America's #1 Progressive Host & NY Times Bestselling Author
Stupid... not so negligible
In a letter to his brother in 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower wrote:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
In the letter, the president singles out H.L. Hunt, an oil tycoon who lobbied furiously for the abolishment of social security, and a prominent member of the early 20th century version of the Tea Party movement, the Birch Society. This was a group that pioneered many of the political positions and techniques that are used by various fringe political groups to accuse everyone else of being in cahoots to some giant conspiracy to make them look crazy. Stop me if any of these Birch Society position sound even a little familiar:
- speculated that FDR was secretly being Jewish
- Accused FDR of being in on the Pearl Harbor Attacks so that we would have an excuse to enter World War2
- Accused Eisenhower of being a communist sympathizer
- Opposed the Civil Rights Act
- Called for the abolition of Social Security
- Opposed the creation of business regulations like OSHA
- Supported the repeal of the estate tax and progressive income tax and a repeal of the 16th amendment altogether.
- Supported the repeal of various other New Deal programs, such as Unemployment Insurance
- Support the repeal of the 14th amendment and birthright citizenship
While the Birch Society identified itself mainly with the GOP at the time, part of the price of entry for the mainstream of the Republican Party at the time was that you had to be willing to reject the rhetoric of the Birch Society.
Fast forward about 50 years, and the positions of the birch society have by-and-large been adopted by conservative politicians associating themselves with the Tea Party movement. This movement insists it is grassroots, working class and apolitical in nature, but it has shown itself in polling and through the empirical evidence to be composed mainly of upper class down-the-ballot Republicans funded by rightwing pro-corporate think-tanks like FreedomWorks and Americans For Prosperity. So, on the whole, the people in charge of the Birch Society are now in charge of the Tea Party Movement, but this time they've invested in some public relations marketing.
Another big difference between the Birch Society and the Tea Party; where Republicans went out of their way to distance themselves from the Birch Society in the 50's and 60's, today's Republican Party seems to be staking their political future on cozying up to the Tea Party and using that populist energy to take back one or both houses of congress in November. The primary season has seen the rise of
- Rand Paul, who has expressed a willingness to repeal parts of the Civil Rights Act and the 14th amendment.
- Sharon Angle, who supports repealing social security and insists that unemployment benefits don't benefit anyone.
- Marco Rubio, the deficit hawk who supports repealing the estate tax but won't explain what spending he would cut to balance out its impact on the deficit.
- Joe Miller, who supports sweeping cuts to Medicare and Social Security, and a total elimination of Medicaid.
- Pat Toomey, who supports repealing the estate tax and privatizing social security.
And a variety of others, all of whom have won their party primaries after latching onto the banner of the Tea Party.
It would come as no surprise to me that if the Senate and/or House went to the Republican Party in November, it would be characters like these that would dictate the agenda for 6 years. the first two would likely be spent engaging in phony impeachment hearings based on conspiracy theories and rightwing folklore, while the four that followed would be spent either blocking expansions/ fortifications of the safety net, or introducing and pushing through legislation to roll back the safety net.
And the program and regulations that Tea Partiers want to attack most are those that are fundamentally pro-labor programs. Social Security (or it's formal title; Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) and Medicare are programs that allow workers to grow old with a certain amount of dignity and provides them the luxury of a being able to die somewhere other than on the factory line. Unemployment Insurance gives workers who are jobless through no fault of their own a bit of breathing room while they make their way back into the world of work. The list of pro-labor safety net programs and regulations that could/would be targeted by Tea Partiers in the name of "getting government out of the way" or "giving businesses the freedom to prosper" really has no bounds.
While the Republican Party has already chosen to cast it's lot with the fringe right wing, there's no reason to act as if this is the future of the republic. There are obviously some months to go before the election, and things can still change wildly before election day. My suggestion to all of you is to look at the candidates running for the Senate in your state, and for the house in your district, and even your state-gov't races, and start thinking about making sure that the fringe right wing doesn't gain a foothold in government. Most states that have already held primaries will likely have the ballot more-or-less ready, so locate your county's department of elections and find out when sample ballots will be available.
Your country needs you. Crunch time folks.
Comments
You make a very serious error if you think that "on the whole, the people in charge of the Birch Society are now in charge of the Tea Party Movement."
The Tea Party Movement [TPM] does not subscribe to the fundamental premises of the Birch Society. There are, admittedly, some commonalities but one has to understand the profound alienation which underlies the interpretation of our postwar history by the JBS.
For example, here is a comment which appeared in the May 2008 JBS Bulletin. Do you think the TPM subscribes to this premise?
"Just as the John Birch Society showed in the 1960's that the communists basically ran both the civil rights movement and the KKK, the strategy was nothing new. The former was used to transfer power to Washington DC in the name of civil rights and the latter provided a pretext for transferring power to Washington. You cannot get a really good conflict started unless you control both sides of the argument."
The Birch Society thought Bill Clinton should be impeached for TREASON. They also have described Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Jimmy Carter and Sen. John Kerry as traitors. Do you think the TPM subscribes to those sentiments?
The Birch Society has identified as "enemies" and "phony conservatives" such people as: Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, John McCain, both Presidents Bush, Robert Dole, William F. Buckley Jr.
Furthermore, according to the JBS "Freedom Index" (previously known as "Conservative Index") Congress has no understanding of our Constitution. For example, here are the results of the two most recent editions of the JBS scorecard for our Congress:
December 2009:
Average House of Representatives score = 38%
Average Senate score = 32%
July 2010
Average House score = 40%
Average Senate score = 38%
In other words, according to the JBS evaluation, our Congress (Senate and House) is comprised of individuals who
(a) do not understand our Constitution (b) routinely vote for un-Constitutional legislation and (c) routinely violate their oath of office to support, defend, and protect our Constitution and (d) this situation has been the case for more than 5 decades.
Do you think the TPM agrees with that?
FBI FILES ON BIRCH SOCIETY:
This report explains why J. Edgar Hoover and senior FBI officials within the Bureau’s Domestic Intelligence Division concluded in FBI memos that the JBS was “extremist”, “irrational” and “irresponsible”
http://ernie1241.googlepages.com/jbs-1
CONSERVATIVE CRITICS OF ROBERT WELCH and BIRCH SOCIETY:
Contrary to claims made by the Birch Society about the alleged "left-wing" origins of JBS criticism, the most potent adverse comments about the JBS have always originated from the right-side of the political spectrum. This report presents a representative sample of such comments.
http://ernie1241.googlepages.com/jbs-4
PERSONS DESCRIBED BY BIRCH SOCIETY AS “EXPERTS” ON COMMUNISM:
Two former FBI Special Agents who endorsed the Birch Society after they retired from the FBI are often cited by Birch Society members and supporters as knowledgeable, reliable, and authoritative sources of information on the communist movement.
However, their FBI personnel files reveal that senior FBI officials did not have a very high regard for their post-FBI endeavors.
In the case of Dan Smoot, just prior to his retirement from the FBI he was censured, placed on probation, and transferred to a small, insignificant field office as a disciplinary measure.
Both reports include detailed critiques of statements and assertions made by these former FBI Special Agents.
DAN SMOOT: http://ernie1241.googlepages.com/smoot
W. CLEON SKOUSEN: http://ernie1241.googlepages.com/skousen
More details: ernie1241@aol.com
http://ernie1241.googlepages.com/home
"The Birch Society thought Bill Clinton should be impeached for TREASON. They also have described Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Jimmy Carter and Sen. John Kerry as traitors. Do ---you think the TPM subscribes to those sentiments?"
-------------------------
Do I think the Tea Party wants to impeach Obama for treason?http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2579417/postsThey speak for themselves. Moving on...---------------------------
"In other words, according to the JBS evaluation, our Congress (Senate and House) is comprised of individuals who
(a) do not understand our Constitution(b) routinely vote for un-Constitutional legislation and (c) routinely violate their oath of office to support, defend, and protect our Constitution and (d) this situation has been the case for more than 5 decades.
Do you think the TPM agrees with that? "
------------------------------------------
Yes. Many of the Tea Party's opposition to various pieces of legislation is rooted in claims that various pieces are unconstitutional, even though their interpretation of the law ends up being disturbingly shallow. Just look at their opposition to the Affordable Care Act, their promises to challenge its implementation in court, even though its obvious those arguments are frivolous and guaranteed to go nowhere.
You are conflating individual positions taken by a few activists associated with the TPM -- with the general perspective of the TPM as revealed in polling.
It is clear that the majority of self-identified TPM members DO NOT share the general perspective of the Birch Society. In fact, this may surprise you but the CEO of the JBS (Art Thompson) published an article a few months ago in which he advised extreme caution with respect to support of Sarah Palin because he thought she probably is under the influence of what the JBS describes as nefarious "Insiders".
According to JBS dogma, "Insiders" are those elitists within our government, our media, our academia, our financial institutions and other institutions whose ultimate purpose is the destruction of our Constitution and our sovereignty and our merger into a one-world socialist tyranny which the Insiders will control.
When TPM adherents discover the full scope of what the JBS believes, they will promptly and emphatically reject anyone connected to the JBS. For example: from polling I have seen, most TPM members (and in particular TPM leaders) have a very high regard for Ronald Reagan. By contrast, the current President of the JBS considered Reagan to be "a lackey of the Communists".
Furthermore, there is nothing in available evidence to suggest that the TPM buys into the JBS premise that both the KKK and our civil rights movement was "controlled" by "Communists". Nor is there any evidence that TPM members despise all of our former 20th century Presidents - the way that the JBS does.
I know it is easy to adopt cartoon caricature depictions of the TPM and there is a natural human tendency to merge all perceived opponents into one undifferentiated mass --- but it is a VERY big mistake to pretend that there are not major and irreconcilable differences between the TPM and the JBS.
Tea Party still = JBS
**In fact, this may surprise you but the CEO of the JBS (Art Thompson) published an article a few months ago in which he advised extreme caution with respect to support of Sarah Palin because he thought she probably is under the influence of what the JBS describes as nefarious "Insiders"**
And that's good, because most tea partiers seemed to have seriously soured on Sarah Palin as well.
---------------------
**Furthermore, there is nothing in available evidence to suggest that the TPM buys into the JBS premise that both the KKK and our civil rights movement was "controlled" by "Communists". **
They've instead decided to "reclaim" MLK's vision to try and paint him as a free marketer, and have taken to claiming that King's legacy was hijacked by progressives and socialists to make him appear that he was actually a liberation theologist who wanted government to redistribute wealth. They've chosen a strategy of revising MLK's history rather than flat-out attack the man. The change in strategy however does a poor job of disguising the sentiment.
It seems you're really trying to grasp at straws on this, either because you're a tea-partier who's offended with being identified with the Birch Society, or Vice Versa. The facts really don't care however really don't care that you're offended.
Tea is code for "T", which they believe is somehow sacredly theirs alone.
Currently, the "T" equates to a cross and the end (whatever it is that they have in mind) justifies the means.
A while back (like 2000 years ago), a Roman letter used to represent the cross looked like our "X", which, contrary to claims of crossing out, is where the abbreviation X-mas originates.
While I'm on it, could we please remember that Christ was born in September (not December). It doesn't matter what month we choose to celebrate a Mass for him, but let's stop misteaching that we hold the Mass in December because it's his birthday.
To return. I'm offended that any group feels they have the right to own Christ or his teachings and since I have as much a right to change their name as they do to corrupt his teachings, henceforth, their nomenclature is declared to be: Teat Party.
Fitting because they want to own the right to decide who may suckle at Liberty's breast.
Brian: What is the basis of your comment that "most tea partiers seemed to have seriously soured on Sarah Palin as well" ??
I am not aware of any data which confirms your observation.
However, I am aware of considerable data that falsifies your conclusion -- including of course the fact that Sarah Palin has vigorously supported TPM candidates across the country who have won their primary elections and, in many cases, those TPM candidates welcomed Sarah Palin's endorsement and her personal appearances on their behalf!
Furthermore: Last April's CBS News poll of TPM members/activists reveals that 66%-75% of them have a favorable view of Palin.
Your observation regarding MLK Jr. does not falsify my original statement. The FACT remains that TPM types do not disparage MLK Jr and they do not characterize our entire civil rights movement as a Communist enterprise which clearly illustrates a major point of disagreement with the JBS position. If TPM members discover the extreme hostility which the JBS has always had toward ALL of our civil rights leaders and ALL of our civil rights organizations --- they will reject the JBS in droves!
"Your observation regarding MLK Jr. does not falsify my original statement."
Sure it does. The fact that you keep coming back just shows that it digs under your skin, as I also pointed out earlet.
" The FACT remains that TPM types do not disparage MLK Jr and they do not characterize our entire civil rights movement as a Communist enterprise which clearly illustrates a major point of disagreement with the JBS position. "
No major disagreement, just a different method of attack. Instead of attack MLK directly like the JBS does, the TPM choose instead to rewrite and misrepresent everything that MLK taught and advocated for while attacking their political opponents with the same type of rhetoric that was used against MLK and his supporters.
Last time I checked, there's no way to piss on someone's legacy and still have anything resembling respect for them.
And my basis for saying that Tea Partiers have soured on Palin is that, while they still like her personally, the consider her unqualified to run for President.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/04/tea-partiers-palin-unqualified/
Bryan -- your reply doesn't make much sense and, more importantly, you now are proposing a circular argument. The fact that I come back to dispute something false which you have written has no bearing upon whether or not your statements are accurate and truthful. Instead of merely declaring your personal opinion, why don't you provide some specific factual evidence (as I have done)?
Furthermore, there is no evidence that the TPM is "attacking" or is hostile toward our civil rights movement. They are not re-writing or misrepresenting anything about our civil rights movement or MLK Jr. In fact, it is clear that the TPM's focus is almost exclusively upon what they (and most Americans) consider out-of-control government spending.
It appears that you want to demonize the TPM and you are willing to fabricate "evidence" to make your perjorative judgments. For example: I provide you with specific polling data that clearly establishes that Sarah Palin is evaluated favorably by the TPM (in fact, she was the highest-rated politician in the poll I cited) but you convert that fact into a falsehood that they consider her "unqualified to run for President". Understandably, you do not cite a single reference for your assertion because it is an invention.
Also, let me address another falsehood from your previous message when you declared "either because you're a tea-partier who's offended with being identified with the Birch Society, or Vice Versa"
Since I am neither a TPM or JBS member or supporter -- your assumption merely reveals (yet again) how your comments are based upon your imagination -- not upon facts. I guess this is how your mind operates. Either you don't have the capacity or you lack the intellectual honesty to carefully examine and analyze available factual evidence --- so, instead, you invent whatever is needed to move your argument along.
"Your observation regarding MLK Jr. does not falsify my original statement."
Sure it does. The fact that you keep coming back just shows that it digs under your skin, as I also pointed out earlet.
" The FACT remains that TPM types do not disparage MLK Jr and they do not characterize our entire civil rights movement as a Communist enterprise which clearly illustrates a major point of disagreement with the JBS position. "
No major disagreement, just a different method of attack. Instead of attack MLK directly like the JBS does, the TPM choose instead to rewrite and misrepresent everything that MLK taught and advocated for while attacking their political opponents with the same type of rhetoric that was used against MLK and his supporters.
Last time I checked, there's no way to piss on someone's legacy and still have anything resembling respect for them.
And my basis for saying that Tea Partiers have soured on Palin is that, while they still like her personally, the consider her unqualified to run for President.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/04/tea-partiers-palin-unqualified/
Incidentally, to whom are you referring when you claim that the TPM is trying to portray MLK Jr as a "free marketer"? I've never seen that.
Anybody familiar with MLK Jr. knows that he believed in Marxist economic analysis -- as even his father acknowledged in an interview many years ago. However, because of his religious beliefs, he rejected communism. He did, however, explicitly accept the principles of democratic socialism.
For a detailed discussion of King's economic beliefs, see historian Adam Fairclough's article "Was Martin Luther King A Marxist?" in the Spring 1983 issue of History Workshop, pp 118-125. Also see Douglas Sturm, "Martin Luther King Jr, a Democratic Socialist" in the Journal of Religious Ethics, Fall 1990, pp 79-105.
Tea Party still = JBS
**In fact, this may surprise you but the CEO of the JBS (Art Thompson) published an article a few months ago in which he advised extreme caution with respect to support of Sarah Palin because he thought she probably is under the influence of what the JBS describes as nefarious "Insiders"**
And that's good, because most tea partiers seemed to have seriously soured on Sarah Palin as well.
---------------------
**Furthermore, there is nothing in available evidence to suggest that the TPM buys into the JBS premise that both the KKK and our civil rights movement was "controlled" by "Communists". **
They've instead decided to "reclaim" MLK's vision to try and paint him as a free marketer, and have taken to claiming that King's legacy was hijacked by progressives and socialists to make him appear that he was actually a liberation theologist who wanted government to redistribute wealth. They've chosen a strategy of revising MLK's history rather than flat-out attack the man. The change in strategy however does a poor job of disguising the sentiment.
It seems you're really trying to grasp at straws on this, either because you're a tea-partier who's offended with being identified with the Birch Society, or Vice Versa. The facts really don't care however really don't care that you're offended.
Still trying to get the last word in an argument you lost 2 days ago?
"Instead of merely declaring your personal opinion, why don't you provide some specific factual evidence (as I have done)?"
I already have. You may not LIKE it, but that doesn't make it any less TRUE.
" They are not re-writing or misrepresenting anything about our civil rights movement or MLK Jr. "
Claiming that Martin Luther King was pursuing anything less than a social justice movement is a blatant misrepresentation of his legacy.
"Understandably, you do not cite a single reference for your assertion because it is an invention."
I posted a link at the end of that post. Please remove your head from your ass before we continue any further with this conversation. Good night ^_^
Bryan:
1. The link you posted was not at the end of message #4 in which you made your reference to MLK. In any event, your link (in message #7 regarding Sarah Palin) produces only the following message: "Error establishing a database connection"
2. You have not provided ANY evidence to support your contentions in this thread. Everything you have provided is your mis-informed or ill-informed personal opinion.
3. BY CONTRAST, I have provided (a) polling data, (b) bibliographic references to articles in scholarly journals, (c) pertinent primary source quotations and (d) links (which actually work!) to reports which contain voluminous documentation to support my contentions about the difference between JBS beliefs vs what the TPM believes.
4. Now that we have established that you are both arrogant and disingenuous -- why should we listen further to you?
1: I click on it and it pops up just fine. Denial much?
2: I provided plenty . You just didn't LIKE it. But again, the facts really don't care whether you like them or not.
3: No you haven't. You've thrown up strawmen and pretended to not get responses to your asinine questions
4: Well, you obviously keep coming back because you're a masochist. I keep checking on this because it's my damn blog and it's fun to smack around right wing apologists.