What is it about those Tea Party types, are they genetically programmed to spout out absurdities as a way of getting attention? Does this constitute some sort of political personality disorder? The verbal pratfalls of Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell or Sharron Angle are by now all the stuff of political fact if not legend. To this we now add the ridiculous yammering of the latest entry to the 2012 Republican presidential race, Rick Perry. Not that Perry needs all that much of an introduction. He’s already on the record as having said that, under certain circumstances, Texas might leave the Union. However, now only days after entering the 2012 presidential sweepstakes, Perry has gone so far as to suggest that Fed Chairman Ben Bernake might be guilty of treason. In Perry’s own words: “If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I dunno what y’all would do to him in Iowa but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treasonous in my opinion.”
So what in fact is Perry suggesting? That Ben Bernanke, if he were to engage in further monetary easing and then decided to show up in Texas, should be pursued by a lynch mob or vigilantes so as to be subjected to some old fashioned frontier justice? Really? What would Rick Perry suggest his “Texans” do to Bernanke; hang him till he quit kicking, tar and feather him or hot brand him with the Tea Party logo “DON’T TREAD ON ME”? If this is the mindset of a G.O.P. presidential hopeful in 2012, then perhaps we can create a work release program for any number of convicted Mafia hoods currently doing time who are more than well practiced in the arts of intimidation and extortion, both verbal and physical. That said, the prudent and rational participant in American democracy can only ask the one compelling question that has to be on his mind; Based on this kind of talk, is Rick Perry even remotely qualified to lead the leading nation of the free world into this challenging century and out of the the Great Recession? The answer is, most likely not. Moreover is this latest Perry pratfall the last straw for Michele Bachmann? Will she, as a strategic campaign ploy, now take off the gloves and accuse Rick Perry of anti-American views in the same manner in which she has accused so many liberals and progressives on Capitol Hill?
You know for all of the problems besetting the embattled Barack Obama as he enters the 2012 election season, he and his consort must be thanking God in heaven above for the Bachmann victory in Iowa and the entrance of Rick Perry into the 2102 presidential campaign. They may very well bail Obama out of the predicament within which he is currently embroiled.
Steven J. Gulitti
8/18/11
Sources:
Perry on Bernanke: ‘I dunno what y’all would do to him in Iowa but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas’
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/15/296552/perry-on-bernanke-pretty-ugly-down-in-texas/
Rick Perry Accuses Bernanke of Treason
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/08/rick-perry-wants-get-ugly-ben-bernake/41310/
Gov. Perry: Bernanke printing more money would be ‘almost treasonous’
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/176985-perry-bernanke-printing-more-money-would-be-almost-treasonous
3 Points on Rick Perry
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/three-points-on-rick-perry/243679/
As I have said before, in other posts and comments, there is a faction that wants to win the Civil War aka The War Between the States according to some – this time:
http://youtu.be/u9YjGWBWCe0
This one is about Rick Perry and succession: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/04/17/0417gop.html
Anyway, not going to be a boring election season, that much is for sure.
amberpaw, thanks for the links and for your comments.
Having just sat through all 25 minutes of Perry’s speech to the Republican Leadership Conference, I can tell you he offers something Obama does not: a clear, plausible narrative of how to get the country back on its feet. Admittedly, nothing about it is true but it is a good story; it is well-delivered; Perry is a really good speaker. I urge fellow liberals to listen to it.
Mr Gulitti does a business in derision. Whenever Palin, Bachmann, or Perry says something dumb, you can count on him to write and cross-post a (mostly unreadable) screed like the above. The problem for Democrats is that the voters we need to win over don’t even know who Bernanke is. They’re much more forgiving of people not knowing what treason means. They haven’t heard a plausible story that explains Democratic policies clearly and cogently.
So contempt for Gov. Perry based on insidery digs doesn’t add up to a lot. After all, the elections of 1980 and 2000 were won by well-spoken bozos too. What mix of hubris and complacency makes us think 2012 has to be different? Mr. Gulitti, after all, will be just as happy writing contemptuous pieces about a President Bachmann.
“Mr Gulitti does a business in derision.”
Hardly the case here, I’m just pointing out the farce and folly of a guy like Perry who is a pea in much the same pod as Bachmann and Palin for that matter.
I asserted above that Mr. Guliti’s posts were mostly unreadable.
Apparently, they are even unreadable for their author.
Bernanke (and other people who work with Obama) are one of them and not one of us. You can’t vote for Obama because he’s one of them. And the voters who respond to this sales pitch don’t care about any legal/dictionary definitions of treason.
There is an effective counter-argument. Here’s an example:
–Bill Clinton at the 92 Convention.
.
And they need to pay their fair share. Warren Buffet was right that his tax rate should not be lower than his administrative assistant’s tax rate.
Buffet never said “raise my taxes” or he would have called for a tax on the transfer of shares to non-profits, or a tax on wealth. Buffet last called for the elimination of the Bush Tax Cuts, which would have raised taxes on people living middle class lives. He’s the super-rich raising taxes on the upper-middle class.
…yes, some hit would go to the middle class, but they would disproportionately take more from the rich. Most Democrats and the President want to keep the Bush tax cuts on the first quarter million dollars and eliminate them on income over that, which would be stretching the definition of middle class quite a bit if you make that much.
Let’s look for example here at 2006 exit polls rather than at another one of Seascraper’s inventions:
30% of voters earning under $15,000 voted Republican
53% of voters earning more than $200,000 voted Republican
In fact, if you look at those statistics, the more money you make the more likely you are to vote Republican.
Ben Bernanke, who works at the pleasure of the richest people in the world, makes an unlikely populist hero.
Perry has the right idea to target monetary policy. I believe Bernanke is a patriot, however his weakening of the dollar has served only the elites (through higher stock prices) at the expense of the common wage-earner (from higher food and energy prices). All the wealth effects benefit the top and all the income effects hit the bottom.
Perry’s ideas are currently being tried out in Europe. You want to import that mess here?
It’s not working in Europe. The U.K. is sinking back into recession. France, formerly doing sort of okay, is now doing sort of not okay. The non-Germany part of mainland Europe is doing badly.
Are you a victim of American Exceptionalism? Do you imagine there are no lessons to be learned from Europe or are you just not paying attention?
In the days of Bretton Woods, the US government borrowed and spent under Keynesian theories. That weakened the dollar and saw its gold reserves cut in half. That was embarrassing, but it kept some kind of leash on the Treasury.
In the current days of the floating currency, weakening the dollar covers bad fiscal policy, for a while. Unfortunately it comes out of our hides when we have to pay more for everything.
Furthermore, the US government has not “borrowed and spent under Keynesian theories”. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
Republicans won the votes of those earning in excess of $200,000 by a 63% to 35% margin. Contrast the $30,000-$50,000 bracket which split evenly.
Believe me, I hate the rich as much as any of you. I am constantly at the mercy of these people and their insane Housewives of X County. But most investment capital comes form people earning over $200,000. Something like 60% I’ve heard quoted. Unfortunately we need these people.
In a better world all the poor saps making $35K/year who are my friends would see their salaries approach $200,000. Would they all vote Republican? Would that be wrong?
I get it.
Because Bernanke is rich — or associates with rich people, he’s wrong.
Because Rick Perry sounds like someone who isn’t rich, he’s right.
Such deductions must save you from hours of needless thinking!