Persecution and Perspective

Last Saturday, during a boring second half of football, my friend Soren reminded me of a time I was making a case for Christians thinking they were persecuted when, in reality, they were just sensitive to criticism. My case being that Christians are the dominant religion of this country, the Republican Party bends over backward for them and, well, they are still in charge (unless one thinks President Obama is a closet Muslim...and Soren might think that). I don't think Soren agrees with me on this point. There was something about Maplethorpe's depiction of Jesus on the cross in a jar of urine and the Christian reaction versus the Muslim fringe insanity about a movie figuratively urinating on the character of Muhammad.

Regardless, this idea of persecution came to mind again yesterday as I was driving back to work. I didn't recocognize the man talking on the radio. Later, they'd say it was Mark Bitman and that didn't help me. He must have been a foodie because he was talking about the idealic Parisian bistro and personal napkins in cubbies. I was interested. Then talk turned to a recent Stanford study suggesting the organic food was no more nutritious than other food.

Mark would go on to say that he thought the study was wrong because it didn't take into account the health benefits of not having pesticides on your food as well as the health of workers in the field and the general sustainability of food production. Of course, what I heard was an attack on food manufacturing. As a man employed for quite some time by one of the country's largest food manufacturers, indeed, in the end of the business with the least glamour and the most persecution from activists, I was offended by his lack of perspective and railing against the industry that keeps everyone fed for the lowest price of any industrialized nation. I was incensed at his narrow understanding of how hungry the world will be when we go organic and crop yields fall dramatcally, livestock die of trivial diseases and food prices soar faster than health care costs.

Then I thought, "Maybe I've lost perspective like Soren and his fellow Christians. Maybe I see attacks where there are none."

It could be that this gentleman had no problem with the food industry. He could have just been a fan of organic. Mind you, his predilection for organic makes it easy for him to dismiss the macroeconomic arguments about organic farming. He also doesn't have my perspective. And I don't have the Christian perspective. I get dozens of industry emails and magazines each month. I see all the urban newspaper editorials decrying lean finely textured beef, gestation crates, processed foods, multibillion dollar food companies and the sorry lot of folks that work for them. I feel the persecution that others may not even notice is happening.

Truth has become murky. It's colored by my feelings about losing my job. Soren's views of Muslim riots is equally filtered by his perspective of a calm, helpful and nonviolent network of Christian churches. The modern world is designed to accomodate whatever truth we choose. Objective truth has been lost. We want everything our own way and when it comes to information, we can filter out everything detestable to us without effort or thought.

A final thought on this point - I watched the Nebraska U.S. Senate election debate between State Senator Deb Fischer and former Senator Bob Kerrey. I don't like Deb Fischer. As you may have guessed from earlier posts, this stems from my distaste for the tea party. This obviously colored my view of the debate. Most striking to me, though, was the twin ideas of Ms. Fischer that we can balance the budget without raising taxes and save Medicare. She wants everything her way and this leaves no room for truth. Medicare cannot be saved without raising taxes. Actually, it can. You can start killing old people. This won't get Ms. Fischer elected though. Tell the senior citizens you'll keep doling out checks. Tell the younger folks you'll lower their taxes. That you can do neither...so what? Deb Fischer will be a US Senator and that's what matters most to Deb Fischer.

Welcome back, dear friends. I wish I could say the time away has left me rested and refreshed. Alas it has not.

While Atticus debates whether he aligns with the Tea Party and whether he will support its candidates, I will ask the question of, ‘Why the Tea Party?’ ‘What relevance does it have?’ and ‘Why now?’ Is it a populist movement? Or is it a revival? Is it the awakening or the dying breath of a great Muse. Let us hope we find more answers than questions.

Soren.

Tea Party Beliefs

One of the more appealing and also destructive parts of the tea party movement is it's lack of central organization.

Think you like the tea party then start up your own organization in the basement. Any wacky, half cooked line of reasoning will suffice.

The California wing of the tea party movement appears to be at TeaParty.org. The Tea Party has "15 Non-negotiable Core Beliefs", to wit:

1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
     And illegal drugs are taken illegally. Exceeding the speed limit is driving illegally. And this is one shoddy core belief. It saddens me that number one on the list of core belief is a statement of the obvious and not a belief at all.

2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
     Indispensable to what? I'll agree that jobs are important, but the age of isolationism is gone and never to return.

3. A strong military is essential.
     Again, essential to what? Just to have lying around. Of course, it is a form of pro-domestic employment. Until we ship them overseas and then I get confused.

4. Special interests must be eliminated.
     And replaced with not so special interests. Everybody is a special interest. Some just have money and organization. Come to think of it, wouldn't the tea party be a special interest group that is especially interested in these 15 oversimplified core "beliefs".

5. Gun ownership is sacred.
     I'm an athiest and even I'm offended.

6. Government must be downsized.
     Agreed. Maybe. Does this mean no more funding for roads, parks, museums? Is there no part of government that's worthy...oh yes, the military.

7. The national budget must be balanced.
     Agreed again. We are on a roll now. Of course, I was saying this back when everyone was saying that the deficits were sustainable at the level of GDP percentage. Those were Republicans with a Republican in the White House wanting to spend money on their pet projects. Suddenly the Republicans are all cost conscious when the Democrats are in charge.

8. Deficit spending must end.
     Didn't you just say that. (See #7) I wouldn't have minded had there only been 14 core beliefs. Really, 14 is just fine.

9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
     Credit for not stating the obvious. Of course, Congress does make the laws and so I guess Congress decides whether bailouts are legal. Congress voted for the bailout, ergo, bailouts are legal. And before you get testy about it, the Supreme Court decides whether the legal act of bailing out is constitutional.

10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
     My income taxes really aren't that bad. Could you do something about Social Security and Medicare taxes, though.

11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
      I've sung this song already, but mandatory for what? For increasing business profits that can go to investing in business expansion and higher dividends? Maybe...is that what you are trying to tell me. I don't understand how this can be non-negotiable when you are not even telling me what you mean. How many more of these are there?

12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
     I'm a bit of snob. I don't want average citizens. The American average is a low, low bar.

13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
     Amen! (Wait...I'm athiest.)

14. English as our core language is required.
     It would make things way more convenient for me since I only really speak English. I dabble in Spanish, though, because god fearing, English speaking Americans won't work for a company with 19,000 domestic jobs, full benefits, pensions, profit sharing, an average salary that twice minimum wage but Spanish speaking, legal immigrants will.

15. Traditional family values are encouraged.
     Finally, encouragement. Not much for a non-negotiable core belief when it's just encouraging, but there it is. If only I knew what a traditional family value was. 

And that is why I don't like the Tea Party.

Is the Tea Party my cup?

On the face of it I should be a tea partier.

Constitutional originalism, small government, low taxes, balanced budgets ... what's not to like?

Personalities. Tone. Single mindedness.

At it's grass roots core, I'm all there. When it's upset the establishment apple cart, again, I'm there. When it makes a stand for what is, in its view, right - yes, sir - all in.

And as a populist political movement, the tea party makes sense. But not it's candidates.

I don't care for the subtle hyprocrisy of the tea party endorsed candidates. Why would someone whose views inform them that government is bad then spend so much time and money to be part of government? To reduce their power and influence? To render meaningless all that ambition and work?

The superstars of the tea party movement are riding on the wave of a populist movement and like in any form of populism, the people lose. An elite few funnel the rage of the downtrodden many into personal gain and nothing changes but the names on the office door.

I fear that the tea party is no more and no less than the established parties - it is populated by candidates saying what needs to be said to get elected and stay elected. Power above all else. Winning a race, winning a vote and winning the news cycle being the object, not making America and Americans better.

In short, I think the people that make up the tea party are being duped by the candidates that they endorse and the big money operating behind the scenes.

And I think Deb Fischer is part of it. I think she's an extreme partisan that traded and withheld votes to get what she wanted. She played to win. Born and raised in Lincoln and returning there over and over again to go to school or to be in the Legislature, the story we are told is she's a rancher from Valentine. Her husband was a rancher from Valentine. She's a politician from Lincoln.

Deb Fischer is also the Republican candidate for Nebraska's open Senate seat. She rode the tea party movement to the doors of the Senate. Does she really care about Nebraskans? Does she really care about the future of this country? Or does she simply care about winning? I don't know.

My gut says I shouldn't like her. My gut says that anyone endorsed by Sarah Palin is instantly disqualified. My gut says it is all branding and marketing and I want no part of her or the tea party.

****

Next up, a look at "Core Beliefs" of one tea party group.

Time to Start Again

We started this blog a long time back to discuss the political topics of the day, but life got in the way as it so often does.

I may not have any more time now than I did then, but presidential politics is churning again and I'm starting to think it's time to fire up the engine of debate.

Over the weekend I uttered the words, "I don't agree with the Tea Party," as I made cause for voting against Deb Fischer for Senate. Later, I wondered why I don't. And that has brought me back here.

Soon enough I'll explore whether I truly dislike Deb Fischer, the Tea Party or both.

- Atticus

An Open Letter to the Republican National Committee

Dear Mr. Steele and RNC,

Thank you for another in your series of entertaining letters asking me to contribute my opinion, but more importantly my money, to your cause. Upon reflection, I have a response prepared to your request for information on the "blueprint - a plan of action" for the Republican Party.

My response: Leave me alone!

I am not going to give money to the RNC. All I needed was to peruse the names running across your last letter - Michael Steele, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner. Sorry, but this does not represent the leadership I'd prefer to follow. I'm not running out to cheer for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, either, but that is not the worry you should have. I don't want to recieve your letters anymore because I don't care to be associated with the Republican Party.

Since the elections in November I've checked out of politics. I took a little break to get away from it all, but as I nose my way back in I see that things have only gotten worse. This has nothing to do with the budget (a document that would have only looked different under Bush and the Republicans because they weren't honest about just how much money they were going to spend). This has nothing to do with wanting more tax cuts because I don't want any; I just don't want them to go up. This has nothing to do with defense spending because a 20% cut seems fine to me; we aren't going to do anything meaningful with the money other than keep some congressional districts afloat in government contracts. This has nothing to do with principles because both parties cashed in any principles they had a long, long time ago. My problem is tone.

Mr. Steele, I see that you called Senator Spector an opportunist. This is ironic coming from a black man elected to the chairmanship of a notoriously white organization after a black man was elected president. Besides, the Republican Party didn't like Sen. Spector much anyway. It was just a matter of time before he was pushed out of the party. Wouldn't it have been better to say you were disappointed with the Senator's decision, but he did what he felt was politically expedient and the voters have to judge whether that makes him more or less capable to represent them.

Meanwhile, Rush is calling people reverse racists. Ann Coulter is saying whatever it is she feels will get people the most excited. The direction of the party seems to be to belittle all the small minded people that disagree with the vociferous talking heads that now control the party. As one of those small minded individuals (and wasnt' the party once a proponent of the individual) I've decided to call it quits.

I approve of gay marriage, I'm against the death penalty, I'm not offended that Latinas might be smarter than white men, I have no compunction about destroying every embryo in every lab for whatever sinister scientific purpose we can find, I rather like immigrants and want more of them in the country, I think a fence is a waste of money and horrific symbol (may as well tear down the Statue of Liberty, or at least remove the plague), the Patriot Act was overkill, torture is torture is torture no matter what name you give it, Israel can maybe do what we say since we are the only reason it even exists, I do not believe in God and though Obama is a big spending liberal he hasn't upset me more than any Republican that has sat in the same chair.

With that said, I'm also not a big fan of government intervention, federal bailouts, gun control, tax increases, regulation, interventionist foreign policy or well, the government if its doing anything much beyond keeping me safe, my roads passable and maintaining equal opportunity to do whatever I please without hurting the next guy.

This does not make me a Republican. This would get me expelled from the party, in fact, so I here and now willingly relinquish any association with that label.

I am an American. I am an individualist. I don't need my talking points from Rush Limbaugh. I don't need to be belittled by the Chairman of the RNC. I don't need to agree with Dick Cheney to maintain my membership in any organization. Most importantly, I don't want anything to do with a group of people that have nothing more than name-calling in their bag of arguments. Be it Democrat or Republican the death of the American dream will come with a membership in a political party. I don't need that kind of blood on my hands.

The Budget

The comfort I take in President Obama's budget is this: it seems honest and no budget has ever passed in the form it was originally conceived.

So much money...so many programs created and expanded...all of it on rosy outlooks for future growth and elimination and consolidation of underperforming programs.

I had fears during the election about candidate Obama's true nature. Was he a big government, tax and spend guy disguised by moderate rhetoric? Was he a true pragmatist who'd look around and say this just can't keep going like this?

Turns out that after a month of being a moderate, relatively bipartisan president, the tide has turned. President Obama is Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Roosevelt. After 8 years of a Republican president increasing the size of government now we have at least 4 years of a Democrat that will put President Bush to shame.

$1.75 trillion deficit.

Tripling of the national debt in his first term.

Dramatic social re-engineering.

Flaccid opposition.

I've managed to stay fairly optimistic about the new president and the prospects for the future economy until the last few days. Sadly, as is often the case, the more we get to know a person the more we find not to like.