Posted on 03/30/2012 1:20:18 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The world came unhinged in the fall of 2008.
.....Such a flurry of state activity would have been enough to spark a reaction from Americans traditionally suspicious of central government. But the interventions did not stop there. Even before Obama was inaugurated in January 2009 the collective wisdom in Washington held that the way to restore prosperity was a massive stimulus of public spending. So Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, at an eventual price tag of $840 billion, in February. The bill, which included an increased refundable tax credit for working people, showered money on state governments (and the public sector unions that staff them), on welfare and unemployment recipients, and on the Departments of Energy, Education, and Transportation. Then, on February 18, Obama proposed a $275 billion housing bailout to encourage refinancing among homeowners whose mortgages cost more than their homes were worth.
The fact that it was the mortgage plan—rather than the bank or auto bailouts or the stimulus—which provoked the first call for a new American Tea Party has been little remarked upon. But the detail is revealing. On the morning of February 19 CNBC anchor Rick Santelli delivered his famous rant against President Obama’s housing agenda, in which he called for friends of liberty to gather in Chicago in the summer to dump mortgage-backed securities into Lake Michigan. Santelli, in the space of less than five minutes, set the template for the coming populist reaction against the bipartisan, elite policies of tax, spend, bail out, and elect.
That template had two significant features. Santelli’s plea was grounded in American first principles, invoking the founding generation in its reference to the Tea Party and in appealing to the authority of “people like Benjamin Franklin and [Thomas] Jefferson—what we’re doing in this country now is making them roll over in their graves.” Second, Santelli was not arguing simply that the government was spending too much money; his critique had a moral dimension that transcended mere accounting. “The government is promoting bad behavior,” he said. Some people had made mistakes during the height of the boom. Why should the government reward those mistakes by bailing out insolvent enterprises or lavishing money on homeowners who took on more debt than they could handle?
Spending one’s way out of a recession was not only counterintuitive; it was also harmful for one’s descendants, who would foot the bill. Implicit in the critique of bailouts has always been a moral critique of the actions that result in bailouts and the behaviors that are encouraged by them. Intrusive and profligate government doesn’t just harm economies and destroy balance sheets; it erodes character. There’s a reason the term for this is “moral hazard.”
[Big BIG SNIP]
Indeed, the real achievement of the Tea Party is not that it has successfully purged social issues from the Republican agenda but that it has given Republican economic policies a moral ground on which to stand. Lower taxes, less spending, reformed entitlements, and freer trade can be tough sells on their own. But wedded to the vision of the Declaration of Independence, in which government exists to secure only those rights that we possess by virtue of being human, a market-friendly agenda makes a lot more economic, social, and political sense.
So we owe thanks to the Tea Partiers because they are responsible for recovering the Declaration’s vision. They remind us that the business of government is not to help anyone’s profit margin but to protect the natural rights of individuals from intrusive, meddlesome majorities. Harking back to the Founders gives the Tea Party an ideological consistency and political adaptability that could prove immensely powerful. The Tea Party is in a unique position to explain the economic costs of Obamacare as well as the law’s infringement of both the right to life and the right of conscience. Such a critique of liberalism on the grounds of natural justice may disappoint dyed-in-the-wool libertarians, but it has the potential to mobilize more voters than a 20 percent cut in the marginal tax rate.
The problem with most current perspectives on the Tea Party is that they look at the movement through contemporary eyes rather than the eyes of the Founders, who saw no distinction among the moral, the political, and the economic. The closest Elizabeth Price Foley comes to attempting this is when she quotes Jefferson’s 1821 letter to Charles Hammond:
"When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government or another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."
What did Jefferson think would be the check against the centralizing tendencies of government? “It is the manners and spirit of a people,” he wrote in Notes on the State of Virginia, “which preserve a republic in vigor.” The Tea Party is significant because it embodies the manners and spirit of an America that seeks to preserve a vigorous constitutional republic, and because it reminds us that one cannot have a limited and good government without an active and virtuous people. Full Text
Many are looking for work, looking for a leader, looking at this administration in growing alarm and fear, waiting for the Tampa convention, waiting for Nov 6th and 2013....
This was when Obama said “I won” and Pelosi said shove it to any counter offer the Republicans had.
I think it's important that now when we're in another election season to remind voters that the entire economic package that's brought bankrupting our country to an all time high was strictly a democratic initiative.
When people go to the polls, I want them to remember this from the article you posted:
Spending one’s way out of a recession was not only counterintuitive; it was also harmful for one’s descendants, who would foot the bill. Implicit in the critique of bailouts has always been a moral critique of the actions that result in bailouts and the behaviors that are encouraged by them. Intrusive and profligate government doesn’t just harm economies and destroy balance sheets; it erodes character. There’s a reason the term for this is “moral hazard.”
I argued with many a liberal back then that "Too big to fail" was a ridiculous statement and economically, failing was the ONLY real cure. They argued it would harm all those workers of those too big companies and we HAD to do SOMETHING. My point was perpetuating a losing business with free money would only make it a bigger loser. In the end, the failure of such a company would be even more catastrophic than letting it fail now, or the government would just have to own it, and that would be nationalization and THAT had failed--witness the demise of the Soviet Union.
Guess I was right!
Well said.
If the Supreme Court dumps Obama”care,” then the Republicans must be ready to dump Obama”care” also.
To Replace or modify Obama”care” would result in The Republican Party ceasing to represent the 66 % of Americans that for years have opposed Obama”care.”
The overwhelming endorsements by the RNC-E of Romney, the Godfather of Obama”care,” is a very convincing indication that the RNC will betray the voters and Replace Obama”care.”
Replace Obama”care” and the voters will replace the Republican Party.
The era of the “Big Tent” will be over.
THAT is awesome !
May folks borrow it ?
Gentlemen > bumper sticker/poster material !
Wow! Nice! Sweet! Never looked at it that way. It bears repeating. Thanks!!!
The tea party has been criticised by some as a sailing ship without a captain. They don’t understand: the Tea Party is not the ship, it is the wind.
Taxed
Enough
Already
Thanks for the props, wish I could accept but I wasn’t the author.
As you say, it certainly does bear repeating!
I've said it much less ably that it is not the responsibility of the Tea Party to act but to influence. I love your metaphor; it's perfect, and I will use it going forward.
Yes, I just read your other disclaimers. It is not your metaphor - but you found it for me. Thanks!
Awesome graphic, as always!
You are most welcome, FRiend.
FReepers rock!
Great work.
B-U-M-P!
Thanks CW, and nice to “see” you!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.