Palin's Republican Tea Party: the Return of Reaganomics and American Exceptionalism
 

Below, for your convenience, is the recent speech made by Sarah Palin at a GOP rally in California.

As diminished as your capacity is to withstand Palin (and regardless of your political stripes), I think it's worth watching. It seems to me a good example of populism at work.

It's also a good view of the role that Palin is playing in politics these days. She's working to rally people to vote against the Democrats. This isn't news, I know, but I think this speech is worth watching because it seems to capture the essence of the Tea Party/Republican drive to "reclaim America" and "restore the republic."

Of note is Palin's shameless invoking of Reagan as some kind of patron saint of freedom for the "little guy" and her shameless support for American exceptionalism.



What do you make of this?

It would seem to me that Palin is being groomed. She seems on the ball and knows how to play the crowd. I highly suspect that she will be a candidate in the 2012 election in some capacity. She can easily claim much credit for a solid GOP win in November, and this will only increase her popularity.

What are you predictions for 2010 and 2012?
What are your thoughts about the desire to return to "Reaganomics" in the wake of "Obamanomics" in a post-recession (i.e. economic recovery) America?
What are your thoughts on the support for American exceptionalism in 2010 and beyond?

2010 is going to be a very good election for the Republicans; mainly because the Democrats are generally spineless and don't act like winners. Americans like to vote for people who act like winners, and running away from your accomplishments is a sure way to avoid that. Amazing how fickle people can be: upset that Obama is doing pretty much exactly what he campaigned on - and less, even! - because people with carefully crafted messages of anger tell them they should be.

The divide between the rich and poor, which is already obscenely large, will continue to widen, and people will continue to misdirect the blame based on whatever the faces on TV tell them.

I'd love to predict that by 2012 people will have learned the lesson that voting for the angriest candidate, regardless of whether they are the best candidate, is no way to participate in Democracy, but I can't say I have much hope. It's just fascinating to me how much of American politics is a self-fulfilling prophecy. People complain about politicians and so they don't vote, thereby ensuring the politicians they don't like keep on winning. We haven't crossed 40% voter turnout in a midterm election since 1970!

I'm starting to wonder if there's any hope for American political culture - and that applies to both sides.

If she somehow wins the Presidency in 2012, I will leave the country. That's not a hollow threat, either.

In the interest of full disclosure, I didn't watch the videos above. I know her shtick and it's not likely to change until she loses the Republican primary in 2012. If she's able to create a more perminant media career for herself, I fully expect she will continue the aww shucks brand of anti-American, anti-progress, anti-intellectual hogwash we've seen since John McCain foolsihly elevated her to the national stage in 2008.

What are you predictions for 2010 and 2012?
The Republicans will take back a few seats, but not as many as expected.

What are your thoughts about the desire to return to "Reaganomics" in the wake of "Obamanomics" in a post-recession (i.e. economic recovery) America?
Reaganomics isn't an economic theory, but a corporate conspiracy put in place to reduce government regulations and taxes and to increase corporate welfare in order to bleed the state dry and create an maintain an oligarchy, a corporatocracy. If it succedes, we will have many more economic bubbles and collapses and each time less and less money will rest with the many and more and more money will rest with the few. It's a long-term strategy.

What are your thoughts on the support for American exceptionalism in 2010 and beyond?
America is just some land with a common government. Nationalism is a plague, feeing on people's ignorance and fear and standing at the doorway to true, species-wide progress not allowing anyone through. It's the tool of the corrupt and the opiate of the ignorant, much like any ideology which empowers its believer to think he or she is better than anyone else.

2010- GOP picks up seats. I'm hoping a lot. The US has short term memory issues and is basically ADHD. When the problems are not solved and the GOP does nothing but shut down the federal government they'll have shot themselves in the foot for any chances in 2012. Many of the tea party folks are on social programs, when they start losing their share of the hand outs they won't be very happy.


2012- Mitt Romney defeats Palin et el in the GOP primaries. He picks someone like Huckabe as VP in an attempt to win back evangelical and convince independents he's not a bat shit crazy Mormon, something the Dems and team Obama will be hammering away at him with.

Which give us 4 more yrs of Obama.. which the way he's getting things done probably won't be best but it'll beat the ideas coming from the GOP.

I don't see this getting better in the next couple of years.

I think that traditional democrat strongholds will lose as will republican strongholds, because people don't want talk about change, they actually want to see some change.

Is it just me or is it starting to not matter which party wins? I mean, all any of these people want to do is get reelected, and prevent the other guy from getting reelected. So, one party becomes the party of "no", and the other becomes the party "we tried but they won't let us," then they change roles every couple of years.

As someone who sacrificed for the good of the nation, I'd like to see these guys sacrifice for the good of the nation. But hey, that might mean doing something unpopular. Like, cutting some entitlements and raising some taxes.

And now the majority of US households pay no federal income tax....

I think I'll start my own country.

Sounds good, Lance. Can I be Secretary of Break Dancing?

Also, no Democrat is as bad as Palin. Not by a long-shot.

The democrats will lose a bunch of seats, but the media and "analysts" will completely misstate the reason for that. In the end, the economy still isn't doing well, which always leads to heavy incumbent losses.

Just like people are completely misstating the "tea party" phenomenon. All this "change" and "outside the establishment" talk about the tea party is bullshit. The tea party candidates are basically the Bush hardcore supporters within the party. I am not saying that people who are in the tea party are Bush hardcore supporters, but the candidates certainly are.

I mean, who are the "outsiders?" Ken Buck, the guy who got into national politics because he was hired by Dick Cheney? Rick Scott, Bush's business partner on the Texas Rangers? Mike Lee, Alito's clerk? Pat Toomey, former congressman and president of the club for growth? Christine Odonnel, the same candidate from 2008? The tea party, as an electoral phenomenon, are a prime example of astro turfing.

Just look at Rand Paul for a prime example of why the Tea Party is just the GOP by another name.

Real politics is a nasty game and it isn't played by outsiders (no matter how much you stomp and shout).

the tea party is an incoherent reactionary populist movement in itself. but it's also become a phenomenon that's being used by groups like american crossroads as an experiment in fundraising and political action outside the control of the republican party. check out the amount of money rove et al have been able to raise. and note the transformations in the tea party line as the midterms have approached. the "outsider" nonsense---which may have been accurate when applied to the tea partiers initially given the preponderance of whackjob ultra-rightwingers mixed with people for whom this was the first experience of political mobilization---but now, it's just a rhetorical tic, something that's part of the identity politics discourse this faction of the reactionary scene uses to speak to and about itself.

I listened to some of the talking heads on Sunday morning and found it interesting the same folks who several cycles ago were pushing social issues such as abortion, gay marriage et el as reasons to support GOP candidates all while back shelving economic issues are now making the exact opposite argument. Reminds me of the logic to cut taxes. We have a surplus... answer cut taxes. We have a deficit, answer cut taxes. Before it was "pay no attention to the spending... gay people are destroying the US way of life!" Now it's "pay no attention to the bigots and their comments... welfare queens and lazy people are destroying the US way of life!"

I also find it odd the people now screaming about spending take no responsibility for the spending they supported-

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/210103/DEFICIT-CHART.jpg

how else is a degenerate ideology the main problems for which follow from its actually being implemented supposed to perpetuate itself if it can't run on it's own record? it creates out of whole cloth a "new movement" with the help of a conservative-dominated media apparatus. then you describe that "new movement" as a "band of outsiders" while behind the scenes you treat the republican party as the subject of a hostile takeover. with the full collusion of murdoch incorporated et al and all that implies, outfits who were once republican but whose business model required the same kind of triage.

Well, here's my prediction.

Stocks and profits are up, building permits are gradually climbing, and auto production is up. To those who know, these are leading indicators of an economy on the upswing of a recovery, no matter how gradual. To the average Joe, they don't notice these things.

You see, they only notice things such as unemployment, which is an indicator that reflects the health of an economy after the fact.

So what's going to happen is the GOP will win more seats, and probably more power. Then, just as the 2012 election gears up, the unemployment rate will have dropped and the GOP will take credit. This despite the fact that it would be more apt to credit the Obama administration for it.

The timing is quite delicious for the GOP. After a disastrous Bush period, let's put a Democrat in the White House to weather a financial crisis. Let's call whatever the outcome is a failure, no matter how close it is to what Obama had hinted at beforehand. Take back power during midterm; take credit for economic turnaround when (not if) it comes. Use this as leverage for the next presidential election.

I considered that too BG and it's a completely possible out come. But the power (money) behind the tea party and the driving force within the GOP is really focused on shutting down the federal government until they get their way. A lot of the money men, Dick Army, the Koch brothers have basically stated that's the goal here. Eric Cantor has tweeted his glee at the prospects of doing it. Shut the government down until the socialist programs are cut to the bone or completely done away with. Now Obama, to my knowledge, hasn't been caught playing with any interns and I don't think he'll buckle like Clinton. The prospects of an economic up swing with the federal government shut down is Slim and none and Slim's left town. And wait until grandma and grandpa stop getting their SS checks and their Dr won't treat them because medicare payments have stopped. The key and the focus for each party will be to convince the masses it's the other side causing the problems. The GOP has a good shot at that with the fake Fox News doing their bidding. But in the end I think it will come down to "we elected these guys and it got worse not better."

That's one of the amazing parts of the tea party folks to me. The number of them on programs such as SS and medicare screaming about the need to end them is stunning. Just wait until they get their wish.

the ultra-right is trying to protect military expenditures at their present bloated levels as well. that's conservative machine politics. "keep looking over there, folks..." that kind of 3-card monty schtick.

the other center is the organizing of evangelical churches that was built across the 1990s. this is a powerful grass-rootsy org. and the tea party has nothing comparable. whence the sudden rapprochement with the republicans.

Will be interesting when some of these tea party folks get elected. Wonder what the mainstream GOP folks will do?

I avoided going there in my comment, but I've been seriously thinking about this as I watch political discourse in this country degrade even further.

I think this is a pretty accurate picture of what might happen, but there are two parts I'm not so sure about. First, I don't have a ton of faith that people will connect the dots and realize the tea partiers they voted for are the reason they are in worse shape by 2012 and the gap between the rich and poor is even greater. Second, because of the lack of insight, I'm not confident that the lesson will be learned in time for the 2012 presidential election.

Sadly, I think this is the most accurate prediction given my reservations about Tully's prediction. In fact, it's something I specifically worried about with the 2008 victories. It's fascinating (and extremely depressing) how shortsighted and unobservant people can be.

I won't say 2004 caused me to moved to Mexico but it played it's part and certainly got the ball rolling.

I think it's the short sightedness of the average US voter that will be the down fall of the tea party and the GOP in 2012. Nothing they've presented will make life better for the middle class or poor. People don't need to be observant to see life sucks more now then it did before. When people are down they vote with their wallets and everything the GOP and tea party types are trying to do will hurt their wallets. They scream about 2,4 and even 10% tax roll backs to pre-Bush Jr. The cost of keeping those cuts and the military spending will do nothing but add pain to the average working family.

The real sad news is we may have reached a summit point and the overall economic health the US has been forever hurt. If not forever a long term recovery might look like 30-40 years. Seriously two wars, corporate tax shelters/give aways and dramatic tax cuts all at once... might have been a bad idea.

The average US citizen hungers to hear what they want to hear. "We can fight two wars and it won't costs you a dime, they'll pay for themselves." "Probably be over in a few weeks, maybe months.. certainly not years." "We can drill our way out of dependence on foreign oil, all this "alternative energy talk is nothing but hokus pokus..." drill baby drill!"

Nothing the right has come up with has worked the way they said it would. Cantor was asked about spending this Sunday on one of the morning shows, specifically "after all the spending the right has done why should people believe you now?" His answer was nothing more then "but this time we really mean it." Call me skeptical. And if they do cut spending it won't be from the military industries or corporate hand outs it'll be from programs helping the poor and middle class.

So I don't see things getting better, certainly not by electing the likes of Paul, Miller and Angle.

Maybe by 2016 well get an honest third party option with real solutions. But I doubt it, people don't want the truth. They want to hear how easy it'll be and how it won't hurt them. So the GOP will have it's chance again in 2016. Wonder what will be left to govern by then?

Don't hold your breath. We won't have a sustained third party in American politics until we fundamentally alter how we count our votes.

Only if you can't break-dance. Apparently, being qualified disqualifies one...

Fed nominee blocked by GOP senator wins Nobel prize

You know, America could really use a Nobel Prize-winning economist who specializes in unemployment and housing.

Couldn't agree more, but I think our first priority is a functioning government...

Why a Nobel Prize? I'd rather have someone with practical experience facilitating actual business growth. Help those who can't help themselves. However... Businesses generate Jobs -> which generate salaries -> which pays for lots of stuff (including housing).

Well the UK seems to be doing it, it can be done. But I'm not holding my breath. I am holding my nose just about every time I vote though.

I didn't say a Nobel Prize, I said an economist who specializes in unemployment and housing. Unemployment and housing are a problem right now, right?

it would be hilarious to think about the republicans two years of obstruction in congress resulting in the belief out there in the land that the republicans can do something about unemployment were the conservative media apparatus not as effective as it seems to be in generating a stupor that enables it. i mean who'd have thought that the people whose economic ideology is at the core of the present crisis would be able to position themselves as offering a solution by offering more of exactly the same thing that landed up here?

who would be so stupid as to believe that nonsense?

btw what the right is doing is not about jobs. it's not about a coherent approach to the economy or anything else. it's about getting power. and if they do well in the next election, you're likely to see them start trying to actually work with the administration to pass legislation.
so they're already setting up to sell the teabagger right down the river.
which is fine by me.

Some GOP House Leaders Push Compromise - WSJ.com

Might be referring to Sir's post above.

???Business growth is stunted. Unemployment is not the problem. Employment is a product of growth from risk and investment. What benefit would an unemployment provide if the goal is "employment"?

First, try to keep your adjectives and nouns straight. It's not that difficult. Let's focus on the economist, not the Noble Prize itself, which is where I started.

Business growth isn't quite stunted, it's balking more like it. Q2 corporate profits are up 40%, and non-financial firms have accumulated more cash than they've seen in decades. They just aren't hiring. They're jittery—and aren't spending—they are waiting to see how the economy goes. But if no one's hiring, then unemployment stays high and people stay jittery—and aren't spending. It's a chicken and egg thing.

You say business growth is stunted and unemployment isn't the problem. Tell us about that.

I don't understand this question. Would you clarify it please?

bg -

I sit with the decision makers in small businesses almost daily. I sit with decision makers of multi-billion dollar companies. I sit with decision makers of 3 person ma-and-pop shops. It doesn't matter who you sit with, it's always the same. They are jittery all right - but for one universal reason. I've heard it dozens of times, "we are waiting to see what the government is going to do to us before we spend any money."

After the election and after the lame duck ass raping which Congress has planned, the economy will get better.

What are some of the things they're worried about?

My role in the room prevents me from having them expound on politics. Anything I say would be speculation.

I think it's logical that, if they are holding money, they believe they will be forced to give more of it to the government or pay for what the government tells them to pay for.

Tax increases. A sudden, catastrophic rise in their healthcare-associated overhead, from the paperwork and record-keeping requirements if nothing else. Foreign-exchange rates crapping out overseas buying because the Fed decides to inflate the Dollar, which makes it harder/more expensive to secure product from outside the US. The new requirement that -all- supplier-to-retailer transactions over $600.00 be accompanied by a 1099, right down to restaurants ordering food and Staples ordering staples. Mr. Obama's and Congress's anti-business attitude in general. The possibility of mandated paid vacation days. All this stuff increases the amount of money they have to pay out, some of it by quite a bit.

So they're holding a grudge against the current administration?

You'd think they'd get over that if consumer demand were strong enough.

No, they're worried about what sort of ass-rape Mr. Obama is going to bend them over for next. Since Gov't ass-rape -always- involves losing money, business-owners are sitting on their reserves (so they can hopefully pay whatever new costs are in the pipeline), and holding off on hiring because nobody knows what insanity will be next.

I reiterate: Every single transaction I do with a supplier, if it goes over $600.00US, will have to be accompanied by a 1099 (Tax) form. If I buy a firearm from a customer, and -it- costs over $600.00, that transaction must be accompanied by a 1099. Since I buy dozens of guns off people every month, and transact 2-5 orders per month per supplier (during the Good Ol' Days it was 1-3 orders per week), that adds up to a -lot- of paper. Paper costs money. So does ink. So does computer equipment. So does whomever you hire to do all this. And if a business-owner does the paperwork themselves and for free, ie they don't give themselves a raise for handling all this new bullshit, the value of their time just went down because now they're doing more work for the same money. And all this -before- Stimulus 2.0 and whatever other ludicrous wealth-redistribution schema Mr. Obama and a lame-duck congress decide to dump on them.

Can you see why situations like this might make business-owners a little jittery?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smal...re_tax_change/
http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=19344

The UK uses six different electoral systems (only one of which is single member plurality) and has a parliamentary government, so that's not really an accurate comparison. In fact, using the UK as a model to strengthen the chances of third parties and allow people to vote their conscience without side effect would require a fundamentally different form of government in the United State - i.e. it would require a whole new constitution - whereas a constitutional amendment mandating that all elections comply with the Condorcet criterion (or at least use instant runoff voting, though there's really no reason not to go all the way to Condorcet voting since it's all the same from the voter's perspective) would allow us to maintain our government as is but allow for much more accurate elections. Sadly, both outcomes seem equally unlikely, which is unfortunate.

(Apologies for the slight threadjack, this is kind of a pet topic of mine :p)

I thought that $600 1099 thing was being repealed

I don't think so. Last I heard they (senate) tried to and failed to repeal it in Sept. I forget what the vote was but many GOP's voted against repealing it. If it makes the health care bill at all workable... they're against it.

But, IMO, it should be repealed. People often say the dems hate the employers and the GOP hates the employees, shit like this keeps that thought alive.

It was sold as a way to partially pay for the Healthcare bill, so no, I doubt very seriously it'll ever be repealed or even meaningfully altered. Dems won't vote against it because it helps kinda-sorta pay for their biggest boondoggle to date and takes money from Evil Businesses, and the GOP won't vote against it because it makes a very handy Dem-bashing stick.

Yes, yes... libs think businesses are evil and the cons think government is evil. Unless of course the cons have control of government then it's happy, chest thumping, flag waving, anyone who dare speak against it is un-American time.

More on this.

Winners Tuesday May Benefit From Economic Cycle – NYTimes.com

What economic 'wave' is coming? Reagan had Microsoft & Apple making every school, business, and homes buying computers in the late 80s to help Reagan. Clinton had the dot com companies get a lot of money flowing around that could be taxed and created surpluses. Bush had an artificial housing boom and war spending in order to get money to change hands.

I'm not saying that it can't happen (if you could predict these trends you could make millions in the stock market), but I don't see what new private sector industry will get created that will hire lots of people, increase the velocity of money around the economy, or change people's lives in the next 2-10 years.

The only thing that comes to mind is Green industries.

Companies are sitting on an unprecedented shitload of cash. Many have probably been waiting for the political uncertainty to pass.

As an example, historically, the stock market does best under a split government such as it is now.

You will probably see a run up of stocks in the coming months. You will probably see companies being more confident making capital expenditures to increase productivity ahead of rehiring those they laid off in 2008-2009.

It will be a slow recovery, but it will happen. The real question is how each party will spin it for their 2012 campaigns.

Newt Gingrich to star in Citizens United movie about "American exceptionalism" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News


What they really mean by "American exceptionalism" - Barack Obama News - Salon.com

Lean back, America. Newt Gingrich is about to suck your dick.

wow. the refiguring of the already problematic notion of "american exceptionalism" is simplistic lunacy, even by the...um....relaxed intellectual standards one typically has to bring to assessing newt gringrich (tm) productions.

i wonder if this meme is going to get traction.

It looks like a feature-length advertorial for the 2012 Republican candidate.

We are exceptional

Exceptionally expensive health care
Exceptionally corrupt politicians
Exceptional gap between the classes
Exceptionally high CEO pay
Exceptional fear and anger
Exceptionally high numbers of guns
Exceptional xenophobia
Exceptional number of single issue voters

We don't even have to do this from a reality-perspective. Even in the right-wing alternate reality, we can do this:

Exceptionally large government
Exceptionally high taxes
Exceptionally black... erm Kenyan president
Exceptionally restrictive gun laws
Exceptionally entitled immigrants/gay people/poor
Exceptionally liberal media
Exceptional FEMA concentration camps
Exceptional bloated, liberal public education system

Exceptionalism is nothing but fellatio.

So... "ummm I really need some exceptinalism tonight' will get me head? sweet :thumbsup: