We can build a real populist movement that isn’t funded by corporate America. That actually cares about the American people and throws the crooks out on their ass. That fights the elites who have captured the government and turned it into their own private piggy bank.
Or don’t join us, just as long as you fight in the right direction. Prove you’re legit. Fight against the banks that are about to take all of our money home in bonuses for themselves. You fight them from the right. We’ll fight them from the left. And we’ll meet you in the middle. The real middle of the country that is tired of being run over by the big and powerful interests in Washington and Wall Street.
177 Comments
The TEA in ‘tea party’ stands for “Taxed Enough Already,” right?
In some cases, you might agree that is true for certatin Tea Partiers (as with Obama’s flagrant flip-flop on excise taxes).
In other cases, I think you’d disagree that they are paying what you consider their ‘fair share.’
It behooves anyone seeking common ground, IMO, to be clear about what your think your common ground is with them with regards to taxes.
For example: Do you think the Bush tax cuts should be repealed or not?
Fair?
This is a very gray area as I discovered when conversing with someone about what “middle class” meant. It means very different things to different people.
Most people want to believe they are successful and that they belong in the same group as Bush’s rich cronies. They identify with that kind of success. But they are treated very differently via the tax cuts. If this can be spelled out very very concretely, then I think we can reach agreement.
IOW, name numbers, percentage of income taxed, have taxes increased for you, Joe Businessman? If taxes have decreased under Bush for you, then you belong to a different protest group.
We don’t have to agree on that question to find common ground on the banks, right?
Right, but I think it’s a good question to cover in another diary. It’s specific, it’s imminent, and it’s a step towards addressing our fucked up tax system.
Sure, but this call to common cause has nothing to do with the tax system. We should repeal Bush’s tax cuts for the rich, that’s what I believe. If you don’t agree, we can still work together to make sure the financial system doesn’t trump the people, right?
Right. Like I said.
Are there some specific proposals for financial reform on the table?
There’s one moving through the House and Senate as we speak, yes.
They’ll want to know where you stand on taxes.
It’s a litmus test. Or maybe a Lipton test. Steep me if you’ve heard that one before.
Ultimately I don’t think there’s enough common ground purely on bank matters, nor do I think any amount of protest is going to change ObamaRahma’s course of action. They are not going to audit the Fed, because that would be the end of the Fed, which would be the end of their cabal.
What are some avenues of common ground. Well, bizarrely enough… marijuana. Whether it’s for arthritis, migraines, cancer, PTSD, or just homegrown fun without a hangover (not to mention industrial hemp, which is an issue Ron Paul and Barney Frank are supportive of), it speaks to one of their main issues: Liberty. Will it happen? Cops in a lot of places are going to have to find new means funding other than property/cash seizures, but costs go down somewhat as well and some revenue will be generated, but banks will lose out on money laundering and that’s a big chunk of actual remaining liquidity.
Second, ending the war as a way to reduce the deficit. No, Obama is not going to back off of his double down, but it is fiscally sensible common ground (even if it’s really a war over peak oil; hemp plays a role here, too).
Third, pork. Cut it. We have to. No more backroom Ben Nelson vote buying bullshit. I’d include cutting farm subsidies and proposing means-testing for Soc. Sec. Gotta propose it even if you don’t think it can pass.
Just suggestions.
It would be wonderful to see a left-right alliance on reforming the Farm Bill. That bill every year is a missed opportunity at building a better agriculture for the American nation in so many ways …
And the Farm Bill, which is near and dear to red-state hearts, is also one of the few areas where government regulation is accepted by the right, and is also a very important policy lever for “progress” as we over here leftwards refer to it.
Yeah, but we gotta be upfront & honest about the bad news:
Earth can’t sustain more American diets, be they in China, India or anywhere.
We can’t afford to keep cycling crops through animals.
It is an inefficient use of & threat to diminishing resources, and results a burden on health care systems.
Now, how to sell this to the Tea Party People?
You’ll often hear them mulling about the CFR/Trilat/Bilderberg plan to erradicate a large percentage of the Earth’s population.
Indeed, we’ll have to if we expect to export our gluttony abroad, so…
ending the subsidization of the modern diet of dead bodies & calf food is key to rebalancing our palates with Earth’s carrying capacity.
Plus, we gotta do something to take the strain off the water supply.
Here’s where some beer/steak/potato-head says, “Yr just a hippy who wants to cram your animal welfare shit down my throat! What if plants have feelings, too, huh? Gonna stop eatin’ salad? Huh, huh, huh!”
To which we say, “It takes 16 pounds of vegetation to make 1 pound of meat. If you really cared about the suffering of plants (you don’t), you’d agree to eliminate as much suffering as possible by cutting out the middle-meat and eat a fruit/plant based diet, thus reducing suffering all around.”
This is where we seperate the vampires from the humans:
“You’ll have to take my butcher knife out of my cold, dead hands!”
Actually, all we have to do is stop taxing everyone to subsidize your destruction-diet and when you have to personally pay for what animal products really cost, you’ll find that you’ll lose weight, have more sexual energy and learn to love the wide bounty of sustainable harvest.
Easy sell? Naw, but if it were easy, wouldn’t we have done it by now?
That is something I very much want to do.
I think there is common ground, and marijuana is a great place to start. That said, I don’t have a ton of faith folks will put aside other differences and stick to common ground.
I’m not trying to convey certainty, but this is a (pardon the term) ‘no-brainer.’
Up to now we could not afford NOT to have a War on Hemp and still have been able to cultivate the oligarchical elite Establishment and racist/superstitious cultural & economic suppression afforded by Prohibitionomics™.
But now, as we transition toward sustainability (whether we want to or not), we can’t afford the oligarchical elite Establishment and racist/superstitious cultural & economic suppression afforded by Prohibitionomics™.
Mexico is learning this. Certain states are learning this. The world will soon learn this.
If Obama had a single speck of integrity, he’d pardon every person in jail for non-violent drug crimes of the type he committed as a youth, as memorialized in his award-winning books.
“Bu-bu-but that would increase the unemployment numbers!”
Necessity is the mother of ingenuity & invention.
Myopia is the father of the bullshit we got going on now.
Fucker need some Lasik, stat.
Sure, legalize marijuana, I’m down.
I expect any cooperation would be on a case-by-case basis, as Jane’s cooperation with Grover Norquist was. That shouldn’t prevent us from seeking ways we can cooperate. That’s probably the smartest course – we’ll disagree on a lot of things, even the ultimate aims of policies we’re both either opposing or promoting. But cooperation can serve our ends, and when it does we (and they) should engage in it.
That’s just smart politics, which is something I see very little of lately on our side of the political spectrum.
end the wars – yes. absolutely.
reduce the fed deficit? not now — just the opposite is needed.
3rd times the charm, eh?
What’s your take on public ed?
A complete failure, like most things that the govt runs. (Sorry about jumping in, but resisting twice was too difficult…)
So what’s your suggestion?
End tax funded schools and go to private/homeschool?
Again, not judging one way or the other, just trying to point out that certain things will always be wedge issues and it may be unlikely they can be overlooked in order to focus on areas of seeming agreement.
Throw every politician out of Washington, and try to do a restart at the beginning. America is about to collapse – IMHO – so a restart will be needed anyway. (I am basically further to the right than the “Tea Parties,” but have recently changed from a Libertarian to a Republican, since I live in FL and want to get in on any Rep Primary that might involve Rubio and Crist so I can vote for Rubio.)
jeeze. sorry i read too slow for you.
I think I misread your comment at 62.
Anyhoo, someone should make an electronic checklist of gov’t programs/expenditures so it can be assessed what Tea Partiers think taxes should pay for or not and what Progressives think taxes should pay for or not.
Schools are just one.
Roads/bridges.
FDA/EPA.
HHS/DHS.
etc., including foreign aid.
The results might be interesting and give a better idea of where common groud lay.
rather than a checklist, i’d like to have conversations — even (respectful) debates. maybe i’ll be convinced of some things and maybe i’ll have some ideas to contribute. in my experience (limited as it is) that is how people learn about each other, develop respect even where differences exist, etc. working together on some common goal is even better, but i think the conversations are needed too.
Conversations have to start somewhere, and the most productive ones in my experience are those preceeded by determining differences before attempting to proceed to areas of mutual effort.
I have to disagree in this particular case: I think we should make an effort to avoid issues known to be divisive and which are irrelevant to our very specifically focused purpose anyway. We should be a one issue movement: honest government. DOE is irrelevant, healthcare is irrelevant, and we will not be divided and conquered because we will maintain our focus on something very specific that everyone wants.
Why can’t an anti-corporatist leftie and an anti-corporatist rightie work together on anti-corporatist campaign finance reform without getting side tracked arguing over gay marriage? Why can’t an anti-corruption leftie and an anti-corruption rightie work together on tougher Congressional ethics rules without getting side tracked arguing over gay marriage?
Focus on just one thing: filling Washington with honest people who genuinely try to represent their consultancies. If that can be achieved we’ll have a working democratic process for sorting out all the rest.
are you kidding? think about what you’re saying… you want to work with people who disagree on every important issue you care about – save for a tiny sliver of one…
That’s exactly what I’m saying: why is it impossible? Especially when the “tiny sliver” is probably the most important issue facing the nation.
Except the right and left have different definitions of honest – like they think Pat Buchanan is honest – do you?
I imagine we could agree on a definition that went something like, does not sell his vote to corporate sponsors. Sound good?
Sounds great – but would a teabagger consider the NRA a corporate sponsor or a civil rights movement?
reduce the fed deficit? not now — just the opposite is needed.
If the money is spent correctly – i.e.: infrastructure, extension of UE benefits, etc. Simultaneously, forced write-down of RE on bank books, with adjusted loans being passed through to bank customers.
agree! imo, it does matter how the $$$ is spent. sorry i didn’t include that and thanks for the correction/clarification.
Most of the Tea Bagging rank and file probably agree with us on taxation when it is explained to them. Typically, they don’t make a lot of money. They don’t realize it, but they hate the income tax because it’s purpose has been perverted over the decades. Instead of heavily taxing the uberwealthy that make up 5% of the population and own half of everything, it raises revenue on the backs of the middle class and the poor.
We need to use the income tax to sequester the wealth that is now corrupting our political processes and nullifying our liberties. We need to let working people see that they can get practical benefits from government and the taxes it levies–like real healthcare, old-age pensions, and education for their kids.
We need to show the tea baggers a government does the opposite of what the corporatist, crony state does. Show them a truly progressive taxation that, when combined with aggressive antitrust regulation and sound banking reforms, overcomes monopolies, lets ordinary businesses thrive, and lets ordinary people prosper.
No, the REAGAN tax cuts should be repealed….
repeal all payroll taxes. they are horribly regressive.
Again, what’s your take on public, taxpayer funded, gov’t run education?
Government run education? I’m assuming you were educated in public schools, at least in the primary grades? If you were educated in “private” schools, that puts you way in the minority. If you were “home schooled,” that puts you way out in the ether.
Um, huh?
I was asking someone who seems conservative/Tea Party sympathetic what their take was on public ed given that they seem to oppose universal health care.
Some Tea Partiers will admit, like Ron Paul, the they want to end the Dept. of Education. Some want to eliminate public ed and transition to all private funded education.
I’d like to know what selise’s take is.
Does anyone else get the feeling the question is being avoided?
How did you ever get the impression that selise opposes universal health care. She can speak for herself, but nothing could be farther from the truth.
Comment 62 seemed odd.
I’m not familiar with selise.
thanks!
I’m not sure what the question is. If it’s abolishing the Dept. of Education, the answer would be no. Management of the thing is another question.
Well, I think a lot of Tea Partiers WOULD say they support ending the Dept. of Ed.
Maybe they really don’t and it’s rhetoric, but I think that has to be addressed.
I do not want to end the Board of Ed, lol. I do want to either fund NCLB or kill it.
I’m assuming they would say that, but before the argument can even be addressed, I think they need to be asked if they were educated in public schools. If they answer in the affirmative, I would think that would go a long way toward defusing that concern…or at least it should…
If government education can be improved, I’m for it. I’ve had some experiences in public school that make me feel like currently, it’s not worth the money the state and federal government throws at it. For example, I had a history teacher in middle school that was mostly a baby sitter. I say that because I learned almost nothing in that class, but I still received an A.
I was dismayed that “Prosperity” people coopted the outrage at the banksters. Perhaps we can get those ordinary americans to unite with other ordinary americans.
Is there anyway we can decipher the BS for tea party people? Ex: PTB always say they want to help “small business” but in reality they are referring to huge corporations when they say that. So there is business and there is Big Business. I would stay away from labels such as capitalists. Everyone wants to be able to make a living and build a better life.
Cenk,
I’ve come to realize that both the left/right paradigm and the insider/outsider paradigm A) are both flawed, and B) are already part of the thinking of most Americans in 2010.
There are probably ways to use the best elements of those flawed paradigms effectively, but I don’t think anymore that openly calling for an alliance like the one you propose here will work to progressives’ advantage in 2010.
In Opposing Dems from the Left in 2010 (8 Jan 2010), I presented the following conclusions:
The arguments that support these conclusions are in the diary.
They include analysis of your earlier arguments and of what establishment Dems and OFA-types are doing to depict progressives as the problem rather than the solution.
If progressives put themselves between the sellout Dems and the American people in 2010, all they’ll be doing is helping the sellout Dems to take the blame off themselves and cast it onto progressives.
They will incur losses. The question is whether or not progressive activists will be blamed for the losses by them in such a way that many among the electorate on the left blame US instead of THEM. That would be bad. We’ll have been scapegoated, and they will go on with politics as usual.
If you won’t accept allies from outside the party…
and you won’t fight the sellouts within the party…
then aren’t you pretty much screwed?
I’m not trying to be sarcastic or offensive, just pointing out that cover your ass and keep your head down doesn’t sound like a winning strategy. I’m not disputing your legitimate concern that “We’ll have been scapegoated, and they will go on with politics as usual”, but that’s a danger that must be confronted and defeated, not avoided. Which brings me to my next point:
Now that part is exactly right (IMO), and requires nothing more than telling the truth, just as often and loudly as you can. Even if people call you names.
My argument boils down to this:
When you see opponents (in this case a$$hole sellout corporatist Dems) going down, it’s better to get out of the way.
By stepping in the way as they’re going down, all you do is give them the chance to do exactly what they’re doing: blame you for their electoral defeat.
What I’m saying is that we can support progressive candidages, that we have to focus on issues (i.e. engage in framing or what George Lackoff calls “cognitive policy”) in an effort to make it infinitely clear that the sellouts are to blame for Dems losses in Nov.
What do you mean, “stepping in the way as they’re going down”? If that means supporting or defending them, that’s not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting that you “fight back against the sellouts in the Democratic Party,” something you don’t want to do for fear of bad press.
These are the people whose sellout is giving you a bad name. These are the people whose sellout is making you look really dumb for having supported them. These are the people whose sellout is fucking up the country.
And you shy away from taking them on because you’re afraid it’ll damage your rep with the idiots who support them?
I definitely did NOT mean support them when I wrote “stepping in the way as they’re going down.” I meant the oppposite. I don’t want to fight them as they’re going down not because I fear bad press, but because it would be ineffective and counterproductive.
Not about fearing damage to my rep. Fear of it damaging Firedoglake’s rep maybe, but Jane seems comfortable taking the heat if it’s necessary and if it would advance progressive goals.
But my point is that we’d actually be doing more harm than good, giving the sellouts a scapegoat – us – for their losses in Nov, allowing them to go back to business as usual.
The best way to beat them – to ensure that their electoral losses are seen as their fault and theirs alone – is to stand by and let them go down while we focus on framing views on the issues rather than cheer on their downfall.
Standing with other outsiders and throwing punches would feel good and be great fun, but it would not help achieve progressive goals and could even hurt our efforts to do so.
Of course you guys are going to take the hit.
The same as with my party in the last election because we were so disgusted with the leadership in the Republican party that we just plain didn’t show up – so it was our fault.
Of course, get used to it…but never go away because it is the extreme views that bring truths to the front – whether we agree with each other or not.
We are the democracy, not those posers who falsely represent the people today. But, please don’t pigeonhole the good intentions of the tea partiers – we dirtbags do have some redeeming qualities…God, Family and Country – and Guns! Big Guns! Lots of Big Guns!
It might help you to realize ‘they’ are actually a whole lot of very individual individuals and many local groups.
The TEA Party is grass roots, it is also anti-war if that helps you conceptualize where they are coming from.
Cenk,
I don’t know if you didn’t notice, or were one of the ones giving me a hard time about it, but this whole thing is growing off of my plan to end the drug war.
I have been blogging about it for many years in the comment section of AlterNet.
Did it ever occur to you that I might ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT I AM DOING? I was a girl scout leader organizing big, association events for a decade before I started this political action project. It is based on freedom of religion and constitutional law.
I seem to recall you making fun of me, never actually taking me seriously. Is that at all possible Cenk? Because I do get easily offended when people dis things they do not understand.
Lauren Unruh
I don’t see why an alliance with the Teabaggers will amount to anything. Aren’t these people pretty much objects of the fifteen minutes of fame which Fox News has granted them? Are we imagining that we can cut in on this action and get some of those fifteen-minute segments of fame?
I’ve come to the conclusion that it would be worse than amounting to nothing. In 2010, as the Dems lose some of their hold on power, allying with Tea Partiers would be counterproductive for – i.e. harmful to – us.
I don’t see why that would necessarily be so, although it might be, depending upon the issue and upon with whom the alliances were made.
My question is one of whether or not this group has gotten together as “the Tea Party” because Fox and other right-wing media outlets have amplified its voice. If Fox were to stop covering the “Tea Party,” would it still exist?
Whether it would exist or not.
First, Fox isn’t going to stop covering Tea Party events, so the “Tea Party” label will be part of political reality in 2010.
Second, it seems like the goal should be more to attract Americans who feel like outsiders and who embrace the Tea Party theme for lack of a better alternative. Americans who feel like outsiders will be there whether Fox covers the “Tea Party” or not.
But can’t we can attract people (or just turn people off to DC insider bullshit) just by doing what we’re doing as progressives?
Putting out a call like this is more provocative than attractive to people who might actually agree with us otherwise. And those who oppose the insider bs from the right are doing just fine opposing the insider bs as is.
Holding hands with them for the cameras in 2010 – as the American people watch the Dems lose their grip on power – won’t help us achieve our goals.
And what precisely are “we doing as progressives” that makes “us” so attractive?
Telling the middle class to urge their Congressmembers to vote for the Senate bill?
Bragging about Obama’s accomplishments to audiences of the unemployed?
Anyone really paying attention to the state of the world today has already seen through the “vote for the Democrat because the Republican is worse” strategy that has guided “progressive” politics for the last thirty years. The most fatal flaw in progressive ideology is that, whereas the Right really means to be stupid and malicious, the “progressives” merely acquiesce in the political class’s stupid maliciousness — which makes them look weak.
What precisely are the Democrats going to run on this year?
What if they started to hold Tea Party events around agendas Fox didn’t like, such as, say, “end the military/ industrial complex” or “end the global war on drugs” or “dismantle the CIA’s global gulag”? You know, a real anti-government agenda. The term “Tea Party” is just a label, and as gjohnsit pointed out over at Kos, the original “tea party” was about collusion between the British government and the East India Company.
Think Fox would go for that?
The Republican Party is walking a fine line with Tea Partiers, trying not to give in to them too much while trying to co-opt them with rhetoric.
Fox is perfectly willing to follow the more extreme elements among Tea Parties, I think. Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and now Sarah Palin.
Still, I think there is a distinction between sending out an invitation like the one Cenk is extending here, one directed to Tea Party leaders and organizers, and reaching out to Americans who are just fed up with the insider deals and the Big Government/Big Business collusion that are ruining this country. We should be reaching out to the latter group and, in 2010, the best way to do it I think is to frame our messages carefully and keep doing what we’re doing.
The type of fight Cenk is talking about I think should start in 2011, after the Democrat sellouts have taken the Democratic Party into the gutter and have been fully blamed for taking it into the gutter.
Except they celebrate the MIC! I can’t believe the nonsense I’m reading here!
Each and every one of them? There are no paleoconservatives in the mix?
“But many of them are populists that have simply been led in the wrong direction.”; this is an accurate statement from those ‘tea partiers’ I have spoken with.
As long as people continue to vote for Dems and Repubs, the parties will think they are ‘ok’. It will only be by voting for other than Dem or Repub -including writing one’s own name in if there isn’t a third party one can vote for- that the parties will understand the discontent in the U.S.
Certainly this intelligent of a conversation is not found on most “progressive” political web sites. Imagine the shriekings that would ensue if one attempted to (gasp!) *talk to teabaggers* over at “Daily Kos” or the Democratic Underground.
Cenk,
You get a lot of shit here.
Ignore the noise. Take the signal.
I think that there are alot of very good questions being asked. And its a brilliant strategy. Common enemies make strange bedfellows.
Good luck with this initiative. I made the same suggestion several weeks ago and got univerdsally panned or ignoreed on this website. Although i come back, daily, you’re the first to make the same suggestion.
Hope it works.
Thanks Cenk. I like this piece. Very straightforward.
You’ll have as much luck connecting with grass roots tea partiers as you will in getting the contact lists for Organizing for Obama.
The two principles of unity I’d propose would be:
1. Separate Wall Street from government
2. Create middle class jobs in the US
Hobby horses need to be left outside, that is, encouraging job creation at the level we need involves much more than just cutting taxes.
First time commenter here (inspired by Cenk’s sensible insight).
I’ve been saying the same thing lately, ever since I saw the principled Ron Paul come off well with Rachel Maddow (and also since I read David Brooks mention ex-N.M. Gov. Gary Johnson in a recent column on the Tea-Party movements less-disclosed side).
Johnson, like Ron Paul and even the late William F. Buckley, support Marijuana Legalization (and if their principles don’t change when Democrats get into office– like the G.O.P.’s sudden focus on the deficit whenever Republicans aren’t in power– it shows me that they are intellectually consistent).
Cenk is right in his observations (as we may need a viable and non-partisan third-party as the only way to keep Obama honest in 2012).
Otherwise a liberal primary challenger to the President will only position him as more moderate-appearing (and, since Rahm and him still act like its the triangulated 90s, that won’t have any effect on stopping his turncoat corporate-sellout behavior).
Only a true alliance with the populists on the right has the potential to do more than simply influence the election and the debate. The timing is right to actually capitalize on the way that the Democrats and the G.O.P. have exhausted the patience of the middle-class with their tax-and-spend or lie-and-spend policies.
I’m not sure if a guy like Gary Johnson can run with the mantle and unify these disparate elements. But having more progressive voices holding the bankers feet to the fire, and actually attending these events, is the first step in building this historic alliance.
After all, Obama can’t be a socialist and be a tool of the banks (a critique that these so-called Austrian School critics also lobbed at F.D.R.). So perhaps being faced with this critique will help to focus the Tea-Partiers attention on who’s really pulling their strings and co-opting the populist outrage that should have naturally been generated from the left (after the no-string-attached bailouts still didn’t result in more lending… which the banks have again laughingly threatened to cut-off in reaction to proposed bonus-taxes).
Sorry for the run-on (I hope someone gets my drift).
After all, we may just get the Tea-Party folks to replace their Obama-as-Hitler posters with a mutually-agreed-upon poster with a corporate bar-code emblazoned across the President’s forehead (that or a bank insignia).
welcome to firedoglake — looking forward to reading more of what you have to say :)
Cenk,
I agree our interests coincide with the interests of most of the teabaggers, but I propose a less direct strategy. We have to build some bridges to convince them that we respect them, we’re honest, we speak the truth, we want to partner with them rather than hijack their movement, and we need each other in order to defeat our common enemy.
They don’t trust us and they believe we’re assholes because we mock them and act like we’re superior to them, which is generally true about most liberals, btw. Instead of telling them we’re right about whom to blame and they’re wrong, we should show them by sharing our information with them and let them reach their own conclusions. Let the facts speak for themselves.
as john emerson likes to say: republican populism is fake, but democratic elitism is real (or something like that, i didn’t look it up and am just going by memory).
Tea Party people are a diverse group. You dont give them enough credit. If you want support in areas of common concern the first thing you must do is quit insulting them by calling them Teabaggers. I am an avid Tea Party member and visit your site to try to understand your views. I must admit that I disagree with most of your views. I do agree with your concerns about large banks and corporate America. I followed Ariannas Move Your Money suggestion and took our money out of Chase and moved it to a small local bank. Is it possible that those of us who are interested, join with you on areas where we agree—stopping the gluttony/collusion of government and big banks? The one thing I realized from this administration is that all both parties are corrupt to the core and have little concern or regard for the citizens.
I love the idea of the barcode on OBamas forehead and that will be my poster for a march we have planned for the 16th.
I do not think you get the tea parties. They are for limited govt. Progressives are big govt. spending. The tea parties are going after the repubs. When they get done, they will go after the dems.
You’re focusing on the wrong thing, I think.
There are things that we all have in common. For example, we’re just as angry about aLL the insider deals and the Big Government/Big Business collusion and the lack of transparency (huge giveaways to the banks) that are ruining this country as are the Tea Partiers.
Still, I think openly joining Tea Partiers will open us up to wrongfully taking blame for Democratic failures in Nov 2010, when the blame should be squarely on the sellouts.
Not totally true. Progressives aren’t for all BIG Gov’t programs, example most Progressives want to cut not increase Defense spending also most want to see Corp. subsidizes cut as well. Progressives are redistributionists and are for a Progressive tax code more like what we had prior to R.Reagan. We have a different vision of Gov’t spending and would prefer it be focused on programs that help poor & middle class people and small businesses, not Huge Corps. and the wealthy. The tea party crowd is anti-Big Gov’t but they want to cut all Social programs and many like big defense budgets. They are also for lower taxation period and many are for a flat tax which is wildly regressive. I don’t see where we and these people can come together? On Social policies we are also on opposite sides of the street on many issues. Yes, both sides are mad about the Bank bail outs, but for totally different reasons. Personally, the tea baggers to me are BV$Hite hardcore and most of their opposition to Obama is racist and fascistic. Where were these people the last 8 yrs. when BV$H was King? They didn’t mind all the Big bank and Corp. giveways then did they? They didn’t mind the spying on us by BV$H did they? They didn’t mind the illegal wars did they? No, we shouldn’t try to make common cause with these toxic morons.
have you been to any?
i recommend watching a couple of warren mosler’s talks (youtubes).
more for background:
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2009/09/warren-mosler-speaking-at-a-tea-party.html
http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/29/tea-party-address/
Both “sides” are suspicious of the other, which is clever of our corporate overlords, is it not? United we stand; divided we fall & fail.
The left is annoyed with hypocracy of the right. Ok: castigate me all you want. But how can I take the right seriously? When terrorist attacks occured during GWBush’s reign, Demorats and progressives were told in no uncertain terms to support the POTUS or else we were traitors. Ok, so far as it goes, and most of us did support Bush (in fighting terrorism) for quite a while.
Yet now the right claims another terrorist attack has occured w/the undie bomber (I would argue whether it really is a terrorist attack, but that’s how the right wishes to describe it). But the right goes on a rampage of attacks against BHO, with most of the attacks being specious, stupid or downright lies. So how is the left supposed to take the right seriously? The hypocracy is there for all the world (literally) to see.
I agree that we have some issues in common with the Tea Party movements (there are several groups/strands/what have you). But my general experience (and I’ve had a lot) with the right is that they are quite unwilling these days to even countenance listening to another point of view, much less having a reasoned logical debate. I have certainly tried with family and friends and usually end up getting shot down in flames with ranting tirades that generally devolve into name calling (eg, BHO is Hitler on steriods type of stuff).
I do read that some Tea Party people regret the Hitler signs & such and feel that those attacks devalue their cause. I wish them well in resisting such stuff because I feel it does their actions much disservice. The huge Dachau poster at a purported Tea Party event in Wash DC this past fall was sickening and disgusting and really serves no purpose except to marginalize the Tea Partiers and whatever message it is that they are trying to get out.
IF we can make common cause, I think that there are grounds for it. Yet even here in this blog, where Cenk is attempting to communicate with these groups, the Tea Party people lob attacks at us. Yes, I am guilty of making fun of some of the Tea Party activities and people, as well as being disdainful. I guess it’s my method for taking care of myself because of the attacks I have endured personally whereby “real” communication with the right often seems impossible. And when one listens to rightwing radio, all it is attack attack attack and seems to exist solely to rile up anger & fear in the rightwing base.
Until rightwing folks can realize that one has to have some degree of openess to really communicate with the left, it will be hard to make common cause. Despite angry rhetoric and name calling from the left, my personal experience is that the left is more open to real discussion without personal attack and to really listening to the other side. Common cause will only work if both sides can be open to listening and hearing and debating. Shrieking and ranting and name calling at Town Halls (almost all done by the right) is not the way to do it.
good luck to us all because, right or left, we are all being truly screwed by the banks and the corporations and wall street and politicians on both sides of aisle. Until we can work together, we are more likely to all be screwed.
IMHO, Big Gov’t is the main problem and not the banks.
Are you concerned about the relationship between the govt and big corps?
Yes, I’m concerned when govt seeks new pardners in order to grow…
Direction of causality goes both ways, and they’re getting better at it every day.
The Big Banks ARE the Gov’t.
America is the United Scams of Goldman Sachs.
They can turn America into Haiti overnight.
The more they feel threatened, the likelier they will.
I don’t think Tea Partiers nor Progressives have come to terms with that.
Your assertion that “The Big Banks ARE the Gov’t.” (if I may use this as an example)I believe is how languaging and our communication disempowers the Middle Class. What is governing for? To collectively use resources we could not pay for on our own and collectively pay for those resources. (We also use governing to regulate behavior and other such things but I’ll stay on point for the cost related issues for governing).
The American Taxpayer is the government. To use the popular percentage of this collective group – 3% are the poor (most likely don’t contribute financially to the government as a whole) 95% are the middle class (the biggest contributors to the government as a whole) and the 2% (the wealthiest of the government as a whole and much like the 3% poor, contribute the least to the government’s well being in relation to their income)
Back to the assertion of “Big Banks are The Government”. No, Taxpayers are still the Government, BUT we are letting the Big Banks (and other Big Corporations, the 2%) govern. Why? That’s the question we need to start finding solutions to.
I find myself agreeing with Cent. A definition of the Middle Class I read states,
“Having a reliable job with fair pay; access to health care; a safe and stable home; the opportunity to provide a good education for one’s children, including a college education; time off work for vacations and major life events; and the security of looking forward to a dignified retirement.”
Who on the Right or Left would argue with this objective?
What the Big Banks have done is not new to this current administration and Congress – or previous ones. The Big Banks have always been the main governor of our tax dollars, either directly or indirectly (inflation, deflation – monkeying with interest rates and creating money out of thin air to loan to the government.)
As the Government (taxpayers) we let them. Why? Because on the most part Middle Class Americans thrived. Yes, there have been some economic bumps. But nothing like what we are faced with today. And why did this happen? The Big Banks simply got greedy. They forgot in their giddiness that the government – you and me as taxpayers – can only pay so much towards their profits. I say they were not too big to fail, but rather they got too big to carry on our backs.
I believe we can and must put our name calling and “sound bite” messages aside – both on the left and right. It only stops the dialog and we both become reactionary and defensive. The 95% must take back our power. We do have immeasurable amount of power. But the 2% have made us believe otherwise.
Some simple suggestions I have to start uniting the Middle Class.
1)Everytime you see the word government funding, government spending, too much government, too little government – anything with the word government, substitute your name in place of government. This may help you want to better informed and take more accountability how and where you are spending your tax monies.
Here’s an example. Recently a post on Huffington talked about the Farm Act Subsidizing program and how 4 members of Congress (Dem and Rep)were receiving income from this government program. Now as I understand, I (government/Kristie) am already paying these Congress members 6 digit incomes for representing and safeguarding my tax money, I’m providing them a nice health insurance program, and if they stay in office long enough, I’ll be paying them a nice retirement package. Why am I paying Michelle Bauchmann an additional $50,000 a year from the Farm Act. It was not the intention of the program. Hmmm – note to self. Find out what is going on. Seems a good intended program has gone adrift.
2) Start taking accountability for who we have hired. We are paying good wages to members of Congress to work in our accounting departments (appropriation bills). We are paying good wages to the Executive Branch to work in our public relations department. We are paying good wages to the Dept of Justice to work in our HR department. I hope you get my drift.
We are the CEO/owner. The proverbial buck stops with us – the Middle Class. We walk around feeling so hopeless and think we can’t call out an employee (Congress). If an employee made up excuses for bad performance would you say okay and walk away? Would you really wait 4 years and hope you could fire them with a new replacement to resolve the problem?
3)Start viewing the 2% as sociopaths. Individually they are American, and they may or may not be taxpayers. Collectively they appear to be the Great Oz behind the invisible curtain. I don’t want to attack them, I just want to look them squarely in the face and say you don’t and can’t scare me anymore. (Remember we truly have more power than they do)
4) Don’t underestimate the determination and will of the 2%. They are superb illusionists and manipulators. There allegiance is to monetary control. They have no loyalty. They have no preference for political parties. They will use members of any to do their bidding. The more they can separate and divide individuals and groups the better to achieve their agenda. They love diversions. They may even great them and then let others run with them.
5) 2% love sound bites, spin masters, messages taken out of context. They know words are the lowest form of communication. These additional tactics with words make the 95% more dazed, confused, frighten, paralyzed, and cause them to just go away.
I like the suggested comment in one of these responses that said the Dems can attack from the left and the Reps from the right. Great strategy! I believe a both/and… approach is always better than a either/or.
I do believe I have more in common with my conservative Republican friend who may attend Tea Parties than I don’t. We all want economic parity and prosperity. After all we are the ruling class. Let’s act like it.
The Tea party movement leaders are fascists and racists and I highly doubt very many if any of these people will want anything to do with progressives. As for their following they just seem like a bunch of Glenn Beck / Rush Limdong zombies and Fox news followers , easily led around by the nose and basically clueless props for people like Phil Gramm and the rest of this Faux movements Corp. leadership. Personally, I wouldn’t waste my time with this rabble their a bunch of useful idiots and worse.
Do any of you know if we can “carry” at the TPN Convention and sessions next month? Nobody seems to know.
I agree that there is probably a fair amount of common ground in opposition to the government’s capture by the finance industry (and major corporations in general).
I don’t know how far that will go, because just not handing over large amounts of cash isn’t enough of a fix. We need regulation, to keep the finance industry from being able to tank the economy, and taxation, to stop the vampire class on top from sucking up all the proceeds in good times and bad. I suspect the disagreements would start up pretty quickly there. Still, maybe not, and we need to make the arguments in any case.
But I gotta say:
Er. Your we, maybe. My we, nope. Unless you take “earn” to mean “need”. We use government (or should) to share benefits and ease hardships, to provide common goods and support for everybody, whether ne’er-do-well bankster scion or hardworking crack dealer. As Ian puts it:
The banks are looting us. A lot of people take exception to that. I’d leave it there.
thank you. well said (and much better than i did or could).
why are my comments being moderated away?
Using inappropriate ethnic terms or insulting other commenters may result in those comments being removed from the thread.
Sorry – this kind of thing makes me crazy!
Looks like Jonathon Martin of Politico is pushing the meme than John Thune is the potential “savour” of the Republican Party.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100113/pl_politico/31431
Forget it. I’m not a “real capitalist”. I believe in a mixed economy. I oppose a system that features socialism for losses and capitalism for profits, but the teabaggers and the Ron Paul fans believe in the fantasy that we can kill all regulation and go back to the gold standard and all will be well, and that we can cut taxes deeply and still make the deficit go away. I think that basic infrastructure should be publicly owned and operated for the benefit of the public: basic needs like water; hydro power operating on federal land, etc. I think that the private health insurance industry is providing no value and should be phased out. If Firedoglake now wants to abandon the left and go libertarian, well, you’re free to do so, I guess.
I’m fine with trying to attract the same people who’ve been attracted to the tea party movement, but if you do so with right-wing language, you’re no longer a progressive. Go join the Libertarian Party if you feel that way.
Commenter #39 has a good point, and I would add that, as someone who has been working for years within the 9/11 Truth movement, it’s been frustrating to see folks come out and actually want to DO Something, yet as Cenk writes in this story, not for the right reasons and unwittingly for the wrong interests.
Cenk, I have my very own Teabgr and I’m stuck with her because it’s a close family relationship. We got into a big fight over Thanksgiving,and when all the dust had settled, we came to an agreement. We are both against Mandates and for Medicare for all!! She was carrying on about Obama’s Socialist America. I asked her how she liked her socialist Medicare and wouldn’t it be nice if her sons had some of that. And she agreed. Teabgrs are mostly poor people, in my experience. I admit to making fun of them, they make it too easy to make fun of them, but at the same time, dialoge is needed.
love it!
Jaimie Dimon, head of JP Morgan, actually testified this morning that “we missed that home prices wouldn”t go up forever.”
Which begs the question, why hasn’t anybody shot him in the head yet? He must be laughing his ass off every night when he gets home, at how he has thoroughly victimized the stupidest population on earth, without any consequence.
Ok here is the deal. We are both being played. The left says that right wing guys like me hate little children and want to throw grandma out in the snow. The right says that the left are all a bunch of communists who want to turn the country over to the UN. All of this is crap. The right wingers (me) and the left wingers (you) agree on a lot more things than we disagree on. The first thing we agree about is that we want the truth. Yes, the truth. Which is why a guy who actually voted for Goldwater, me, reads FDL. Because I find out things that I dont get either from MSM or from Fox. YOu can see this happening with Brown. He didnt close to the dem because he had money from wall street or backing from the vast right wing conspiracy. He started getting close because he touched something that the Mass lib and the Mass moderates agree on. They feel they are being screwed. Now that the Reps have discovered Brown they will probably rush in and spoil it for him ( limbaugh ). But for a brief time the guy set off a genuine non sanctioned non wallsteet financed bon fire and the guys running things are feeling the heat.
Absolutely. One of the problems with the public conversation is most of the serious problems in DC are not generally reflected in the dialogs created by the few companies that represent the MSM. A middle-class conservative and a middle-class liberal will both agree that resources should be handled for the general good and that the government should live within it’s means. They will disagree about priorities but neither wants to see an end to the middle-class nor the oppression of the poor. A conservative politician and a liberal politician will agree that if they can get a bigger slice of the power pie that lobbyist dollars will follow. They will also agree that the most profitable place to negotiate is from the ambivalent middle. There’s not a lot of money to be made standing up for principles unless you’re willing to trade them for something.
I kind of liked Goldwater in the 80s, though I can’t say I was his number one fan.
seriously appreciate the change of course from previous. but this bit is nonsense (by bold):
unless you’re talking about neo-liberals.
first of all, it’s not taxpayer money if you mean money paid in taxes. second of all, progressives and liberal support things like universal healthcare. please note the word “universal.”
Just curious, what’s your take on public education?
personally, i think it should all be fed funded through grad school for anyone who can and is willing to do the work. i think we should spend the $$$ for class sizes to be cut by at least half. investment in our human capital is probably one of our most important infrastructure investments. i’d like to see some local control for k-12 though and i have no problem if people want to home school.
“i think it should all be fed funded through grad school for anyone “
I feel the same way , this would be one of the greatest investments in the future we could possible make.
If we want to be a strong and powerful nation ,we can achieve that through education.
You’re never going to get Tea Partiers to agree with that.
It’s divides liket that which will IMO undo any meaningful alliance.
exact same thing can be said of progressives.
Yes, the same thing can be said, but with all due respect, there is a difference. The rightwing has done a clever job in portraying all media as having a “liberal bias.” If anyone agrees with that unquestioningly, then you might as well stop reading my comment.
MSNBC has some left-wing biased shows, as we all know, and there are some other outlets, such as Democracy Now on the radio, which are leftwing biased.
But the leftwing has nothing like Fox or Rush Limbaugh and all the rest. And to portray CNN as left-biased is simply laughable, and for that matter, NPR these days has more rightwing commenters on their news shows than lefties. Therein lies a huge difference between the media influences on the right v. on the left.
Democrats and progressives more or less have to go out and find the news and opinions in other sources, such as, yes, this blog, for example. but if you read through leftie blogs, you will find a lot of very well researched blog articles (as well as stupidity, name calling & vapid stuff). I simply don’t see the same level of research or discourse in rightwing blogs.
Rightwing churches are another matter, and I’m at liberty to comment on them because of my family’s affiliations. I see much in those churches that I would call outright brainwashing, as well as outright political activity & organizing (which should cause the church to lose it’s 501(c)(3) status). When I attend other churches, I experience much less manipulation than what I see in my family’s churches & almost no political organizing.
So, reasonable people can chose to disagree, and I disagree with your argument that it’s the same kind of manipulation on the left as it is on the right.
Cenk,
You might be talking to yourself here.
Newss over at Talking Points indicates that the TPN may fold its tent. Big sponsor and original teabagger astroturf org backed out of Golden Sponsor status to “withdrawn.” The fight appears to be over financial responsibility or lack thereof. Apparently the chosen baggers can’t trust each other not to steal. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/key_sponsor_pulls_out_of_tea_party_convention.php?ref=fpb
Back in April I remember standing in front of the White House in the rain with David Swanson, Bill Grieder, Jason Rosenbaum and about 4 people from Code Pink protesting the AIG bonuses. We were all very worried because Fox News was heavily promoting the tea parties, and we were losing the populist anti-bank argument to the right. And the only reason that happened was because the White House told the liberal groups to STFU and not criticize the banks, because Geither wanted Jamie Dimon to buy into his shitty PPIP program.
So the left stayed silent, and now the right “owns” the populist message against the banks. And every time there’s a headline saying “Geither told the Fed not to disclose AIG bailout details,” all that anger accrues to the Tea Parties.
As a result, they now have a higher approval rating than the Democrats or the Republicans. No matter what they started out as, they now attract the support of a lot of people who don’t care much about anything beyond the fact that they are righteously (and rightfully) pissed at the banks.
The institutional elements of the Tea Parties are indeed questionable, but the huge swath of the public that is now listening to their message is probably neither identified nor invested in that. So the question is, do you want to try and speak to this very large group of people about common ground that we have on the issue of the banks, or do you want to excoriate them as impure and not worthy of addressing?
I think the issue of the banks and the bailouts is going to be the biggest of the 2010 election, because that’s where populist anger is going. I question the wisdom of saying that a huge chunk of the public who could determine the 2010 outcome, many of whom AGREE with the arguments we ourselves are making about the banks, are best addressed by mockery and disrespect (which I myself have been guilty of doing in the past, for many of the same reason Cenk outlines).
What can I say, Selise was right.
In this case I think it’s best to be on the “right side” of the argument.
Why not align with those who have common interests ?
i cheated. i don’t watch cable tv, i didn’t know what the dem message was and i saw what was happening locally (in a place where i had done some grass roots organizing).
“So the left stayed silent, and now the right “owns” the populist message against the banks.”
Correction. They have an OPPORTUNITY to “own” the populist message, but I doubt that any GOP or RNCC sponsored rally will carry that message. The first “Tea Parties” were Ron Paul Revolution meetings with the primary message being to Audit the Fed and shine some light on the oversight-free Federal Reserve. That message has largely been drowned out by the vitriol and Glenn Beck-inspired aimless, knee-jerk resistance to anything Obama.
I hate to say “litmus test”, but at this point any conservative movement that does not seek to shed light on the collusion between Wall Street and the Federal Government can be dismissed. Any progressive/conservative consensus should start with transparency of the process as is cornerstone.
“Owning” the populist message against the banks should be the strength of THIS coalition…and anyone else who tries to claim that message should be raked over the coals until they pass the “openness and transparency” smell test.
Agreed on the Ron Paul origins.
I still think FDL should host a mock Presidential debate between Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.
Wow, that is a fantastic idea.
To what end?
To determine what, if any, common ground there is between the two.
Again, when I think ‘Tea party,’ I think Ron Paul.
When I think, ‘Progressive,’ I think Dennis Kucinich.
Both of their parties treat them largely like pariahs.
They actually agree on certain matters and I’d like to let them elucidate those, as well as draw distinctions.
It would be great if it could happen this year.
As strange as this might sound, the only problem with a debate between Paul an Kucinich might be that they AGREE on too many things.
I had to step away after typing that. Does anyone else agree? There would have to be an establishment type at the debate also to provide contrast in messages, right? Talk about triangulation biting you in the ass.
Just the opposite!
Keep the establishment voice out!
And, nothing against Nader (I blame Lieberman for 2000, not Ralph), but I prefer to have 2 people who have legislative records and have been presidential candidates.
Again, by having it in 2010 you reduce some of the perception that they’re trying to usurp the 2012 process. It’s a ‘mock’ debate, in that they are debating their philosophy rather than their personality. They seem evenly match for that type of event.
Er – UFOs and the separation of church and state.
If it attracts enough attention, maybe it could help in organizing around issues with which all parties agree. I have a feeling there are a few, the bankers being foremost in my mind. I’m not sure the teapartiers really understand how much money we’re talking about here. When you get into the $Trillions, eyes glaze over. Clarification is needed.
I like that idea.
Thank you Jane. I appreciate your post. As an avid Tea Party member I can assure you that I have not been recruited by any establishment. I hated what Bush did and I hate what OBama is doing. I always felt government was corrupt but just being one person I felt the only thing I could do was vote. When I saw people taking to the streets to protest I joined them with my homemade sign. I pay for my own transportation. I do not have a blow horn or drum that someone else bought for me. I do not wear a matching t-shirt that someone else provided. I do not scream and insult those that do not agree with me. Despite all the mockery and sexual slurs leveled at us I continue to march and protest. I dont know that I am making a difference but it feels better than staying at home and throwing things at my TV. I oppose health care reform for different reasons than you. I feel that politicians are corrupt to the core and after they skim 2/3 of the tax money, they spend the pittance that is left on health care and no one benefits but the crooks. My husband and I have college degrees, have worked hard and have a business that employs over a hundred people. We provide health insurance. The employees seem to be happy as evidenced by a very low turn over. But–and a very big but–the government makes it increasingly difficult for a small business to survive. We worry that the new regulations will drive us out of business. I believe our income would classify us as upper middle class and I believe that middle class and upper middle class are the ones who pay the majority of the taxes (10% pay 50% of the taxes). The immensely rich like Geitner, Dodds, Rangel, and the K Street crowd certainly do not pay their fair share. If we pulled the financial stunts they do we would loose everything and be in jail. It makes my blood pressure spike to pay so much of our income to the crooks in Washington and to see them parading around like Kings and Queens with our hard earned money. Then they start the class warfare trying to make us look like the heartless ones. I would love to see everyone have good health insurance, a home, sufficient food and a tremendous education. If we are hoping that a corrupt to the core government will do that for us we are deluding ourselves.
I am as opposed as you are to the collusion of the government and the big banks. I hope an new era of respect and working together to stop government corruption will begin regardless of our differing political views.
BTW as I attend protests and rallies it appears that the numbers are growing as is the diversity of the protestors.
amen to that!
You make sense, and I welcome your viewpoint. I think what might differentiate you from some other tea partiers (I am thinking of Tea Party folks that I know personally) is that you actually state that you have problems with Bush. The Tea Partiers that I know still speak glowingly of all things Bush/Cheney whilst going extremist nuts over Obama (I’m talking the Obama as Hitler on steriods stuff).
I think that’s what has caused me to feel negatively about at least some part of the Tea Party movement. Some elements were quite alright to cheer on the sidelines whilst Bush/Cheney spent spent spent like drunken sailors and ran our country into the ground financially. Then when BHO is elected, suddenly everything is horrid because of the Democrats.
That kind of black/white thinking that is often evidenced on the right (and yes, it is also evidenced on the left) is what is disturbing and hard to accept. And watching people like Rudi Guiliani & the Cheneys abjectly lie about terrorism under Bush v. the undiebomber incident makes me gnash my teeth. And no: I don’t blame you or other tea partiers for that, but I also don’t see enough folks on the right protesting about these kinds of lies.
Suffice it to say, I am now in agreement with you about the crooks in Wash DC stealing our money from both sides of the aisle. I think most progressives voted for Obama because we hoped, perhaps foolishly, that some change would occur. Look, I’m old enough not to have stars in my eyes, but one would like to think that we could expect some morality from our governing overlords. But this is the last time I’ll go to the polls with that meagre expectation.
Had health care reform really been handled correctly, you & your company & your employees would have benefited. The reason why it didn’t work out as it should have lies with both political parties. The problem I had with what I saw of the Tea Party protestors is that the focus appeared to be on screaming about socialism and the ills thereof. That framing is quite incorrect. The problem is, as you state, about all of us being ripped off by our politicians and their corporate overlords. My suggestion to Tea Partiers is to examine how you frame your protests (humbly offered).
I think there is an opening in progressive minds to working together to achieve common goals. Let’s hope we can do that. Otherwise, as I stated earlier, we’re all gonna get screwed a lot worse. But it takes people have some openess of mind. Otherwise: forget it.
“The problem I had with what I saw of the Tea Party protestors is that the focus appeared to be on screaming about socialism and the ills thereof. That framing is quite incorrect. The problem is, as you state, about all of us being ripped off by our politicians and their corporate overlords. My suggestion to Tea Partiers is to examine how you frame your protests (humbly offered).”+++++ That was only the liberal MSMs side of it that they wanted projected. Teapartiers are not corporate funded at all as the left suspects, when actually the opposite is true. The opposition groups that show up in large buses, all with matching T shirts and professionally made signs, screaming in old ladies ears with bullhorns, ripping signs out of older peoples hands, and even pushing a 70 year old man to the ground, were funded by liberal corporate agenda pushers such as ACORN, SEIU and other unions.
I am really glad to see the moderate right and moderate left starting to pull together though. There are a lot of problems going on that all of us can agree on and work together to get it fixed. Had both parties actually listened to each other HC reform could have been passed when Repub said they agreed with 80% of the first house bill but Pelosi refused to allow them in any discussions.
Can you explain to me the ‘liberal corporate agenda’ of the SEIU please? The biggest obstacle to this effort is low information voters on both sides spewing the propaganda they’re fed by the DNC and RNC. As you say, there some areas on which the liberal left and moderate right agree, healthcare is not one of these from my pov.
I know people love to call hemp/marijuana a “single issue” but I can’t think of a single person its prohibiton doesn’t adversely affect…
other than the banks who launder the money.
Obama must be forced to end Prohibitionomics™.
It is the THE root of the what’s wrong with America.
Teddy Partridge is proceeding with another day of: Liveblogging Prop 8 Trial: Day Three, Wedndesday Afternoon (Ten)
The right wing noise machine has been slamming us liberal democrats for so long , it’s not going to be easy getting the tea partiers to see we’re actually fighting for some of the same things.
Agreed. I despair of the ilk of Rush, Glenn, Hannity, Palin, O’Reilly, et al, because all they do is attack & fear monger & degenerate into stupidity & name calling. They have been very clever in setting up a “Survivor” mentality where it’s “winner take all” with any means justifying the end result.
I know many who listen to/watch a steady (almost 24/7) “diet” of rightwing radio & tv with no letup and no access to other points of view. They are mostly all totally angry most of the time (but unable to really articulate WHY they are so angry) and totally enraged with the left (again, unable to articulate real reasons for why beyond the standard BHO is Hitler stuff).
I have real concerns for the physical and mental health because it’s not good to be enraged all the time (and mostly for no reason). It used to be that when the opposition President was elected, citizens mostly gave the POTUS their support because we are allegedly the UNITED States. Sadly, on the right those outdated, but somewhat more nobel notions, have gone by the wayside.
Most on the right simply do not recognize how deleterious & counterproductive rightwing media is, and how it has totally dumbed down the national conversation.
I had a customer this past summer ,who had Faux news playing on TVs in every room in the house.
I came out of there feeling like I needed a shower !
Oh boy, here we go. Cenk, if you post this on Kos, alert me ahead of time so I can have the popcorn ready.
Tea Party Patriot here. 22 yr Dem also BTW. Tree hugger, member of NRDC, WWF as well. but I was at the Tax Day Tea Party with my Congress Stop Spending sign. I knew the stinulus was padded and misdirected, not enough infrastructure. The housing market ahs not been either, allowed to correct, or addressed in a meaningful effective way. the banks are skating off recovered and Main St is frakked. Obama blocked pharma reimportation and now the employer mandate is gone.
we cannot afford to have Congress keep throwing money at the wall hoping something sticks, it will leave us with an increased tax burden on the middle class to pay for it all which will kill the incipient recovery.
I met many Dems at the Tea Party and mostly Indies. We want DC to listen to us, HRC did NOT have to be done NOW, Housing DID have to be fixed NOW and they failed to do that. Now we have no money and housing is still a mess and the country will not go for another trillion in ‘stimulus’ after the wasted effort of round one. Good Will has been pixxed away by this administration IMO.
Those are the issues on which I agree with my fellow Tea Party Patriots.
I’m willing to give it try, but would appreciate it if the Tea Partiers stopped carrying offensive signs and shouting at the left.
But: willing to give it go. Good for you. Vote with your feet.
wow, that’s really interesting jedimom. thanks for your comment. i agree with almost everything you wrote (not this bit though: “it will leave us with an increased tax burden”).
if you don’t mind, may i ask what general part of the country are you from? i’ve been wondering about regional differences regarding who attends the tea parties.
What phrase would you find more appealing?
Reduced infra structure spending due to less money to being available for anything besides debt.
Less money available for the rest of the country as the too-big-to-bail continue to feed at the Treasury and Fed troughs via continued behind scenes bailouts.
Less money to spend on services requiring cutbacks and layoffs as we spiral the economy downward.
Government largess increasing the income gap between the rich and everyone else.
We will owe more but pay the same each year because you can’t get blood out of turnip.
Not being harsh here, but there is a subtlety that I’m missing.
well, it depends on whether galbraith, mosler, wray, mitchell, etc are right or not. i’m persuaded that they are: that in our monetary system, fed spending is not funded by either taxes or debt.
here are a couple of links:
The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy
by Warren Mosler
PROTECTING THE BUDGET FROM INTERGENERATIONAL WARRIORS
By James K. Galbraith, Warren Mosler and L. Randall Wray*
i strongly recommend the first link, which besides being mind blowing economics, is also an extremely entertaining read (side stories include people like al gore and larry summers). the second one is imo, more of a hard slog, but i provide it if you want more info (and the three authors are, as far as i can tell, some of the most important people on this topic)
Isn’t Mosler the guy you turned me on to a couple months ago?
probably. i’ve been talking mosler up for a while now. mostly because he’s very good at explaining things so regular people like me can understand. after reading my rave reviews, letsgetitdone read mosler’s 7 deadly frauds and was so impressed he even wrote some diaries on it.
didn’t even know he was going to run for president until months later (i first heard of mosler when i heard him speak, via podcast, with galbraith, wray and parenteau at last april’s minsky conference at the levy institute – session 6).
anyway, i’m just finishing wray’s book, Understanding Modern Money: The Key to Full Employment and Price Stability, and am going to beg (and i do mean beg) bev to have it for a book salon (i’m also going to request that galbraith be asked to host). if they are right, and i’m persuaded they are, it is probably one of the most important books i’ve ever read because it breaks free from the deficit hawks / deficit doves divide (it’s taking me a while to finish because i’m doing a bunch of supplementary reading, but it’s very well written for the non economist and not a hard slog although detailed and the concepts are very different from my previous assumptions so the paradigm change is sometimes challenging.)
I’ve read a bit from Galbraith and a few others and i’m not quite so persuaded on the issue.
The theoretical advantage of fiat currency is less than the reality when other players constrain the system. In a system that balances tax revenues against expenditures, as is done in nearly every country in the world, the source used to balance debt are the various banking and financial entities. When these entities loan money to the government they are paid via future tax revenues, money taxpayers owe. In the abstract sense any government can ignore that debt and go on a printing spree. In reality other governments and financial institutions will step in whenever possible. Even it were completely true in the abstract sense the reality is that the trillions the government have been borrowed, often from the same entities that created the current problems. The interest on this money is going to be many billions for the current fiscal year. If we inflate the amount of cash, via printing, that reduces the working value of the money that the financial institutions control. Since they don’t actually want to see that value drop they will intervene to protect those profits. Not being an economist, my take is that a lot of fiat theorists are trying to not to pay attention to the many external players that have a vested interest in not losing money on their investments in government debt, the money taxpayers owe.
but the constraints are mostly political — not economic. debt issuance is to control short term interest rates (other stuff going on now with QE that i’m still trying to wrap my head around), not to provide funding. taxes create demand for $$, but do not fund fed spending. (there is also the issue of dollar as the world’s reserve currency which seriously complicates matters). deficits do not have to be inflationary (although excessive ones can be).
political constraints can change if we are educated as to the reality of the monetary system we have instead of believing the lies we are told. that is what i hope for.
anyway, if we bev agrees and can arrange a book salon for us, we could argue it all out with the experts. that, i think, would be FUN!
Yep, but since I see our current form of government as seriously compromised to the will of the corporate powers their rules define the system. Thus debt and how it is paid off is defined not by what we want to be true but what the system defines. Since, even in a more perfect world, say the early 70s debt and it’s obligations were defined in the same fashion there seems to be little that would suggest that a sea change is in the works. That being the case all debt, including that brought on by QE, will be paid in the historically defined standard fashion which means taxpayers will fulfill the obligations. Since politics is defined by money the people with money get to change the rules when it suits them.
If you think QE is tricky to fathom, and it is, consider the new rules by the Fed that essentially open up the Primary Dealer rules so that in effect even more foreign banks can trade their “assets” for dollars. I have yet to figure out what that is all about or why it might be a good idea.
historically defined fashion? we’re not on a gold standard.
private sector debt is another matter. that has me worried. (as does, less immediately, the dollar losing reserve status).
do you by any chance read billy blog? here’s the first post in a series on deficit spending:
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=332
i love the idea.
at the present time the USA has a govt by the banks for the banks
we need to take our Govt Back.
the left and the right know that HCR is a complete scam.
PS The banks are doing what they always have and always will do, it is the WH that is being led by the nose, witness the HCR catastrophe, if the WH won’t fight for principal reductions, and Geithner testified they deliberately set out to avoid them, WTH should I direct my anger at banks? The WH is in the leadership role here. WTH is Barney Frank rolling over on the House Regulatory Reform bill? why are so many financial institutions exempt from it? GE?? GMAC? wha??
I am not wasting my fire on people who once the camera pool left were in a ‘love fest’ with Obama to quote Charlie Gasparino
Credit Suisse helped fund obama to avoid meaningful housing mods…
Cenk-
and just who will replace Timmeh who I agree needs to go?
Summers? HA! taxpayer from pan to fire.
Sheila Bair? Okay then Im on board!
thank you onitgoes
sadly I see lARouchies at all the tea parties, but they call themslves Dems still I think
Good point – I’m going to make a better effort to embrace their racism, homophobia and a hatred of the social saftey net. I mean, when I see that ocean of white faces, I undertsand it’s not THEM, it’s the peopel of color not giving them their chance – and it’s not racism that drives them – after all, Bush (I and II) and Reagan BOTH kept the federal budget teeny, tiny and the teabbaggers came fater THEM as well – so it MUST be our corporate overlords, melting our brains with Snuggies(tm) and that spring fresh odor from my detergent…
Dead bodies will be required to bring about any fundamental changes, on both sides, as always. Anyone who has any knowledge of history already knows this.
But mental masturbation is fun, isn’t it?
[Mod Note: let's not head down that path please]
MODERATOR–That’s what history shows us. Stating the obvious truth is not the same as going down some prohibited “path.”
The Tea baggers are Brownshirts material we should steer clear of them and their rage. They think Obama is a Communist for some reason. These folks are angry and confused cannon fodder for the militias and the KKK. Personally, I want nada to do with them.
I don’t see either getting any face time with/from their respective “supporters.” There are supporters of both on each side but I don’t see them as a majority of either.
If we’re looking for common ground between the two I don’t think I’d call it a debate.
A research project by an interested individual could compile a selection of writings/speeches which highlight areas in which the two basically agree and go from there.
But that would be based on past realities, not current reality, which is radically different.
But anyway, just a thought.
Why call it a debate? In order to draw eyeballs (everyone loves what they think will be a fight!)
I don’t think their core values have changed. Both are saying today what they’ve said for years. Any conversation between the two should have some preset agenda items, if for no other reason than to keep the thing focused. That would take some prior leg work. Not scripted but somewhat focused.
I’d rather attract attention without images of winning/losing.
Core values? Probably not.
Current context? Hellz, ya!
So much has changed since 2008!
Like I said, you advertise it as a ‘debate’ to draw eyeballs.
But obviously there has to be guidelines, etc.
I don’t think Paul plans to run again in 2012.
I certainly wouldn’t want to dissuade Dennis.
In fact, my hope is that it might encourage him to primary Obrahma.
Back to the cesspool.
Namaste
damn. sorry i took so long to reply to your previous Q. if you don’t see my comment will give you a link on some future thread where i “see” you.
peace. gotta go myself.
Well, Neoptolemos, I think you’ll find lots of agreement over at Daily Kos.
I’d thought the strategy was populists from both sides vs. corporatists from both sides, but you want to sit that fight out because you’re afraid the left-populist message of truth can not defeat the left-corporatist lies among the rank-and-file. There’s a large and growing non-partisan opposition to the corporatists that you despise but you won’t join because you’re afraid of “the spin”. Either you have no confidence in your message, or no faith in the Left base’s ability to distinguish truth from lies.
You should hope that the populist movement fails, because if we succeed while Progressives stand by twiddling their thumbs they will properly be seen as useless and irrelevant, and as sellouts of a different stripe.
Progressives are supposed to be anti-corporatist pro-populist, aren’t they? And now that fight is finally here and you won’t fire at the enemy because (gasp!) they might shoot back. Step away and try to blend into the woodwork if you wish, but failing to act on your principles during this unique moment of opportunity will not win you any supporters.
And the Dem corporatists will blame you anyway. If you do not actively support them just because of the “D” then then defeats will be spun against you to the Dem base. If the Dem leadership does not push your agenda when you do support them, how much worse will it be for you if you don’t?
The citizenry uniting against government abuse should be a Progressive dream come true. If you slink away now you’ll have a bigger problem than losing credibility with the Dem base: you’ll lose credibility with everyone.
As I see it you have three options:
1) Support the DINO sellouts to maintain your popularity with the Dem base and the Dem leadership, thereby pissing off anti-corporatists everywhere with your hypocrisy.
2) Oppose the DINO sellouts and the right-corporatists to prove the courage of your convictions and gain popularity with anti-corporatists everywhere, as well as scaring the hell out of Washington by showing them a non-partisan grass roots movement where Left and Right work together for the common good.
3) Keep your head down and your ass covered, pissing off the Dem base, the Dem leadership, the unafraid Progressives, and the right-anti-corporatists.
There’s a populist uprising going on: are the Progressives in or out?
Except – of course, for all that racist signifying! Who do you think you’re fooling – yourself? The Teabaggers movement has nothing in common with progressives – even if we all think the banks suck – we also all agree that the sky is blue, but that doesn’t mean anything either. When I see Teabaggers calling for a strong social safety net – instead of calling common sense civility socialism, then maybe you’ll have a pint.
I’ll be in when I see a populist uprising against a White republican president – until then, I think your so-called populist uprising – which seems to bypass people of color and folks under the age of 55, is a mere excuse for the klanners to get together and party…
You mean like hanging George Bush in effigy and calling for him to be prosecuted as a war criminal?
You are outside the focus, which is integrity, transparency, and anti-corporatism (I.T.A.). Do you support ITA? I do, but if you don’t want my help in fighting for honest government because I don’t think illegal aliens should have drivers licenses, then fine. You might as well refuse to cooperate with your neighbor in getting the city to put a stop sign on your street because his dog pisses on your lawn.
Posting to left-leaning blogs is not the way to invite them.
Considering your recent dust up with Alex Jones, perhaps going on his show and conducting some constructive diplomacy is the thing to do.
Go into the belly of the beast.
Well, it appears that we all have an issue with the big banks.
Could we start to work together by getting behind the effort to have people pay off and refinance notes and credit cards with large bank and move the money/debt into credit unions or other local banks?
I’ve moved one new car and one $20,000 debt and cancelled two credit cards amounting to $50,000 in favor of local financing. I actually got a better deal by changing banks from “BIG!” to local. And, yes, Jane, I sent you a contribution for serving up the idea.
Is this a possibility?
Would I be willing to participate in a Big Bank Boycott? Only if everyone involved shares my views on School Vouchers, obviously.
;^)
We progressives need to stand with the baggers against the banks. If FDR could work with Stalin we can work with them. The fundamental issue of who’s in control – corporations or average citizens – should unite us for the purpose of stopping/reforming all the corruption that business is continuing to assert over our country and our lives.
PEOPLE OR CORPORATIONS–WHICH SIDE DO YOU PREFER?
A simple slogan, simple enough to be understood by lefties as well as righties, and having the virtue as well of capturing the essential truth of the present situation. IMHO
Cenk, I have watched many times where you and your co-host have put down, criticized and referred to these people as teabaggers. Maybe if you would have listened more closely to what they were saying instead of the biased liberal “news” stations, you would have been aware long ago of the fact that they were against the stimulus bill and all the bailouts to the banks and failing car makers. Now at this point and time with Obamas approval rating about to go <40% you want to say, “hey lets join forces but you should be against the bank bailouts”. In my opinion you are just now awakening to what has been going on and now you are trying to play catch up to people whom you called a bunch of whackjobs. Who’s the idiot?
This is great and I have been waiting for this to happen. I am from the tea Bagger side of things in Nashville TN. But, I check onto this blog 3-4 times a week. Lots I do not agree on, some I do. But, I like reading the ideas and thoughts and differences, and come from the Libertarian side of things.
Believe me, there is not a TEA party monolithic creed. If one emerges most people will quit IMHO.
If there is a shadow group of corporate funding, I have never heard about it. Will some try ? Probably, but I doubt it would work, and won’t for most people.
Does the Right suspect the same of the left ? Yes they do.
There are a bunch of issues where there is not common ground. So what, that’s not the point of the article.
The point is the “Tea Party” wants an end to corporate dominance and political corruption because of money. I think a lot of people on FIreDogLake do also. We are all slowly being destroyed because of it.
Believe me, we are not the racist dumb asses everyone thinks we are. And we are tired of being used and lied to by both parties. That is the “Tea Party” movement.
Does everyone not understand the only way the bankers and political class win, is by keeping us apart and hating each other ?
“There are a bunch of issues where there is not common ground. So what, that’s not the point of the article.
The point is the “Tea Party” wants an end to corporate dominance and political corruption because of money. I think a lot of people on FIreDogLake do also. We are all slowly being destroyed because of it.”
Thank you for this. It needs to be said over and over.
I see alot of comments on here about how you should team up with the tea partiers, (what happened to your favorite term teabaggers?) to fight the banks and some are saying it is to move credit card debt to lower interest rates. I do not think you will get much help from conservatives on that since we are “umm conservative” and do not put near as much debt into unsecured accounts as the liberals (oops sorry progressives, whatever) do.
Mouthy little cheapshots are not helpful, please leave them at the door. If anyone really wants to hurt the banks on their unsecured debt, simply default on it. Anything else is just conversation.
I’ve fantasized about this angle. For example, carrying a sign at a Tea Party rally reading ‘Obama: Tool of Wall Street’, or asking a tea partyer who owns the Democratic party; who gives more, the unions or the banks, college professors or health insurers? But I don’t think tea partyers will want to hear this narrative. David Corn points out that anti Wall Street isn’t that pronounced in even a much broader part of the political spectrum, and i don’t think tea party types want to give up their beliefs that it’s all the fault of the intellectuals and the lesbians. Nonetheless I’m sympathetic.
“The Young Turks followed the principle of developing an intellectual elite to govern the Empire, never envisioning participation of the masses in policy-making or administration.” From Wikipedia –
Don’t know anything about the Young Turk website, but my limited research has not been good. It’s a great idea… the left and right joining hands on this very worthy project, and as a member of the “masses” I agree I don’t want my life controlled by the banksters. Neither do I want to be governed by a squad of Young Turks. Which is safer… the devil you know or the devil you don’t know?
Great post Cenk! I’ve featured you on my blog at TPM.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/w/a/watt_childress/2010/01/young-turks-reach-out-to-the-t.php?ref=reccafe
The SEIU was quite useful to the Democratic Party in 2004 in screwing the Ralph Nader campaign out of ballot access in the state of Oregon through a series of “dirty tricks” (e.g. maliciously spoiling Nader signature lists)…
I did not know that, thank you. What was unclear to me was what connection the SEIU had to Goldman Sachs, Wellpoint, and Cap and Trade. I guess that is one.