The Tea Kettle Movement

Thomas Friedman from the New York Times wrote an excellent opinion piece in today's paper about the alleged "Tea Kettle" movement. Knocking on the Tea Party, Friedman goes on to explain that while the movement may have the ability to affect votes, it does not have the ability to affect the American future. Why, pray tell? Because, and I quote:

The Tea Kettle movement can’t have a positive impact on the country because it has both misdiagnosed America’s main problem and hasn’t even offered a credible solution for the problem it has identified. How can you take a movement seriously that says it wants to cut government spending by billions of dollars but won’t identify the specific defense programs, Social Security, Medicare or other services it’s ready to cut — let alone explain how this will make us more competitive and grow the economy?

And how can you take seriously a movement that sat largely silent while the Bush administration launched two wars and a new entitlement, Medicare prescription drugs — while cutting taxes — but is now, suddenly, mad as hell about the deficit and won’t take it anymore from President Obama? Say what? Where were you folks for eight years?

The issues that upset the Tea Kettle movement — debt and bloated government — are actually symptoms of our real problem, not causes. They are symptoms of a country in a state of incremental decline and losing its competitive edge, because our politics has become just another form of sports entertainment, our Congress a forum for legalized bribery and our main lawmaking institutions divided by toxic partisanship to the point of paralysis

I found this to be a rather poignant observation, factual as well. We have heard the screams of "big government", "hands off my healthcare" and "cut taxes" but no actual plan, or way of coming about it. This signifies continual empty promises from a movement too busy being dramatic to formulate cohesive actions.

There is, however, a real Tea Party movement that may actually be of interest to the common-sense, forward thinking American. This ideology which permeates throughout moderate America is interested in long term results for the American future. A movement which recognizes over spending but realizes that we need investment for the future. Debt, as Friedman notes, is not necessarily the cause of our challenges; but simply the symptom of something worse.

I believe this misguided notion of "taking back America" (from what exactly is still TBD) is doomed from the beginning because they do not seek to actually fix the issues that plague us. Similarly, the Republican Party, in a tip-of-the-hat to their 1994 colleagues (and in some cases, themselves) gesture recently released the so-called "Pledge to America." A 21 page document similar to the "Contract for America" released during the '94 mid-term elections. As is par for the Republican course, the document outlines few actual plans for the future, but rather lofty goals to "cut spending and taxes." Jonathan Chait over at The New Republic summarizes the plan nicely when he wrote:

...the Republican program has consisted of a combination of specific, detailed plans to increase the deficit alongside vague assertions of intent to reduce it.

It's time America correct her myopic vision and begin planning for the remainder of the 21st century. Political bickering is the bane of this country's existence. I would challenge both parties and third party contenders to put on their big boy pants and actually come ready to play ball.

Political rhetoric at its best

I'm disappointed at the state of politics, I mean, who wouldn't be?

I tried to get some information from the GOP about their health care plan. They oppose the current package that is making its ways through the House and Senate committees. Understandably, the plan goes against many of the fibers that hold the GOP together. God forbid we actually do something for the people.

Fine.

Now, offer an alternative fools! I went to the GOP website trying to get some information on how they propose to solve the crisis. First of all the GOP website has been under constructions since May 17th!!!!!! WTF!?! May 17th? Two months and counting. You are one of the major political parties in the United States. UPDATE YOUR SITE.

After much hunting, I did come upon this portion of the GOP's health care issues site....their 2008 party platform.

This platform was published over a year ago. They've offered no alternative to the American people for a health care system, but they have no problem whining, complaining and dare I say...bitching? I assume some kind of lame response will be a tax-credit to those who offer health care to their employees. Nothing comprehensive and no funding for any sort of system which would solve the dilemma. Just more party rhetoric and tax-cuts.

I have my reservations about the current health care package currently underway. But, at least its something. Its quite expensive to provide a system of comprehensive care for all. But as I read a comment in a forum somewhere, "not doing something is more expensive than doing something." The US currently spends more money ($1 out of every $6 is health-care related) on health care yet has the worst system among industrialized countries.

In comparison to the GOP site, the Democrats at least have update news on the health care package under their 'current news', front page and under agenda "health care for all." A quick search of the website, however, failed to deliver a laid-out spiel of what we can expect for people with this health care reform bill on the party's website in laymans terms.

From Politics to Pretzels

I was talking to my Mom tonight and we had an interesting conversation on politics. Of course my Mother's ADD means that she only listened to about 35% of what I said but thats okay. I love her anyway. :)

The predicament that the United States has found itself in is not all that different from the end of the 1960's. An expensive war (read: "Military Engagement"), a faltering economy coupled with out of control oil prices and a disenfranchised public have all contributed to pessimistic feelings about the United States.

I join the ranks of disenfranchised citizens. I think this upcoming election is quite important and I refuse to let my vote go to someone on the basis of one issue or the core of a few issues. Let's remind ourselves that no matter who is elected, they are still politicians. Politicians never follow through with that they say. Even if they want to, they still have to ask Congress for the means to do so. Sadly, the majority of American's are not informed about the American political system so all of our potential ends up going to waste.

Without flat out supporting any candidate, I'm going to outline what I see as the major pros and cons of each candidate. It really doesn't matter who wins anyway, we can only go up from what we currently have.

I'll begin with the Republicans. John McCain is going to win the nomination but for the sake of argument I'll throw Mike Huckabee up there too.

McCain is a great man, great cut-through-the-crap Senator and War Hero. What can you say bad about a man who spent six years eating gruel in Vietnam. McCain has a reputation for saying what he means and then doing it, and I like that. I think his experience in Foreign Relations would help revive the American image if he learns to court our allies instead of distancing them like GWB. However, he has been a part of the Washington establishment for too long and look where that has gotten us. I see McCain serving as Secretary of Defense or State. I would gladly be in the Foreign Service with Secretary McCain at the helm.


Huckabee is a newbie to politics and could perhaps foster the change necessary. However, no guitar playing Baptist minister has any business serving as President. I think he would focus too much on the "moral issues" (whatever that is) that are facing America and not the actual issues at hand (ie. education, defense, Iraq, budget crisis, etc). He caters to a certain group of people that I don't play well with and so for that reason, I'm biased. I do say, however, props to him for loosing 110lbs. I like the idea of a Huckaburger (lean ground beef/turkey with organic vegetables on a whole wheat bun). I say Mike should be the Secretary of Agriculture, fix those school lunch programs! Or even the director of the National Fitness Initiative. Besides, he's from Arkansas.

The Dems

Barack Obama is not a Muslim, in fact he's a member of the Church of Christ (shudder). His father is from Kenya, not Saudi Arabia. I've heard it one time too many (about six times) that he's a muslim and would turn America into an Allah loving country. Get over yourself. Obama is new to the establishment and that brings both pro's and con's. I see in him though similar traits to former presidents Lincoln and Kennedy (both later assassinated, lets hope the Secret Service doesn't bungle this one up too). He's not been in office so long as to have his butt imprinted into the Senate Chambers, once again a good thing. If the United States is going to bring itself out of this hole we've found our self in then we need change. However, Barack will have to surround himself with advisers from both sides of the aisle to bring together this divided country. We'll need Republican economic advisers dueling it out with Democratic education advisers. His lack of experience doesn't necessary signify a weakness on his part but it does make me cringe when he talks about invading Pakistan to get Al-Qaeda.

Oh, Clinton. I'm not going to lie, I don't like her. She's a cow...always has been always will be. She grazes on other people because she is a true politician right down to it. People voting for Hillary often think that things will be happy and nice again just like the good ol day's of Bill. I'm sorry to tell you but this isn't 1996 again and its not coming back anytime soon. Although I feel her policies on health care and education are good ones for America, I think she's also just interested in selling her product (herself). I can't vote for someone who once served on the board of Wal-Mart. However, all things aside, she's probably pretty good with a calculator and could be perhaps balance a budget (if she doesn't tax the hell out of us first) and I have no doubt that she's ballsy enough to go after terrorists but let's not forget, she's also from Arkansas.