What is the point of this? That this Marxist-Elitist, Frank Rich wants to criticize those who advocate less government, less taxes, and less regulation, while at the same time insinuating that the majority of Americans, (Those that support conservative, American principals and tenets, the very tenets that made this Nation Great) are ignorant, and clueless?
It is a part of the Anti-American, Socialist-Elitist agenda to write revisionist history about the legacy of Ronald Reagan, both Krugman and Rich are famous for this. That somehow Reagan increased taxes on the American populace, which again, is an outright lie. Typical elitist humor to mock those who are well educated, abreast of world affairs and current events, but who hold an American viewpoint and shun an economic and political theorem that has failed throughout history, but one that Krugman, Rich, Dowd, Maddow, Olbermann, Matthews, and a very small but vocal minority who not as well read, not as educated, and not nearly as intelligent as they think they are. I've said this before, but it bears repeating, especially in a dumb ass article like this from Rich, which is non-sensical and trite, to say the least. ALL of the "Progressives", and those who are far left of center like Rich, Krugman, that asshole from the Daily Kos, George Soros, Olbermann, and the very small vocal minority in this Nation who are far left, extremist liberals, fall into one of two categories; I surmise that the majority of them fall into the first category: (A) e.g.; Most of them are ill informed and not well read. They don't keep up with current events, other than to watch liberal, biased mainstream media, or read and follow far left slanted web sites, never taking the time to comprehend why or how any specific situation came to be, or the root cause, genesis or motivation of any particular issue(s). They tend to believe that they are the only ones that are compassionate, failing to realize that it is statistically proven in fact, that those who are conservative contribute far more money & resources to charitable causes. Further, (and just as important!) these same individuals don't have a lot of knowledge of our history; they fail to understand or comprehend the principals and tenets that made the United States the greatest Nation-State in the World, bar none. In general, these people reject the notion that our founding fathers were influenced by Christian principals and tenets, but they do understand enough history that they would very much like to revise this one important aspect. Thus their lack of understanding and reasoning; (*See* Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews, Keith Olbermann, Frank Rich, Rachael Maddow, et. al.); or, (B) They are literally Anti-Americans, and they want to see the United States become equal to or consistent with a third world or fourth world Nation-State. (*See* George Soros, Paul Krugman, Michael Moore, etc.) There is literally no other option. On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 9:14 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > *About Those Tea Party Candidates > *Posted by J.H. Huebert <[email protected]> on October 30, 2010 > 07:04 PM > > Frank Rich is no fan of the tea party (or of liberty), but he > understands<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/opinion/31rich.html?_r=1>better > than the tea partiers do that their candidates are going to sell out > any principles they have as soon as they get to Washington. > > Will the tea partiers learn their lesson about supporting Republican > politicians? History strongly suggests they won’t. Then again, historically > there was no one like Ron Paul on the scene to offer a genuine alternative. > > The whole Rich article is worth reading, but here’s a sample: > > What the Tea Party ostensibly wants most less government spending and > smaller federal deficits is not remotely happening on the country club > G.O.P.’s watch. The elites have no serious plans to cut anything except > taxes and regulation of their favored industries. The party’s principal 2010 > campaign document, its “Pledge to America,” doesn’t vow to cut even earmarks > which barely amount to a rounding error in the federal budget anyway. > Boehner has also proposed a return to pre-crash 2008 levels in “nonsecurity” > discretionary spending another mere bagatelle ($105 billion) next to the > current $1.3 trillion deficit. And that won’t be happening either, once the > actual cuts in departments like Education, Transportation and Interior are > specified to their constituencies. > Perhaps the campaign’s most telling exchange took place on Fox News two > weeks ago, when the Tea Party-embracing Senate candidate in California, > Carly Fiorina, was asked seven times by Chris Wallace to name “one single > entitlement expenditure you’re willing to cut” in order “to extend all the > Bush tax cuts, which would add 4 trillion to the deficit.” She never did. At > least Angle and Paul have been honest about what they’d slash if in power > respectively Social Security and defense, where the big government spending > actually resides. > That’s not happening either…. > > xxx > > Op-Ed Columnist > *The Grand Old Plot Against the Tea Party > *By FRANK RICH > Published: October 30, 2010 > > ONE dirty little secret of the 2010 election is that it won’t be a > political tragedy for Democrats if a Tea Party icon like Sharron Angle or > Joe Miller ends up in the United States Senate. Angle, now synonymous with > racist > ads <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44246.html> sliming > Hispanics, and Miller, already on record threatening a government > shutdown<http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/08/joe-miller-shutdown/>, > are fired up and ready to go as symbols of G.O.P. extremism for 2012 and > beyond. > > > What’s not so secret is that some Republicans will be just as happy if some > of these characters lose, and for the same reason. > > But whatever Tuesday’s results, this much is certain: The Tea Party’s hopes > for actually affecting change in Washington will start being dashed the > morning after. The ordinary Americans in this movement lack the numbers and > financial clout to muscle their way into the back rooms of Republican power > no matter how well their candidates perform. > > Trent Lott, the former Senate leader and current top-dog lobbyist, gave > away the game in July. “We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples,” he > said<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/17/AR2010071702375.html>, > referring to the South Carolina senator who is the Tea Party’s Capitol Hill > patron saint. “As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.” It’s the > players who wrote the checks for the G.O.P. surge, not those earnest folk in > tri-corner hats, who plan to run the table in the next corporate takeover of > Washington. Though Tom DeLay may now be on > trial<http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/jury-selected-for-tom-delays-money-laundering-trial-999253.html>for > corruption in Texas, the spirit of his K Street lives on in a > Lott client > list<http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?lname=Lott,+Trent&id=Y00000386730&year=2010>that > includes Northrop Grumman and Goldman Sachs. > > Karl Rove outed the Republican elites’ contempt for Tea Partiers in the > campaign’s final stretch. Much as Barack Obama thought he was safe > soliloquizing about angry white Middle Americans clinging to “guns or > religion” at a San Francisco fund-raiser in > 2008<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/us/politics/13campaign.html>, > so Rove now parades his disdain for the same constituency when speaking to > the European press. This month he told Der > Spiegel<http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,723880,00.html>that > Tea Partiers are “not sophisticated,” and then scoffed, “It’s not like > these people have read the economist Friedrich August von Hayek.” Given that > Glenn Beck has made a cause of putting Hayek’s dense 1944 antigovernment > treatise “The Road to Serfdom” on the best-seller > list<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/books/review/Schuessler-t.html>and Tea > Partiers widely claim to have read it, Rove could hardly have been > more condescending to “these people.” Last week, for added insult, he mocked > Sarah Palin’s imminent Discovery Channel reality show to London’s Daily > Telegraph<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/us-politics/8090279/Karl-Rove-questions-Sarah-Palins-suitability-for-president.html>. > > > This animus has not gone unnoticed among those supposedly less > sophisticated conservatives back home. Mike Huckabee, still steamed about > Rove’s previous put-down of Christine O’Donnell, publicly > lamented<http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1010/Huckabee_blasts_Rove_elitist_GOP_Establishment_.html>the > Republican establishment’s “elitism” and “country club attitude.” This > country club elite, he said, is happy for Tea Partiers to put up signs, work > the phones and make “those pesky little trips” door-to-door that it finds a > frightful inconvenience. But the members won’t let the hoi polloi dine with > them in the club’s “main dining room” any more than David H. Koch, the > billionaire sugar daddy of the Republican right, will invite O’Donnell into > his box at the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln > Center<http://www.lincolncenter.org/load_screen.asp?screen=visitorinfo_hallinfo_nyst>to > take in “The Nutcracker.” > > The main dining room remains reserved for Koch’s fellow oil barons, Lott’s > clients, the corporate contributors (known and anonymous) to groups like > Rove’s American Crossroads, and, of course, the large coterie of special > interests underwriting John > Boehner<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/us/politics/12boehner.html>, > the presumptive next speaker of the House. Boehner is the largest House > recipient of Wall Street money this year much of it from financial > institutions bailed out by > TARP<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/24/AR2010102401561.html>. > > > His Senate counterpart, Mitch McConnell, will be certain to stop any Tea > Party hillbillies from disrupting his chapter of the club (as he tried to > stop Rand Paul <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44162.html> in > his own state’s G.O.P. primary). McConnell’s pets in his chamber’s freshman > G.O.P. class will instead be old-school conservatives like Dan Coats (of > Indiana), Rob Portman (of Ohio) and, if he squeaks in, Pat Toomey (of > Pennsylvania). The first two are > former<http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?lname=Coats,%20Daniel%20R&id=Y00000099271&year=2009> > lobbyists <http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=70007>; > Toomey ran the corporate interest > group<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/22/club-for-growth-asks-for-_n_772466.html>, > the Club for Growth. They can be counted on to execute an efficient > distribution of corporate favors and pork after they make their latest swing > through Capitol Hill’s revolving door. > > What the Tea Party ostensibly wants most less government spending and > smaller federal deficits is not remotely happening on the country club > G.O.P.’s watch. The elites have no serious plans to cut anything except > taxes and regulation of their favored industries. The party’s principal 2010 > campaign document, its “Pledge to America,” doesn’t vow to cut even > earmarks <http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/23/gop-pledge-earmarks/> > which barely amount to a rounding error in the federal budget anyway. > Boehner has also proposed a return to pre-crash 2008 levels in “nonsecurity” > discretionary spending another mere bagatelle ($105 > billion<http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/pm171>) > next to the current $1.3 trillion > deficit<http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/useconomyfinancebudgetdeficitpolitics>. > And that won’t be happening either, once the actual cuts in departments like > Education, Transportation and Interior are specified to their > constituencies. > > Perhaps the campaign’s most telling exchange took place on Fox News two > weeks ago, when the Tea Party-embracing Senate candidate in California, > Carly Fiorina, was asked seven times by Chris Wallace to name “one single > entitlement expenditure you’re willing to cut” in order “to extend all the > Bush tax cuts, which would add 4 trillion to the deficit.” She never > did<http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/17/fiorina-spending-flummoxed/>. > At least Angle and Paul have been honest about what they’d slash if in power > respectively Social Security and defense, where the big government > spending actually resides. > > That’s not happening either. McConnell has explained his only real priority > for the new Congress with admirable candor. “The single most important thing > we want to achieve,” he > said<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44311.html>, > “is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” Any assault on Social > Security would defeat that goal, and a serious shake-up of the Pentagon > budget would alienate the neoconservative ideologues and military > contractors who are far more important to the G.O.P. establishment than the > “don’t tread on me” crowd. > > For sure, the Republican elites found the Tea Party invaluable on the way > to this Election Day. And not merely, as Huckabee has it, because they > wanted its foot soldiers. What made the Tea Party most useful was that its > loud populist message gave the G.O.P. just the cover it needed both to > camouflage its corporate patrons and to rebrand itself as a party > miraculously antithetical to the despised G.O.P. that gave us George W. Bush > and record deficits only yesterday. > > Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and Wall Street Journal have been arduous in > promoting and inflating Tea Party events and celebrities to this > propagandistic end. The more the Tea Party looks as if it’s calling the > shots in the G.O.P., the easier it is to distract attention from those who > are actually calling them namely, those who’ve cashed in and cashed out as > ordinary Americans lost their jobs, homes and 401(k)’s. Typical of this > smokescreen is a new book titled “Mad as Hell,” published this fall by a > Murdoch imprint. In it, the pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Douglas Schoen > make the case, as they recently put it in > Politico<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44140.html>, > that the Tea Party is “the most powerful and potent force in America.” > > They are expert at producing poll numbers to bear that out. By counting > those with friends and family in the movement, Rasmussen has > calculated<http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/most_recent_videos/2010_10/scott_s_report_support_for_tea_party_rises>that > 29 percent of Americans are “tied to” the Tea Party. (If you factor in > six degrees of Kevin Bacon, the number would surely double.) But cooler > empirical data reveal the truth known by the G.O.P. establishment: An > August CNN > poll<http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/08/13/rel11d.pdf>found that 2 > percent of Americans consider themselves active members of the > Tea Party. > > That result was confirmed last weekend by The Washington > Post<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/23/AR2010102304000.html>, > which published the fruits of its months-long effort to contact every Tea > Party group in the country. To this end, it enlisted the help of Tea Party > Patriots, the only Tea Party umbrella group that actually can claim to be a > spontaneous, bottom-up, grass roots organization rather than a front for the > same old fat cats of the Republican right, from the Koch brothers to Dick > Armey’s FreedomWorks. Tea Party Patriots has claimed anywhere from 2,300 to > nearly 3,000 local affiliates, but even with its assistance, The Post could > verify a total of only 647 Tea Party groups nationwide. Most had fewer than > 50 members. The median amount of money each group had raised in 2010 was > $800, nowhere near the entry fee for the country club. > > But those Americans, like all the others on the short end of the 2008 > crash, have reason to be mad as hell. And their numbers will surely grow > once the Republican establishment’s panacea of tax cuts proves as > ineffectual at creating jobs, saving homes and cutting deficits as the > half-measures of the Obama White House and the Democratic Congress. The > tempest, however, will not be contained within the tiny Tea Party but will > instead overrun the Republican Party itself, where Palin, with Murdoch and > Beck at her back, waits in the wings to “take back America” not just from > Obama but from the G.O.P. country club elites now mocking her. By then > after another two years of political gridlock and economic sclerosis the > equally disillusioned right and left may have a showdown that makes this > election year look as benign as Woodstock. > > > *A version of this op-ed appeared in print on October 31, 2010, on page > WK8 of the New York edition. > > *http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/opinion/31rich.html?_r=2 > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
