What's Racist about Balanced Budgets?
Jul 14, 2010 at 11:53 AM
The internet and blogosphere are abuzz today with discussion of the NAACP's resolution that the Tea Party is racist (e.g. here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here -- all via Memeorandum). How predictable! For decades now, any opposition to the progressive expansion of state power, control, and influence is met with accusations of racism.
But in case you weren't aware (apparently the NAACP wasn't, because we know that it definitely isn't a radicalized tool of the progressive establishment, using patently absurd accusations to attack and intimidate grassroots political activists for challenging the status quo), the size, role, and influence of government have nothing to do with race!
What on earth could possibly be racist about saying we need balanced budgets? Or that our government spends too much? We do need balanced budgets (as it seems axiomatic to me that you have to produce something before you can consume it -- that you can't indefinitely spend more than you have to spend)! Washington D.C. does spend too much! What does that have to do with race? Besides -- who could disagree?
Does anyone honestly want to raise their hand and say that Washington is not spending too much? Anyone?? Even Mr. Obama agrees to that much. Remember how he and the Democrats tried to sell their perpetual health insurance industry bailout to the American people? They said it was a matter of getting costs under control. They said the fastest-growing part of the budget was medicine, and that we needed to do something to fix it.
The federal budget isn't just too big; it isn't just out of control... it's insane! It's positively suicidal. It is going to run our nation into the ground if we don't do something to fix it (like spending less money and ignoring the Democrats' arithmetic that says if Washington spends more money, it will somehow reduce deficits).
This Tea Party movement arose out of a frustration at an out-of-touch, out-of-control, out-of-solutions, out-of-money Federal government. Unlike the vague hope and change promised by the Obama campaign in 2007-08, the Tea Partiers had some very specific, very practical, very sane policy proposals to reign Washington in: these were 1) an end to corporate bailouts, 2) a balanced budget, 3) term limits, 4) a "read the bills" act, 5) and a full, public audit of the Federal Reserve bank.
None of that has anything to do with anybody's race! Period. None of it. For goodness' sake, you'd think any honest liberal would have been thrilled that a bunch of white, middle-aged, middle class Christians were standing up and raging against the malfeasance of corporate America, asking for more transparency and accountability, demanding some more regulation and oversight of the world's most powerful and secretive private corporation, and trying to ensure that Congressional seats are more accessible to every day Americans, not just the wealthy, entrenched establishment.
If anything, these policies would all improve the quality of life for racial minorities in America. Bailing out irresponsible corporations with the printing press only rewards the wealthy by punishing the poor with inflation, which causes higher prices at the checkout counter. Rich Wall Street men got money that was stolen from every poor, black family that struggles to buy food, clothes, and diapers.
The bill that made this travesty possible may not have become law if Congress was actually required to read it. Tea Party candidate, Rand Paul proposes a "read the bills" act that would require Congress to wait one day for every 20 pages of legislation. If this had already been law at the time the financial bailout bill was being deliberated, it may not have passed.
You can decide for yourself what the NAACP's real purpose is, but they've made it abundantly clear with their absurd condemnation of the Tea Party as racist, that they are about as relevant today as their name, which includes the now antiquated euphemism "colored people."
If the Tea Party has nothing to do with race, as I've outlined here, the NAACP has still less to do with race, except to wield it as a weapon against any brave challenger of the status quo. I propose a name change to The National Association for the Advancement of Corporate Plutocracy.