Primary Results in Seven States and the District of Columbia
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-09-15/primary-results-seven-states-and-district-columbia
Morning-after analysis of primaries in seven states and the District of Columbia. What contests between mainstream Republican candidates and tea party activists signal about voter sentiment ahead of the midterm elections in November.
Guests
Donna Brazile
Democratic strategist; adjunct professor at Georgetown University; nationally syndicated columnist.
David Keene
chairman of the American Conservative Union and a columnist for The Hill.
Amy Walter
political director, ABC News.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Paladino's win does NOT (!) represent a victory for the Tea Party. The race for the governorship of New York is virtually a no contest win for Andrew Cuomo. The GOP party regulars know this. They selected the totally lackluster Fazio to run in the primary and gave him little financial support. Paladino won by default. The Tea Party had little to do with it and gains nothing by it.
Why do the conservative guests on the Diane Rehm show continue to speak when others are speaking? Why does David Keene think it appropriate to say "Dream On" while Diane Rehm is identifying Donna Brazile? Mr. Keene, you are rude. Please stop it.
Your panel is so facinated by electoral mechanics and the upsets caused by the Tea Party that they ignore the principles that Tea Party candidates espouse--when they do so. Isn't anyone else out there concerned that Miller's supporters enjoy parading with rifles and pistols, that Angles has called for "Second Amendment" remedies to elections that don't go the Tea Partiers' ways, and Glenn Beck, Palin and other paragons of Tea Partydom regularly use violent imagery in their speeches.
Diane you Rock!
Now my question: "if the tea partiers became their own party wouldn't they bicker too much over what federal spending to cut. I want the tea party to say clearly what federal spending they would cut. Let one of those tea partiers run on the campaign of cutting medicare benefits or medicaid or military spending and they will end up fighting with each other."
The TEA Party is NOT the republican party. If it were I would not identify with it at all.
George Bush was one of the worst presidents ever. His son was even worse.
Obama is trying to be as bad. Clinton lucked into being able to ride a bubble all the way through.
We have not had a good government in generations. It is time to FIRE Washington completely.
I wonder if the rupture within the GOP will extend beyond the election. The other day I read that Minority Leader Boehner and Whip Eric Cantor are not close; and when I think about the two of them they remind me of former Speaker Hastert, who many thought was passive, and HIS minority leader, Tom Delay, who was anything but. Does your panel think that if the GOP takes the House, that Cantor might become the real power behind Boehner or that he might even challenge him outright?
I wonder if the rupture within the GOP will extend beyond the election. The other day I read that Minority Leader Boehner and Whip Eric Cantor are not close; and when I think about the two of them they remind me of former Speaker Hastert, who many thought was passive, and HIS minority leader, Tom Delay, who was anything but. Does your panel think that if the GOP takes the House, that Cantor might become the real power behind Boehner or that he might even challenge him outright?
The 24/7 news cycle and right wing radio personalities created the Tea Party (literally - it is a Fox creation), let the astro turfers fund it, and the RNC thought it would be a great boon for them. Well, the chickens have come home to roost. Yes, the country is upset and we do want change in Washington. 53% of us VOTED for that change in 2008. The "Tea party" movement started because certain people can't deal with an African American President. As soon as these rallies started, the number of KKK rallies in America went down. Why bother with dry cleaning the sheets if you can demonstrate your racist viepoints AND be validated by the press. This country lacks seriousness. What makes for a good 30 second segment CAN'T govern. Until people realize that and stope trying to get elected and START governing for the good of the American people, the country will continue its spiral descent down the drain. Progressives are upset too. We need to take the lead and remind the President that we put into office that it's time to stand up and be strong and wash out the wishy washy. People respond to leadership. Demonstrate it and the majority WILL follow.
When can you be sure that a fact will not follow? When you hear a conservative or Republican say, "The fact is ..."
I am convinced that the best thing that can happen is to let the republicans and their tea party have power and govern. Their newly found angst about deficits and incompetent government is very interesting. Obama has turned out to be Bush lite yet none of them were running around talking about taking their country back when Bush was destroying it instead of Obama. I can't wait to see how they actually cut the deficit. Will they go ahead and actually cut the Defense budget by 75% the way it ought to be. Or will they cut social security and medicare and support themselves and/or their aging parents? There are interesting times ahead.
Jonathan Rauch, the National Journal writer who's been covering the Tea Party and who has gotten to know them well, was interviewed on NPR this morning. Well worth listening to (and the audio is up now). Here is part of what he said:
...When I talked to sociologists about [the Tea Party being decentralized, leaderless], they said this is very hard to sustain because you're trying to do two contradictory things at once. On the one hand, you're trying to be radically decentralized and leaderless. On the other hand, you're trying to have a national impact. I talked to one sociologist, David Meyer at UC Irvine, who said in his opinion the Tea Party's influence is peaking right about now, in the current Republican primaries and that one of two things will happen. Either they'll dissolve into a bunch of local groups and disputes -- without much concentration or focus -- or, in five years time they'll be a Washington interest group with a CEO and staff and a press person whom I'll call up to get quotes from... Tea Partyers, when confronted with that, say, "Well, he's a traditionalist. He would say that, wouldn't he!"
I disagree with the comment that people are frustrated with the "incompetent government" they currently have. Most people will hear this as an indictment of the Obama administration, which is NOT incompetent. The incompetence comes from the Republicans in Congress who are willing to obstruct to win even if it is to the detriment of the American people. Please clarify whom your guests are referring to as "incompetent".
Talk about the funding behind the tea party - it's not just a grassroots movement -it IS driven by big money libertarian billionaires - like the Koch brothers. The non-regulated spending is running almost 10 to 1 in favor of republican and tea party candidates. And PLEASE when a weekly standard person is on the air, identify the magazine as the people who brought you the iraq war and who brought sarah palin out of alaska.
@ Mike Costanza:
No they don't, they're so thrilled to shake what they imagine to be The Constitution in the faces of those of us who've upheld other amendments for a couple of centuries. It's pure and simple retribution.
The fact that Diane keeps saying (and I have heard her say it on other shows) "Just what does the Tea Party want?" shows her incredible bias. How can she say she does not know what they stand for? She knows. But, like most liberals, she believes if she acts and speaks as if the Tea Party is some kooky, confusing, unorganized group of folks out of touch with reality then no one will listen to them. The Tea Party wants less federal government, less taxes, less control from Washington, less programs and more freedom to prosper. They believe that the rights of each indiviudal should not be trampled on by the heavy hand of the government that thinks it knows what is best for everyone.
The Liberals are secure in their base; those that enjoy the free services off the back of other's hard work. Those folks will always vote for liberal policies. Why would they not? I like getting stuff for free! What the liberals fear is loss of Independents that understand the truth of the Tea Party.
@Capital1234
But Diane does indeed believe she does a superb job concealing her liberal bias. 1994 "Sonya Live" show:
SONYA: "Are you suggesting that if I listen to you, I would not know what your political agenda is or what your point of view might be?"
REHM: "For the most part, that's absolutely right."
Makes one wonder what is Diane's definition of "most."
Coincidentally I've just been reading "Fascism and Big Business" (1936) by French dissident Daniel Guerin. He explained how callous racist parties came to power in Italy and Germany with massive funding from elite industrialists and financiers. A recent article about David and Charles Koch in the NYT reveals such a pattern. Like the Nazis the crass commercial minded (see the work of Erich Fromm) Tea Partiers understand what is going down but expect to benefit as regulation and social responsibility are further de-funded. If you look at Glenn Beck's gold selling scams you know there is no limit to deception. If it takes widespread homelessness for them to become or remain real estate entrepreneurs they are ready. If it takes denial of emergency health care for them to get plastic surgery they are ripe. If a hundred children must be malnourished for them to pre-sell a fetus to the wealthy childless they'll be there. And are these the same people who "create jobs?" I'd starve before I'd work for them. For a good time join the Resistance.
I am not sure if it is all Conservative guests, that are rude, but I did find Mr. Keene to be a rude guest and, because he obviously has a slant to sell, was not a quality guest that could provide insight and analysis instead of spin and talking points.
Ms. Rehm, please try to get guests who while maybe considered conservative or liberal, can also step back and do a somewhat unbiased analysis. Mr. Keene did not seem to pass this threshold.
@Capital1234
The question "What do the Tea Partiers want?" really is asking about the policy and legislative initiatives they advocate. Statements about lower taxes and less government are far too vague (for me at least) to say much of anything about what the Tea Party would or would not do.
For example, the desire for less government and lower taxes doesn't provide a clue as to how that might be accomplished. This year the federal government is projected to spend $3.6 trillion, roughly $2.2 trillion of that financed by tax revenues. So, let's say we cut taxes by a fairly modest 20% and simultaneously balance the budget. To make this happen the federal budget would have to be reduced by $2 trillion. How does the Tea Party propose to do this?
If we eliminate all safety net programs (SSI for the elderly and disabled, unemployment compensation, food stamps, schools lunches, housing assistance, etc) we would save half a trillion dollars. If we stop funding medical and scientific research, transportation and infrastructure spending, education, foreign aid and other miscellaneous programs, that would yield another half a trillion or so in savings. Since we can't stop paying on the national debt, the only budget items left are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Department of Defense, and Homeland Security. Every one of the programs would have to be cut by a third in order to realize the necessary savings.
I don't know about Diane, so let me speak for myself. If the Tea Party wants to cut taxes and balance the budget and they actually have a plan for making this happen, what is that plan? Where do they cut spending and by how much? What do they want?
@ Capital 1234
Asking "What does the Tea Party want?" can hardly be considered biased, if she asked it in a way that implied an answer then it would be biased. For example if instead she asked "Isn't the Tea Party (TP) movement too unorganized to know what it wants?" then that is a biased way to ask a question as it is also stating that it is without dispute that TP is unorganized.
However if she asks it often from multiple guests familiar with the TP it might be because the TP is a decentralized organization. Your specific definition of what the TP wants may not agree with another self-descrined TP'er.
In reply to capital1234
This second paragraph captures what is so sad and troubling about the tea party movement. I am a professional in my 30s who just completed postgraduate work. I am finally making enough money to start paying off debts and support a family. I do not need any more costs (like taxes). But the truth is that part of my taxes support the schools and services from which I benefited in order to reach this point.
Do you think the janitor at my elementary school didn't work hard? How about the nurses at my pediatrician's who probably struggled to make ends meet? Do their children deserve to grow up in poverty, unhealthy and uneducated?
Government, at least in part, organizes the services that we supply to ourselves. Overzealous destruction of that organization will disproportionately affect the middle and lower classes, many of whom, I guarantee you, work hard. And that may not harm the rich at first, but they will feel the effects as a stable and productive middle class fades.
It's sad to see so many people give in to the understandable anger of the tea party. And it's sad that none of our leaders are capable of articulating rational thought to counter it.