The Tea Party Caucus - Todd Akin

Todd Akin, the Tea Party Republican representative from Missouri has found himself in the midst of a emotionally charged debate. A member of the US Army named Chazray Clark was wounded passed away in Afghanistan because the medevac chopper that was flying in to rescue him had no armed escort. A blogger named Michael Yon, was embedded with the unit and has spoke out about arming the medevac squad.

Todd Akin has stepped in to give his opinion on the matter, saying, "Any policy commitment that would impede even a single wounded soldier or Marine from receiving medical care in the least amount of time possible is simply unacceptable”.

Medeveac units don't carry weapons because of the complex rules of war set forth by the Geneva Conventions. But, Akin argues that the Taliban and other terrorists do not play by those rules and thus, they do not apply. While it would be wrong to call Akin a means-justifies-the-ends type of guy this is a slippery slope. No soldiers should be placed in the way of undo harm, but if a superpower were to ignore the Geneva Convention simply because the enemy does not, the results could be disastrous.

We here at the Leibnizian Ramblings blog have no satire for this grave post. We merely wish to express our condolences to the family of the soldier whose life was lost. We do however, want to maintain our optimism and hope and pray that a resolution to the Afghanistan problem is in the making currently. America must take the moral high ground and protect its soldiers. We understand the delicate balance that this entails and do not offer and easy solutions. We caution against throwing the rules of engagement out, but likewise do not advocate leaving someone to die unnecessarily. As the conflict in Afghanistan continues to evolve, the United States must maintain its place as the moral center in this war, otherwise all that Chazray Clark fought for will have been in vain.

The Tea Party Caucus - Mike Pence

Mike Pence has made a recent trip to Middletown, America. Middletown, America is Muncie, Indiana, a sleepy little town in the Midwest in between Indianapolis and Fort Wayne along I-69. Muncie is home to Ball State University and used to be the epicenter for the Ball Jar empire. Middletown, America received a lot of attention from businesses and politicians throughout the years because it was seen as a breeding ground for what the Midwest liked and disliked. Since the Ball brothers left though it has dwindled in size and importance. But for Hoosiers, Muncie still represents the paradigm of Indiana residents. Indiana, though a landlocked state with not much international prominence has still produced its fair share of importance. Just look at the current Republican battle for the presidential nomination and the wishing for My Man Mitch (the governor of Indiana) and you can understand the importance of this small town.

Mike Pence is looking for the nomination to Indiana's governorship and he met with the financial players of Muncie recently. While these businessmen command way less national prominence than the Ball Brothers did in the heyday of the movie Hoosiers (it highlights the little town of Milan, IN upsetting the perennial favorites Muncie Central in the annual hoops tournament), the prominence of Middletown has not diminished. Muncie is still the quintessential little town in America in a swing state.

Mitch Daniels was wished for to be a contender against the Obama Machine in 2012. He decided not to run of the election, which is wise considering the fact that Republicans really don't stand a chance for the White House in 2012. If, as expected, President Obama wins the election this year, it could be that two Hoosiers grace the presidential ticket in 2016. A Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence ticket in four years could upend more than a few folding chairs. It would be more excitement than Indiana has seen since Tippaecanoe and Tyler too!!! Why in the world is this important?

It's not in 2012, but it will be in 2016. If the world doesn't come to a complete halt in December of this year, the election of Mike and Mitch could be a windfall for true conservatism. Mitch and Mike are unabashedly Republican and their election would recenter the balance in Washington. While we don't make endorsements here, we make predictions. Mike Pence's little meeting at Minestrista will have deep implications of national politics four years from now. So you can tell your friends and family that the President in 2024 will be Mike Pence barring some catastrophe. That is the Tea Party's goal, 2024. After the Mayan, Zombie and Hipster apocalypse, the Tea Party can come to power and fix all that ails America. That, subsequently will be the same year that the Shi'ite Muslims elect Sarah Palin as their head. It will truly be a Tea Party year!

Rand Paul gets detained in the airport. The incident becomes a political battle over fast food.

We've already profiled Rand Paul on our Tea Party Caucus tour but he made some headlines today. The senator from Kentucky was flying through Nashville airport and when his knee made the security scanner get all wonky the TSA officers told them he would have to be patted down, the standard procedure. Rand Paul objected and made it into a whole scene. We understand the want to speak out when one has been held up by the TSA. It's frustrating, annoying and realistically Rand Paul probably does not look like someone who is about to cause damage to an aircraft through a terrorist attack.

But, this is the day we live in. It would be wrong only to profile Middle Eastern looking men or Muslims, or Sikhs (who are often mistaken for Muslims by uneducated policemen and security workers). If we do not want to slip into a racist form of McCarthyism in today's world than we need to use technology to our advantage and when that technology triggers something then we go to a manual check, regardless of what the traveler looks like. Besides, plenty of terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by middle aged White men. Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski and Gordon Kahl were all white men that operated in terrorism.

Unfortunately, in another sign of the times this incident became instantly politicized. Republican presidential hopeful and Rand Paul's father, Ron Paul called the TSA a police state. In an interesting and completely unforeseeable twist, the White House has defended the actions of the TSA. In other news the Republicans have declared that it is ok to eat fried chicken on Fridays. The Democrats countered that fried chicken is very unhealthy for you and thus, should only be eaten on Saturdays.

The Tea Party Caucus - Sandy Adams

Sandy Adams, a member of the Tea Party Caucus has decided to back Mitt Romney. According to CNN she has decided to back Mr. Romney because he represents the Republican chance at defeating President Obama in the general elections in November. This marks a stark difference between her and many of the Tea Party Loyalists. She is displaying a pragmatism that is often lacking in the young Tea Party candidates, representatives and grass roots organizers. What does this say about Sandy Adams?

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Sandy Adams, she is a freshman congresswoman who came to office with many of the other Tea Party members in 2010. Most of her colleagues are too idealistic to throw their support to a moderate like Romney. Maybe though this has to do with the fact that Romney's political committee Free and Strong America PAC donated $2500 to Sandy Adams' campaign back in 2010. But, maybe we're being too cynical here.

Sandy Adams' voting record shows that she has gone against Tea Party hardliners in the past. She voted for a short-term spending plan that was eschewed by many Tea Party members in early 2011. In spite of going against the Tea Party she has not lost the support of many conservatives. Maybe her pragmatism can push the Tea Party to be a more effective batch of legislators rather than a strong opposition force for politicians to have to deal with. That is some delightful optimism. We have now profiled five Tea Party Caucus members now, only some sixty odd more ones to go. That's stolen a bit of my optimistic thunder...

John Boehner offers a comparably light rebuke of President Obama

While congress was recessing President Obama appointed three people to the National Labor Relations Board and appointed Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The whole separation of powers thing that Montesquieu wrote about and America subsequently adopted is what has people upset about President Obama's appointees. Most of the time when a president picks someone to do something congress gets to vet that person and ok or disallow the appointment. This way the President doesn't get to install unelected leaders to hang on to their posts after he has left office.

I'm not going to say that President Obama has done some political chicanery here. I'm sure that what will happen is that the Republicans will gather enough fury to make this an issue and then President Obama will go out on the campaign and point this out to Republican obstructionism and win some points. But, the National labor Relations Board is something that deals a lot with unions. Republicans were going to block anyone that President Obama appointed to it, even if it were a janitor, unless of course the janitor was non-unionized. Also, the Dodd-Frank law demands that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have a head. Since congress has been unwilling to approve President Obama's appointee, congress in some sense is acting against the spirit of the law. If you don't like the law, rewrite it. You're congress.

Some of the Republican Presidential candidates have had some strong words about President Obama's usage of congressional recess to appoint the people to their positions.

Ron Paul has called for the president to be taken to task for his "clear disregard of the constitution".

Newt Gingrich calls President Obama an "imperial president" and urges congress to defund the National Labor Relations Board.

Mitt Romney has an even scathier scathing word for President Obama, "President Obama has wasted no time in returning to one of the top items on his agenda: doling out favors to his big labor political allies and giving them a dangerous level of power over businesses and workers". Ouch! Cronyism and corruption. Bam.

On the other hand John Boehner has offered a bland criticism of the president's actions saying, "This action goes beyond the President’s authority, and I expect the courts will find the appointment to be illegitimate". Obviously the recess was not long enough because Mr. Boehner seems to be exhausted from all the smackdown he has been receiving from House Republicans. Or its possible that the short vacation from those meanies has allowed him to return to a more demure and moderate self. Either way I'd expect some more venom from the mouth of John Boehner in the coming days, even if it is written by his Tea Party puppeteers.

The Tea Party Caucus - Rand Paul

Last time on our journey through the Tea Party Express we had a look at Jim DeMint. For this time, as the Iowa Caucuses comes to a full head tomorrow, we'll look at Rand Paul who has joined his father and presidential hopeful, Ron Paul. This seems a fitting time to continue our general overview of the Tea Party Caucus with a couple of thoughts on the younger Paul.

Rand Paul, the senator from Kentucky, styles himself as a constitutional conservative. Like his father, he is a trained doctor turned politician. The younger Paul cut his political teeth on an issue that has become near and dear to the Tea Party movement, taxes. Mr. Paul was the founder of Kentucky Taxpayers United that has kept tabs on legislators' records on taxing and spending. I'm sure that the KTU was conscience in their choice of the word "united" over "union". If they had gone by the name Kentucky Taxpayers Union the group would have been disavowed as being some sort of liberal, secular bastion of tax and spenders, even if they had observed their current conservative opinions. Such is the nonsensical emphasis on rhetorical devices of this age.

But, both Pauls are on a whistlestop tour of Iowa at the moment trying to churn up as much support for the elder Paul as possible. So our focus today will be on this and what the younger Paul is hoping to achieve in Iowa. Ron Paul is currently second in the Iowa polls, trailing Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney faces no challenge from Ron in moderate circles and this probably does not bother Rand too much as he sees moderates as being big government types whom conservatives ought to be wary of. So, Rand's focus is not on Mitt whose supporters are unlikely to cozy up to the libertarian candidate anyway. Rand is instead looking to stop the recently surging Rick Santorum. Rand has criticized Santorum's support of the expansion of Medicare, the No Child Left Behind Act and for the Department of Education.

Victor Hugo once said something to the effect of, "nothing can stop an idea whose time has come". The reform of the healthcare system in America is such an idea. It's time has come and reform must take place, one way or the other. However, instead of focusing on the insurmountably large topic of Medicare on a short blog post, we'll focus rather on Rand's criticism of Santorum's education stances.

Rand has decried Mr. Santorum's support of the No Child Left Behind Act, which is common political fodder from both sides of the aisle. However, Rand goes further with his devolution of power in his criticism for Santorum's support for the Department of Education. In criticizing this, Rand claims that he is against the Department of Education because there is no "function on the federal level" for it. This is a bold claim and one worth great amounts of time to deliberate on. Therefore, I offer this next paragraph to form a well-guided opinion.

On the positive side of things, decentralizing education power would give more autonomy to the states and local municipalities that actually educate. Any time the bureaucracy is cut to become more efficient the results should be a positive one. In some sense allowing local governments to provide local services like education makes perfect sense. However, education sometimes must be considered in a costs based way as well. Teachers today work for piddling salaries in comparison with the work that they do. The Department of Education at the federal level commands a much greater revenue (eek taxes) than any local municipality could garner. This economy of scale type thing makes it necessary to handle at the bigger, and hence, federal level.

Today's assessment of Rand Paul and his ideas has both positives and negatives, as should all honest assessments of politicians from both sides of the aisle. The ideal to make a more nimbler, efficient and local government is laudable. The current trend of throwing more and more money at the Department of Education has proved to be ineffective and unsustainable. Paul's decentralized solution to it (as is his wont on most issues) though would cause too great of a financial strain on education. It would create the best of times and the worst of times dependent upon the affluence of a municipality. This would only further increase a sense of have and have-nots. But, decentralizing should not be thrown out either, it just shouldn't be applied to education

The Tea Party Caucus - Jim DeMint

Continuing on from our fairish profile of Michele Bachmann we shall investigate another member of the Tea Party Caucus. Mr. DeMint is the senator from South Carolina and a leading voice in the Tea Party movement.

Without delving deep into a history of the Tea Party, which one can do simply by turning on the news everyday. Turn on FOX to get a positive spin and everyone else to get a negative outlook. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

However, we need not delve deep into every issue of the Tea Party to get a general understanding of what it is and who is leaders are. We can simply touch base on an issue or two per senator/representative and have a clearer picture at the end of the series. On Michele's post we defended her against some unfair criticisms, tried to understand a few of her strange utterances and justified much of the criticism about her. But, with Mr. DeMint we will touch on one of his last acts of 2011 to get a fuller understanding of what he is all about.

One of the things that many people have railed against since the morning after the collapse of the financial markets is deregulation. The rhetoric has been so loud the word 'deregulation' carries an instantly recognizable negative connotation. But, the philosophical underpinnings of DeMint's idea of American exceptionalism are interwoven with deregulation. American exceptionalism is something of a huge topic that we cannot begin to touch on a single blog entry, suffice it to say that it does seem to come from a rugged individualism that has characterized Americans for centuries. But, this idea has come under fire because of what critics call its innate lack of fairness. The merits of American exceptionalism can be debated over and over again, but the fact that he continues to push this agenda in a time when the word that underpins his big picture philosophy has become a pariah shows Mr. DeMint to be a man of courage and/or recklessness.

To that final act of 2011 though, Mr. DeMint was again pushing legislation that deregulates. The Next Generation Television Marketplace Act was introduced on December 15th and would, if passed, repeal compulsory licenses and relax local ownership restrictions for television media. Big media companies like DirectTV and Comcast are for it so they can buy up local stations to garner better advertising revenue. The National Association of Broadcasters are "respectfully" against the bills passage, fearing that by not mandating local news to be aired by major for-pay TV providers means that local news would not be aired. But many commentators and industry insiders see the act as a good step in tackling a quickly shifting technology that is still governed by laws passed over 20 years ago. Regardless of this outcome, the fact that Mr. DeMint is not afraid push hard with deregulation statutes deep into 2011 shows a ballsy attitude. If the Republicans could ever couple a deeply principled approach with the eloquence of some notable democrats, the Republicans would prove very hard to beat.

The Tea Party Caucus - Michele Bachmann

The Tea Party Caucus is led by Michele Bachmann and has (as of March 31, 2011) 66 members to it, all Republicans. The Tea Party looks like it is here to stay. Though for awhile it looked like the comet Lovejoy flying towards the sun that is the anger spouting from every direction that makes up the enjoyable and pleasant current political milieu. But, fight fire with fire and you get bigger flames.

Enough of the bad analogies. I cannot promise to present a fair and balanced assessment of each of the members of the caucus for two reasons. First, that objectivity is trademarked by FOX News and I am afraid that if I try and copy it my phones will be tapped by Rupert and co. Second, that type of objectivity is not truly possible. Everyone has their own biases, even such optimistic fellows as myself. However, what I will promise is to give an honest assessment of the things that these members are doing from time to time, both their good points (which they have) and their shortcomings.

To begin with, I'd like to take a note of the caucus' head, Michele Bachmann. There is a virtual cacophony of Bachmann bashing out their on the web so I'll try and limit myself to a few quotes that have earned her some pretty scathing counterpoints.

1. First, let's focus on both the John Wayne Waterloo remark where she mixed John Wayne the actor and John Wayne Gacy, the serial killer and when she wished Happy Birthday to Elvis Presley on the anniversary of his death. While this shows poor oversight, who has not fallen prey to misreading something on Wikipedia? Those of you who have not throw the first stone.

2. The John Quincy Adams and the founding fathers working to end slavery. Ok, Q as we call him upstairs wasn't really a founding father, but he was around at the beginning of America and a member of one of the earliest political parties, the Federalists. You can tell her to represent history a little bit better on this one. It's bad, but not awful. The other part about the founding fathers working tirelessly to end slavery is hard to defend. I'm not going to do it. Lambasting can continue.

3. The attempt to link swine flu to Democratic presidencies. Wow. Not only was she factually incorrect this is just odd. Maybe she was trying to be funny?

4. When she spoke about the media needing to look at congress and ask if they were pro-American or anti-America she was reported as looking to install a neo-McCarthyism. At first blush this one seems pretty wrongheaded too. Nobody that wishes to build a stronger, more united America should hanker for the days of the Red Scare. However, this one could also be rephrased a bit to sound more intelligent and intellectually honest. If she sharpened her rhetoric skills she could pose it this way "the media ought to look at whether the current representatives are acting in a way that is consistent with the core, historical and foundational values of America". But, she is a busy woman and does not have the fifteen-twenty seconds that it took me to formulate that question.

5. When she equated the earthquakes and hurricanes that have recently struck in the US with God's wake up call she divided people quite well. Some shared her sentiments and were encouraged by her speaking, but most laid into her with some good reason. Tying God's wrath to congressional spending is wrongheaded on a number of levels. However, tying God's wrath to natural disasters is something many Scriptural literalists do all the time. Understanding how the Infinite mind works completely is an impossibility for finite ones and attempting to do so can sometimes do more harm than good. Because God acted one way at a specific time does not guarantee He will do so at others. This is illogical and it's probably bad theology. But, we can discuss theology later. However, for those who use this as a way to demean the simpleminded religious, your simplistic views on religion belie any critical thinking. An abstraction cannot be used to determine the whole, nor should one so easily cast aside 6,000 years of reasoned thought.

6. As to the abolishment of the minimum wage that she proposed, this is not an unique or new idea. There is a school of thought that minimum wage actually keeps wages down rather than lifting them up as they are thought to do. This has to do with market principle. While Bachmann delivered her now famous quote with the eloquence she is becoming known for, this idea certainly can be debated without resorting to calling Michele names.

7. Though I think I have been just in my assessment of what many are calling Mrs. Bachmann's biggest flops and have even, to an extent defended some of the ideas I think she was trying to iterate I have to end on a down note. When she mentioned both HPV vaccine and the effects of carbon dioxide she showed herself pandering to a specific crowd and was caught out in uninformed and ill-researched speech. She was trying to stir up her base on two unpopular topics for conservatives, vaccines for STD's for children and global warming. This gets all the conservatives hot under the collar and maybe not without merit, but you can't make things up Michele.

Georgian SPLOST vs. Even better, Optional Taxes

I recently read in the December 10th issue of The Economist about this thing called a "special purpose local-option sales tax" or SPLOST for short. Basically what is happening is the local Georgian government is setting a ballot initiative to allow voters to decide whether or not they want to take on a tax to pay for badly needed infrastructure. I thought that the idea was rather brilliant, but didn't go quite far enough. More on this in a second. However, the Tea-Party Republicans have come out strongly against the list for a number of reasons.

Firstly, they are against it because the list of projects that were announced for the ballot lacked oversight. Secondly, it is poorly planned. These are absolutely valid objections that ought to be heard. Third, it violates county sovereignty. This reason might have been valid recently, but I think that the communication ability between constituents and their representatives is so great nowadays that this objection carries less and less weight. In bygone days when constituents would only see their state leaders during election times it was important to maintain county sovereignty. But today there are such little barriers between someone in Fayette County (whom the Economist cited) and Atlantan politicians that a strong county government is no longer necessary. It is a 45 minute drive from Fayetteville to Atlanta. Likewise, the days when politicians can simply say, "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" are long gone. A strong local government simply isn't as necessary today. But, I'll reluctantly grant that some local county sovereignty issues are raised for locally-minded individuals.

Their final reason for opposing the procedure is one that cannot be valid in a vibrant democracy. The Tea Party Republicans' final point of contention is that creation of a rail network invites terrorist activities. Even if this is an absolute truth, the moment that Americans begin to withhold progress out of fear of terrorism, then terrorism has a de facto victory and forced genuflection of the American people.

Moving on from the serious to the flippant, as I said earlier however, the dosage of direct democracy in this Georgian measure is not enough. Georgia ought to take a look at how well direct democracy has played out in California. Offer the public a chance to pay for the infrastructure. If they choose to pay the 1 cent sales tax, send them a thank you card with a toll deferring sticker for their cars or a discount card for the aforementioned railway. If they opt out of the tax send them a card that exempts them from the 1 cent tax, but not a discount card. Obviously both of these, the opt out card or the discount card would have to be a state issued picture ID. Thus, solving another contentious issue for Tea Party fellows, the extreme danger of voter fraud.

Tax chicken, not chicken tax

Recently we have talked about the cold war era Chicken Tax and the payroll tax extension, specifically how it was not a good idea to try and force a stalemate on this issue. The house Republicans however did not heed my thoughts and decided to play a game of chicken with the Senate and President Obama. The House Republicans blinked first. The payroll tax extension went through today in spite of Tea Party grumbling. This was the right call. It is a shame that the House Republicans tried to politicize this and their gamble did not pay off very well. But, as I optimistically wrote, the payroll tax extension went through.

The Guardian has a colorful, if not brutish description of Tea party bran muffins and the effect it had on John Boehner's digestive track to describe the situation that I appreciated very much. Check it out here. Colorful rhetoric aside, a little humility from the House Republicans might spur on some more cooperation in Washington.

Constant defense and Payroll tax

Hanover Line I-II

With all this talk of chicken tax and irony and more tax it got me thinking about governance and politics. Specifically, American governance and politics. Incredibly, a two-party system designed to check and balance each other is working by checking each other. The bicameralism is even working really well right now with House Republicans blocking the Senate. Fair play to the defensive maneuvering! Cheers.

However, while I'd like to be optimistic about the incredible defense we have seen in the past year by both sides of the aisle I have to admit that it has all been rather dull and unimaginative. Democrats propose one thing, Republicans block it, Democrats get angry and complain loudly. Republicans propose another thing, Democrats scoff and block it, Republicans cry foul. There's little agreement on any topic these days in Washington, which is fine. We should have these debates. Single party domination has never worked. Just ask the continually growing China. Their united front has not worked one bit.

Poor tasting jokes aside though, the recent blocking of the payroll tax extension by John Boehner and company in the House after the Senate passed it 89-10 is incredible for all the wrong reasons. The argument that the two month deal simply pushes the problem down the road to be dealt with later is 100% true. By only passing the two month deal the American government will have to deal with it again, in two months. However, if anyone truly believes that is why they are going this course they are not doing their due diligence as concerned American citizens. The move is completely political, meant to bend the left side of the government to their whims.

The political and economic environment of the times demands short-term fixes. Of course, a one-year deal is better suited to the American public because it provides stability. However, a two-month deal is infinitely preferable to no deal at all. When constant posturing and political maneuvering replaces actual governance the legislative branch must accept temporary deals. Unfortunately, many of the Tea Party Republicans are showing a lack of wisdom. Compromise in methodology is not a compromise in ideology. Everyone agrees on this one, left, right and center - the payroll tax needs to be extended to help Americans. In this climate, temporary fixes might be all that is achievable. That's pragmatism. Anyone remember it?

All this blame however should not be shouldered by House Republicans. The disagreements go too far now and politics has become increasingly nasty. I wonder though if politics has always been this nasty but because of the internet more people have a forum. 295 years ago I, a famous and well-versed philosopher would have the ear of all of Europe, but would the mere blogist (I understand that the term is blogger, but I think blogist has a better ring to it)? Everyone can comment on everything now and spew unthoughtful responses at the speed of their typing fingers. But, this digression distracts me from the task at hand, heaping coals upon the heads of the legislative branch of the United States. Where was I?

Oh yes, the House Republicans are not the only one to blame in this. While this obstructionism is coming from them this time the response of many Democrats has not been helpful. Why are the Democrats and Republicans unable to get along and work out legislation these days? Because they are too busy with populist demagoguery. This is a populist move to drum up anger in the Tea Party wing of the Republican base. Unfortunately though the loss will be for people of all bases...

However, all this negativity is nonsense. Eventually, the tactic will work or fail. Because of the importance of this tax break the extension will happen. Then both sides will take credit for pushing the deal through and we'll throw a parade. Undoubtedly, somebody will protest the parade. In a strange and ironic twist though, the protesters will then be occupied by other protesters. In all of this active protesting there will be a lot iPod, iPad and Android app creation dealing with the measuring of angst and depression. Somebody will pick up on this and get funded to do research on the connection between legislative gridlock and seasonal depression. Researchers will pay people to participate in the study, pumping money into the economy. Drug companies will design the correct drug for the condition, creating jobs, thus pumping money into the economy. Lawyers will sue the drug company for creating a drug with a unreported side-effect, creating wealth and most importantly distracting the American public from the continuing political stalemate in Washington. A win for everybody!