Age in the Age of the Tea Party

We all have opinions and ideas about the Tea Party by now. Some of us think we know what they stand for. We've seen who they nominate for elections of all stripes and we've seen how they run those elections. So, my question at this point is this.

Does the Tea Party care what happens to young people long term?

I think they don't. I don't believe that the Tea Party as an entity cares one bit about what the country will look like for those of us in our 20s and 30s when we're in our 50s and 60s. You want proof, right? Okay. Let's look at the facts.

The Huffington Post has an article up here that suggests that the Tea Party is disproportionately elderly. The relevant section says this.

the demographics of the movement seemingly align with those who traditionally vote for the conservative candidate as well. Fifty-six percent of Tea Party respondents are male; 22 percent are over the age of 65 (compared with just 14 percent who are between the ages of 18 and 34)

Compare that to 12% (as of 2004) and rising for the whole country. There's no doubt that the Tea Party is more elderly than the country on average. The Huffington Post article also notes that 14% of the Tea Party is 18-34. Compare that to roughly the same number for all Americans who are in that same age bracket. So that's the Tea Party. But what about their candidates and positions. Do they espouse positions that benefit older Americans at the expense of those of us who've lived less? Check out what Rand Paul, Tea Party candidate for Senate in Kentucky has to say. That's from the conservative Washington Post. Rand Paul wants to raise the retirement age for "younger workers" (he's not specific on who that is) in order to pay for things like an extension of the Bush tax cuts on those making $250,000 or more per year. And we all know that those of us in the 18-34 bracket are much less likely to be in that group. That's how the corporate ladder works. You hit the jackpot once you've been on the job for a long time and proved your worth. And it probably should work that way. But, the point here is that we're not getting bonuses now for a raised retirement age. We're getting screwed in order to pay for bonuses for old corporate VPs like the guys at Goldman Sachs. To be fair, that WaPo article suggests that the Democratic nominee in Kentucky also wants to extend all the tax cuts. Good job there Mr. Conway.

Then there's Sharron Angle. Check out how she feels about Healthcare Reform. Just the other week on September 23rd it banned denying children coverage because of pre-existing conditions. This bill is good for young people. It's good for young people because the jobs that we increasingly hold, hourly jobs with no benefits, allow us to stay on our parents healthcare until the age of 26. That also went into effect on the 23rd. And it creates a system where healthcare may just become affordable one day. Most older people have healthcare though their work. We aren't like that. Just check it out here. She says there is "nothing good in this law." Also, for nerds out there like me, they set that ad to the theme music for Battlestar Galactica. Win.

Those are just two of a litany of examples, but I think my point is proven when I say that the Tea Party has no interest in protecting younger people in America. Vote at your own risk.

Republicans have a Tea Problem

This isn't new news. But it is important news. It's been ramping up for quite a while now as we move through the Primary season. It started with Sharron Angle. It continued with Joe Miller's defeat of Lisa Murkowski in Alaska. And now, we're looking at Carl Paladino and Christine O'Donnell. Those are the highlights, but you can bet that there are others out there who are a little less wackadoodle but no less unelectable. The Tea Party may yet play Ralph Nader to the Republican Party's Al Gore. Weird analogy, I know. To be sure, as a liberal commentator one of the things I'm going to do is try to be optimistic about Democratic chances in ANY upcoming election. Check out Nate Silver's Five Thirty Eight for the statistics. He still gives the Republicans a 2 to 1 shot at winning the House. Get ready for Speaker Boehner, but cross your fingers you won't ever see it. 

The Senate looked much better last week. But, in a rare bright spot, in the last week, Democratic chances of holding at least 51 seats there have gone up. Again, Nate hits the nail on the head when checking out the statistics in this article about the primaries in Deleware the other evening. But in short, we can thank Christine O'Donnell. For those of you who haven't gotten the memo about her yet, here's the short version. She just defeated nine time Congressman Mike Castle for the Republican nomination in Deleware. She now faces Chris Coons. Coons is a strong pick. There are only three counties in Delaware (I know, right?) and as a leader in one of them he has made tough choices to balance their budget and pay back their debt. The have a AAA financial rating. He's honest and upstanding and really about as squeeky clean as you can ask a candidate to be. That said, he had been written off as having little chance while everyone assumed he'd be challenging Mike Castle. But he's not. His challenger is Christine O'Donnell. She has run for several times before, with the most recent instance in 2008 when she tried to upset VP Joe Biden. Even while spending almost all of his energy helping the President with that race, Biden defeated Mrs. O'Donnell soundly. Her 2008 Campaign manager ran robocalls against her candidacy before the primary on tuesday, and though they did not work, to me that says something about how badly the Republican Party doesn't want to have to deal with her. Among other things, this Campaign manager has accused Mrs. O'Donnell of using campaign money to pay personal expenses including rent. She has touted herself as a college graduate for a long time, but only recently received her degree after having finally paid her school what she owed them. And this is one of the people the Tea Party wants to send to the Senate to fix our financial troubles? 

Mrs. O'Donnell has spent most of her pre-campaign days as the founder and organizer of SALT, or Savior's Alliance for Lifting the Truth. A creepy name for an organization if there ever was one, it gives you no idea what the organization's main goal is. Video exists of Mrs. O'Donnell explaining this so it's not just me making things up.

YouTube doesn't want to embed, but you can check out the video here.

Yes, that was the theme song from Joan of Arcadia, and yes, aside from the 90s hair we all had, that is Christine O'Donnell really telling you you can't masturbate because of the bible. Really. And now she wants to be the senator from Delaware.

In short, many of these candidates including Mrs. O'Donnell and Mrs. Angle may prove to be short lived victories. Yes, the Tea Party got them nominated. But can they actually put them into Congress, or will they do poorly in the general election because of the far right wing values they espouse? I imagine the latter is the answer and Chris Coons and Harry Reid are all to glad for that to be the case.

This is how the fight against Obama is being characterized. With Fawkesian subtitles, clever editing, and a sound track more fit to an end of the world/disaster movie than a political campaign. Obama isn't perfect. Not by a long shot. But this is why we need to support him in 2010 and 2012.

If you go to their website two things will happen. One, you'll think it's funny that only 113,000 people have taken their "pledge" so far as of the beginning of May and two, you'll notice that, way down at the bottom, it says, "Paid for by the Republican Governors Association". Just saying.

She's at it Again

Friday saw another post by our beloved former governor of Alaska on her Facebook page in response to the Horizon Oil Spill. I thought about not linking it in order to not give her the traffic, but as I'm going to quote some of the post here I want it to be available to readers in full so as not to take the Governor out of context. Her note is here. As you might expect the core of her response is still "Drill, Baby, Drill", now wrapped in a shell of concern for the environment.

As an Alaskan, I can speak from the heart about the tragedy of an oil spill. For as long as I live, I will never forget the day the Exxon-Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef and millions of gallons of North Slope crude poured into the waters of our beautiful Prince William Sound.

To be honest, I'm tired of this idea that only Alaskans understand the oil and gas industry for what it really is. We all buy their products, refineries are everywhere, and there are (as has been horribly demonstrated) other places where extraction is happening inside the US other than the North Slope and Prudhoe Bay.

Alaskans understand the tragedy of an oil spill, and we’ve taken steps to do all we can to prevent another Exxon tragedy, but we are still pro-development. We still believe in responsible development, which includes drilling to extract energy sources, because we know that there is an inherent link between energy and security, energy and prosperity, and energy and freedom.

I think it's safe to say that Americans understand the tragedy of an oil spill. But leaving that aside, if Alaska has done all it can, how come twenty years later the majority of tankers operating out of the Port of Valdez in Prince William Sound are still single hulled tankers? Could it be that replacing those tankers might cost Exxon and BP money that they don't want to spend and so they haven't been pushed to make necessary changes?

She does get one thing right. And I want to give credit where it's due. There is a link between energy and security, energy and prosperity, and energy and freedom. So why is it then, as a major news contributor and a political figure of some serious heft, Governor Palin hasn't used any of her significant power to push for more money for R&D on renewable energy generation, or more money toward the technologies that we already have?  After all, we just approved the new wind farm off of Cape Cod. I agree that it was a tough decision but it comes down to whether you're willing to make the sacrifices to break America's dependency on foreign oil or not. Clearly the Governor and her friends in the Tea Party and the GOP aren't willing to make that sacrifice. For them, truly, national security always comes down to who to kill, what war to start, or what to blow up in that country several thousand miles from here. Even though their rhetoric says that they get it, they never seem to make the easy choices that will advance our national security and safeguard the lives of all Americans including those in the military.

The Governor also pushes the idea in her post that she (and by extension the GOP) has been tough on Big Oil.

This was the position I took as an oil and gas regulator and as Governor of Alaska when my administration ramped up oversight of the oil industry and created a petroleum-systems-integrity office to monitor our oil and gas infrastructure for potential environmental risks. I took a lot of heat for the stand I took “against the oil industry” (which is how political adversaries labeled my actions). But we took tough action because there was proof of some improper maintenance of oil infrastructure which I believed was unacceptable. We instituted new oversight and held British Petroleum (BP) financially accountable for poor maintenance practices.

If that is true, why is it that profits for Petroleum companies went through the roof during the Bush Administration? Well, besides the fact that two unnecessary wars opened up a big new market for them. Granted, the Obama Administration doesn't get off the hook. After all they just a few weeks ago lifted a ban on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico that they are only now, in the light of a national disaster, walking back. The Obama Administration is, just like the Bush Administration, far to loyal to big business interests. We've seen this time and again from the deep water drilling, to the weak stance on Health Care Reform when Big Pharma got involved and now we're seeing it in Wall Street Reform. Everyone is to blame here. Every administration since the early 1900s, the Democrats, the GOP, the Tea Party, and yes, you and me. We take for granted that our choices at the pump and at the ballot box have no effect on these big companies and we're wrong. It's time, well past time, to make a conscious effort to drive less, take public transit, walk, and bike more, vote for representatives who legitimately want to control big business, and get America off our Oil Addiction, foreign or otherwise.

Florida Senate Take Two

I want to do an update on the Florida Senate race as it looks like things will be shaking up a bit in a few hours. What has been talked about as a possibility up until now looks like it's going to come to pass, namely, as the St. Petersburg Times is reporting, Charlie Christ should be announcing his run as an independent in the race for the open Florida Senate seat. He's been trailing Marco Rubio in the GOP Primary polling for quite some time and doesn't seem to be fond of the idea of losing out before the general election. Historically the game plan for federal elections in Florida has been to run to your base through the primary and then scramble back to the middle to get as many moderates as possible by the general. This is mainly because Florida is a wild state from the conservative panhandle and northern area along the Alabama and Georgia state lines down to the cosmopolitan city of Miami with its large block of hispanic voters and more liberal heads.

A three way race shakes this dynamic up considerably. With three candidates you only need a plurality under Florida election law to win. As best I know there are no runoffs or tie-brakers. This can be a huge advantage for Christ but also for Rubio and Kendrick Meek the likely Democratic challenger. In this instance there will be much more running to the base for Rubio and Meek because both sides can at least hypothetically get their candidates 34% of the vote where 51% was impossible. What this also does though is give Christ wide latitude to sweep up an odd man out coalition of moderate Republicans, true Independents, and Democrats disaffected by things that the Obama Administration has or hasn't done that they disapprove of. His main issues are going to be fundraising and creating a viable infrastructure to run on without the help of the GOP.

I think this is going to turn out to be an infinitely interesting race between now and November. I think it could tell us just how many moderate Republicans are out there, being drowned out by the Tea Party right now. And it could also give us a shot at a Democratic Senator from Florida.

More on Senate Races

I read this today on Firedoglake and it got me thinking. Reid was/is looking at a very very difficult race for his own seat in Nevada. That's a big deal, even in a year that is as anti-incumbent as this one. But all of this is still up in the air. Will the Tea Party candidate run, my gut says yes. What we're essentially looking at here is the Tea Party serving as the Ralph Nader of the Nevada senate race. Only this time the Dems may come out on top.

I have very mixed feelings about this. I don't think I've said so before, but I don't like Harry Reid much. I think he's an ineffective party leader and he doesn't have enough spine to get the things done that need to be taken care of. But if I compare that to putting a Republican in that seat, I have to say I'm torn. On the one hand, if Reid loses, we get a new (hopefully more effective) party leader. Names like Dick Durbin have been thrown around. But, this scenario also means one less seat in the Senate for Democrats to be able to do the things we need them to do. I don't care what kind of reform you're pulling for most be it healthcare, the banking system, or something else; your best bet is to have as many Democrats in Congress as possible.

Senate Races

It's taking a lot to get used to forming my own ideas to put on this blog. Give me a while to get into gear. In any case, I want to take a moment to talk about the Florida Senate race today. Or more specifically, the Republican primary between Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio. This is an issue that has been brewing for a while, and in some contexts can be seen as representative of the larger issue in the Republican Party right now. A lot of talking heads have been saying that this race is a metaphor for the larger divide between the mainstream Republican Party and the Tea Party movement. While I would contend that the "mainstream" of the GOP is not that far to the left of the Tea Partiers anymore, how they view themselves within the party is really the important part here. Anyway, this article is what got me thinking about this issue this morning.

First off, the simple fact that there are outside influences like Mike Pence all the way from Indiana dipping their fingers into this race already is a statement on how big this is going to get. Believe me, this is Daschle/Thune territory that we're working toward. And it's just a GOP primary. Secondly, this race says loads about our political climate. By all accounts Charlie Crist is an excellent governor in both the big and little "G" senses. He's well liked in Florida. To see him slipping so majorly this early to someone like Marco Rubio says a lot about how the country, and really more specifically the GOP is going these days. That said, a moment ago I said, "this early". It is still early. The primary isn't until August 24th. Any manner of things could happen to turn Crist's chances around beginning with a fizzle in the popularity of the Tea Party. Stuff like this, especially Tancredo's comments could very well do that. Rachel Maddow's excellent coverage is here. Likewise, as strange as it sounds, President Obama could be Crist's biggest ally right now. If the momentum the President has been building since his Question Time with Congressional Republicans continues into the summer, the Tea Party could look very bad and a moderate seem the more reasonable choice to Florida GOP voters.