A New Radio Show: The Tea Party and various other fictions

I’ve been thinking about adding a verbal edition to my written blog, but hadn’t gotten around to it until this weekend.  My intention was to record the following show merely as a test, but since it didn’t come out too badly, I’d thought I’d proceed with publishing it.  This initial show just includes me and the topic is an overall review of current political trends with a focus on the tea party.  As I move forward, I’ll be bringing on guests.  This episode is about 25 minutes long.

In this episode, I assail the tea party for not wanting to cut defense spending and as I was preparing to post this, I just ran across an article where the tea party claims that defense cuts are on the table.  We’ll need to see how that plays out, but I’m betting that dog won’t hunt.


  • http://twitter.com/WayneFromNaz Wayne Schissler

    I’m listening to your podcast right now as I type this. So far so good…

    Your problem with the Tea Party is that it’s not as concerned with the issues that concern you (militarism). Sorry, but that’s to be expected — we are not “all things for all men”. Rampant military spending isn’t what caused us to form. Yes, it is a spending concern and must be addressed but too many see it as a necessity in a dangerous world.

    We didn’t exist back then (we were just “those people” as you said) to fight the deficit. As I’ve said before, many were concerned but not organized, those that were organized were small & somewhat fringe, and many others where simply asleep until the crap hit the fan with the financial meltdown.

    We are concerned about inflation, quantitative easing & the printing of money. We do not focus on individual welfare – more on corporate welfare, corporate cronyism, and superfluousness spending of all sorts.

    Most of the things you accuse us of avoiding are the same things most everybody, R’s & D’s, are avoiding. Which you pretty much acknowledge.

    Question: If there was no Tea Party would there be any group exerting pressure on keeping spending down? You acknowledge that revenue went down because of the financial problems yet the one party rule in DC went on a spending spree. I really don’t know how this escapes you as a factor that would cause people to get alarmed about. As we started to buckle down due to financial reality the federal payroll began to take off.

    I agree with you on just about everything about personal responsibility, consuming, and what’s to come…

    Your speaking voice seemed to improve as the podcast progressed. Not bad at all.

    Almost 25 minutes, not 15!

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      >>Your speaking voice seemed to improve as the podcast progressed. Not bad at all.

      Almost 25 minutes, not 15! <>If there was no Tea Party would there be any group exerting pressure on keeping spending down? You acknowledge that revenue went down because of the financial problems yet the one party rule in DC went on a spending spree. I really don’t know how this escapes you as a factor that would cause people to get alarmed about. As we individually started to buckle down due to the financial reality the federal payroll began to take off.<<<

      I'm not convinced that the tea party is about controlling spending and judging by the proposed $ 2.5 trillion in cuts to non defense over ten years, that pretty much puts all the nails in the coffin that they're not about trying to control anything. This proposal and the drama behind the health care repeal is little more than a piece of "red meat" they're providing their constituents while doing little. Same applies to all the noise about earmarks.

      Please explain what you're referring to when you make the statement about the dems going on a spending spree.

      • http://twitter.com/WayneFromNaz Wayne Schissler

        My question was… who else is exerting any real pressure to reduce spending?

        You said:
        >>Please explain what you’re referring to when you make the statement about the dems going on a spending spree.

        In the interest of honesty, first GWB set the stage:
        http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/george-w-bush-biggest-spender-since-lbj/

        It took me a while to find this. It’s from the Bureau of Economic Analysis an agency of the Department of Commerce. The actual expenditures, every quarter, for the past decade. You can enter different years in the fields to see different years. Follow the expenditure row across and get a feel for the quarterly increases. Yes, they’re all obscene. The largest jump occurs in the 2nd quarter of 2009. This could be the stimulus, but if it was you would think that the following quarters would go back down. They don’t, they continue to climb, while revenues decline and the rest of the country lays-off. Curiously one of the few quarterly declines occurs in the last quarter of 2008, when the economy began its fall.
        http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=86&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2000&LastYear=2010&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no#Mid

        But did the government actually grow, or did the money all go to those “shovel ready” jobs? I think an increase in federal employment counts as an increase in government. Increase in federal employment, accounting for census workers, while the rest of the country lays-off:
        http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256225/census-and-growth-federal-government-employment-veronique-de-rugy

        CBO’s estimate of debt growth under the president’s proposed budget:
        http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/112xx/doc11280/Chapter1.shtml#1109732

        Just how big is the debt?
        http://www.nationalreview.com/exchequer/246159/our-debt-more-all-money-world

        • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

          Wayne,

          Too late tonight for me to respond, but I will do so tomorrow. It looks like you put in some work here and have concluded that Bush’s spendthrift ways contributed mightily to the problems.

          • http://twitter.com/WayneFromNaz Wayne Schissler

            I never denied that he did. And the newly politically aware (due to the economy, TBTF, bailouts, etc) that didn’t pay attention to such things until now, and are a large % of the Tea Party, are never told that it’s just an Obama/Dem problem — especially at our local group. We do not trust the R’s or D’s to do the right thing with us applying constant pressure.

            G’night.

        • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

          ok, Wayne, I’m circling back here to respond:

          >>The largest jump occurs in the 2nd quarter of 2009. This could be the stimulus, but if it was you would think that the following quarters would go back down. They don’t, they continue to climb, while revenues decline and the rest of the country lays-off.<<

          The government's budget cycle runs from October 1 to September 30. This means that Obama's first budget was effective during October 2009 and prior to that we're working with the Bush budget that he inherited. That also means the first deficit for fiscal 2009 (ending in September) was also mainly Bush's. This also means that all the crying and moaning you guys are doing about Obama's supposed "spending" is really only related to one full year (ending in fiscal 2010). The one thing that impacted spending prior to the beginning of the first fiscal year that was under Obama's full control was the stimulus of $800 billion, but that was not an immediate all at once outlay, but one slated to occur over 10 years with the bulk of it budgeted to be spent over 2009-2011. In other words, the the stimulus' impact on the deficit for fiscal 2009 and 2010 was muted in that only about $ 500 billion of the stimulus is reflected in expenditures and that's spread over two years. This means that it must be something else that is the cause of the trillion dollar deficits under Obama's administration. What could that possibly be? Guess what? There are still two wars being fought, a medicare prescription benefit and the Bush Tax Cuts. ALL OF THESE ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO GEORGE BUSH AND NOT ONE OF THEM WAS PAID FOR.

          I apologize for yelling, but the point must be made that all of the tea party/republican talk about Obama's supposed spendthrift ways is a bunch of BS almost like everything else that's brought up. Basically, someone makes an unsupported/unsubstantiated assertion about Obama's spending or Obama care and the rest of the tea party/republican party run with it without checking facts or attempting to understand the nuances, instead the desire is to just create controversy and a level of background noise where there really should be none. And rather than coming up with something that can actually help the country, the country really gets a disservice because someone desires political gain.

          The stimulus was rather benign and the spending broke down as follows:

          Tax Cuts $ 288 Billion
          Extended Unemployment benefits & etc. 224 Billion
          Job Creation via federal contracts, grants and etc $ 275 Billion

          The job creation component is routinely criticized as not being big enough. In my view, he probably should have skipped the tax cuts and just put the amount allotted for that on job creation. I say this because the tax cuts in the stimulus were like the Bush Stimulus. Although the Bush stimulus related tax rebates (anywhere from $ 300 to $ 1600 based on family size as I recollect) were more generous, these were saved rather than spent. Obama's tax rebates/cuts while helpful were lost in the sauce so to speak. For example, a retiree got a $ 250 rebate check; an amount so small that its stimulative effect is muted IMO.

          • http://twitter.com/WayneFromNaz Wayne Schissler

            A quick early morning reply…

            I said:
            >>>The largest jump occurs in the 2nd quarter of 2009. This could be the stimulus, but if it was you would think that the following quarters would go back down. They don’t, they continue to climb, while revenues decline and the rest of the country lays-off.<>The government’s budget cycle runs from October 1 to September 30. This means that Obama’s first budget was effective during October 2009 and prior to that we’re working with the Bush budget that he inherited. That also means the first deficit for fiscal 2009 (ending in September) was also mainly Bush’s.

            I am aware of the 2009 #’s being Bush/Pelosi #’s. I probably should have said Bush stimulus when I said stimulus. THE POINT IS —-> afterward there was no falling back to pre-stimulus levels, in fact the rate of increase is climbing. It’s as if we are spending stimulus-plus as the normal way of doing things throughout 2010.

            Recap:
            Noticeable jump in Q2 of 09
            a leveling in Q3 and Q4
            Then in 2010 a rise at a higher rate than “normal” ie… spending “stimulus plus”, the new normal while the rest of us buckle down. And fed hiring goes up – what’s being stimulated?

            Billions of $
            4,790.3 2009-1
            5,045.0 2009-2
            5,078.4 2009-3
            5,081.5 2009-4
            5,189.6 2o10-1
            5,268.6 2010-2
            5,316.4 2010-3

            • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

              Wayne,

              I’m not sure if I’m understanding your argument here. You say that the 2010 numbers rose at a rate higher than normal. What’s normal? What do you believe caused the rise? Who is at fault?

              Again, I maintain my point that much of this spending is being driven by Bush era decisions with the stimulus contributing to the rise, but the impact is muted. If you’re arguing that the dems went on a spending spree, then you need to identify what exactly they did.

  • Mason James

    you know its funny you mention living “off the grid” its been a joke in my family for the past year or so. I’ve been telling everyone that we should move to a small farm build cob houses and sell watermelons or something for income.
    greg this is the video
    some might see it as far fetched but it does state some interesting facts and it gets kinda sells pitchy at the end
    http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/WPSILC12/PR

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      James,

      Thanks for the link. I’ll review and comment here on my thoughts.

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      James,

      I just watched this video and I agree that it get pitchy at the end, but I think his analysis is pretty spot on and lines up well with other stuff I’m reading. There will likely be a debt/currency crisis revolving around not only the dollar but the Euro as well. I think the dollar is currently the beneficiary of all the turmoil in Europe, but that’s only a temporary situation as our fiscal condition is very bad and at some point, the market will fully price that in. You know, the US will go to war to keep the dollar/oil pricing mechanism. As a matter of fact, there are many who believe that’s the main reason we went to war in Iraq as Sadaam was settling all his oil sales in Euros and made out like a bandit.

      The fact that oil trades in dollars is what keep the demands up for our currency and one of the reasons the fed can print money with little consequence until here of late. That game is ending as China and others aren’t going to sit around just watching the fed devalue their treasury holdings. I think that may be why China may be diversifying and buying more European government bonds and that’s the other risk. All China has to do is stop buying treasuries and we’re finished.

      There’s no question in my mind that we’re all screwed and our only real choice is self reliance with others who believe the same. We have to reduce all dependencies on the Walmartization of America and go for total self reliance when it comes to the basic things of life. The transition to that will be challenging, but there’s no other way. The big risk here is in not being prepared.

  • Black Diaspora

    I’m a little late to the party (pun intended). For some reason I couldn’t bring up this blog page. There’s been a great deal of talk in cyberspace and in the news media about The Man with the Golden Voice.

    I don’t think they come more “golden” than yours. You have yet another talent that, perhaps, you haven’t fully exploited.

    Radio suits you, and guest spots on television news shows, as a paid pundit melding your blog (the written word) with the spoken word, would highlight both.

    Perhaps you should shop your voice around.

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      >>I don’t think they come more “golden” than yours. You have yet another talent that, perhaps, you haven’t fully exploited.<<

      BD, perceptions are a funny thing, particularly self perception. Since we can't really "see" or "hear" ourselves as others do, we forced to rely on the feedback of others. I don't hear what other people hear. I just hear me, but I've been told that I have a radio voice on many occasions and I really must take the time to seriously look into this.

      I think we were talking about some of the things I was wanting to do over on your blog this summer. What I'd really like to do is do that radio thing in addition to the written stuff and I've been speaking with a friend of mine about doing something jointly with me. I've a real interest in communicating with both the written and spoken word here to explore issues that concern me. Most people seem to do one or the other but not both. I'm not sure why, but talking requires far less time than writing.

      • Black Diaspora

        “I’ve been told that I have a radio voice on many occasions and I really must take the time to seriously look into this. ”

        With a voice like yours, I was pretty sure that I wasn’t the only one to make this observation. If I were you, I’d pursue it.

  • http://functionalculture.blogspot.com Constructive_Feedback

    Brother Greg L:

    I have not yet listened to your audio report BUT – before I do I have a few questions to ask you:

    1) Out of all of the “forces” that are running up the red ink of this nation why was “The Tea Party” worthy of your focus? In the 536 individuals that hold ELECTED POWER in Washington DC and thus are able to “cut defense spending” – how many of them are “Tea Party members”?

    2) As the trajectory of government spending growth shows “The Big 3 Entitlement Programs” then “INTEREST ON DEBT” and then “Defense Spending” are the 3 budget busting forces in Washington.

    Is it rationale for someone to run a parallel audio mix to the one that you have registered that focus on people that:

    A) Gained more POWER over the areas where the “Labor Class” live and have failed to implement an ECONOMIC BASE that would allow their work effort to generate the WEALTH that is needed for their “Social Entitlement” and Education – thus the #1 growth area is shifting from the PRODUCTIVE PERIPHERY to the NATIONAL treasury for funding

    B) Those who are exploding the federal debt and thus the DEBT SERVICING are threatening America’s long term viability without ever having to explode any munitions.

    Do you see, Brother Greg L – in the big scheme of things the ‘Yin and Yang’ balance suggests that there is a COST that is rendered as individuals FOCUS on certain “enemies” that don’t quite represent the REAL WORLD MODEL of the threat vector that stands before them.

    Indeed they might appeal to their ideological soulmates but as the creature that creeps up behind them and slashes their throats does what they feared their “enumerated enemies” would do – the fact that they HEARD the steps but failed to respond because they were “Friendly Footsteps” shows a bit of complicity.

    Agreed?

    • http://functionalculture.blogspot.com Constructive_Feedback

      * Tea Parties were silent about “Bush’s Debt Spending” – valid point

      * The “Professional Left” has been silent on
      *** The Ongoing Wars, the amplification of war in
      *** Re-up of Bush’s Federal Justice Department policies that the Left protested against
      *** Effective education policies – as they lump praise on “Race To The Top”

      and as you have done:
      *** Obama and the Democratic Congress (2007-2010) Debt Spending

      Brother Greg L – You have mis-analyzed Obama’s “Debt Spending” because of your goal to cover for Obama.

      The reason for the DEBT SPENDING under Obama was because America did not want to degrade their Standard Of Living commensurate to the INCOME that was being generated during the time of economic decline.

      Please produce facts of the 40% military spending that you claim.
      US Military Defense Spendign – 4.3% of GDP / $650 Billion
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

      US Military Spending $782 billion
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

      I agree with your analysis of the Fed!!!!
      We are going to have an inflationary period in this nation as more dollars are printed to mask our underlying economic weakness.
      Why do you run back to the TEA PARTY?

      If the Tea Party are dupes – Why do you not go after the people who PUT THE TEA PARTY ON THEIR FRONT PAGES? (Like you are doing)

      • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

        Hey CF, How are you doing there man?  Hope that this new year finds you and your in good health and spirits.  My response:

        • http://functionalculture.blogspot.com Constructive_Feedback

          [quote]he cornerstone of the budgets during all of these years remains the big three initiatives coming from the Bush [/quote]

          Greg L:

          Set your DVR to record the replay of Chris Hedges on CSPAN Book TV Feb 7th “The Death Of The Liberal Class”
          http://www.booktv.org/Program/12062/Death+of+the+Liberal+Class.aspx

          He, an “unattached Progressive” takes the “Liberal Establishment” to task for using the LANGUAGE of Liberalism but ultimately being Corporatists.

          Greg – You risk proving what I have previously modeled about “Progressives”. While the conservatives have “ORGANIC evil” which are the origins of the problem at hand – the Progressive’s actions which are in line with that which was criticized about the Conservatives are either ‘RESIDUAL’ or “Incremental Transitive” actions. Since the “Conservatives got us into war……we must clean up the mess that they made but not make an abrupt change for the sake of continuity”.

          Hedges blows all of this out of the water with his analysis.

          I beg Black Disaposra to tune in on Feb 7th and watch Hedges.

  • http://functionalculture.blogspot.com Constructive_Feedback

    Greg L:

    After listening to your entire audio report I did not hear one mention of:

    * How the Establishment Power that the “Black Rank & File” has confidence in has PREPARED our people for this “Off The Grid” lifestyle

    ** The #1 failing is that the SCHOOLS that they now control which were supposed to be our key “Human Resource Development” channels are instead failing to prepare our children to compete in the PRESENT system or even this future “hand to mouth” future that you speak of

    ** The “Black Media” and how they have totally sold out in the defense of the “Permanent Interests” of our people. They now function as the “Protectors Of The Progressive/Democratic Establishment” – assisting them into power and protecting their power base. It doesn’t matter one bit how much dysfunction that is rendered within our community, despite the promises made – the Black Press is going to focus on “Sarah Palin” and the “Tea Party” as the main THREAT to Black people. In truth these two forces are a threat to the DEMOCRATS – thus speaking volumes of what their real purpose is.

    You mention “unplugging”.
    Do you believe that the present NAACP (consciousness) which is fighting tooth and nail to NOT have Black kids end up in schools all by themselves – are going to accept the notion that these Black schools – who choose to make their own clothing BUT don’t have an “iPAD” like the “suburban” schools across the political boundary – are going to accept this (their words) “Violation of Social Justice”?

    I have a lot of respect for you Brother Greg L. I NEVER held my initial assumptions of your “conservatism” as a litmus test against you. More than anything I only ask that all of us build a MODEL OF THE REAL WORLD that is more accurate to that which exists rather than that which is appealing to our respective ideologies.

    I think that you error in that you don’t see that in order to achieve this “Off The Grid” life that you suggest (and I agree with) some of the theories that you (and BD) support will have to be WALKED BACK.

    I purchase the Final Call each week in order to see how the Black Progressive-Fundamentalist voice flies today along with the Black Nationalism of the NOI. I was stunned to see Dr Wilmer Leon III – the primary cheerleader of “Black Salvation Through The Democratic Party” now seeing that “the bridge is out” ahead of our community and telling his readers “What The Black Man Must Do”.

    Sorry but the CREDIBILITY has been lost.
    He was for “Multiple Tax Payer Paid Health Care” but FAILED to mention any of the COMPETENCIES that our people must acquire in order to be the HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONERS – using the schools that have been taken over.

    I do not demand “Ideological Purity”. Not one bit.
    There comes a point, however, where the main NAVIGATORS that have lead us into this corner – promoting notions of “Social Justice” but failing to articulate how the power that they had would build up ORGANIC COMPETENCIES – that I am NOT willing to dutifully follow along in the next interval.

    If the Tea Party’s credibility is shot for their previous SILENCE……..who among those that lead our community should take a hit for their LOUD COMMANDMENTS that we travel down that dark alley – that “social justice” was the light showing at the end – which turned out to be merely a voting booth – the ballots already filled out – STRAIGHT TICKET?

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      CF,

      Your theme is pretty much the same here in this string as it is in my “Faking the Funk” post about military spending vs. healthcare, so if you don’t mind, let me address everything here in this response.

      I know you don’t want to quibble over the transactional issues, but allow me to make a couple of more points here.  The chart showing the allocation of the military spending being equal to nearly 45% does not merely involve a reallocation of expenses towards military purposes, but you’ll notice that the chart excludes entitlement spending.  Excluding the entitlements allows one to focus directly on the real issues.  Everyone pretty much acknowledges there’s a problem with entitlements, but few admit to any problem with military spending,  That’s a huge
      problem and really represents a wealth transfer from the people to the munitions manufacturers.  Do you know that the GAO was unable to audit the books of the department of defense?  Do you know why?  DOD’s recordkeeping was so shoddy that there’s about $ 125 billion that can’t be accounted for.  Yes, $ 125 billion was just straight up lost and unaccounted for.  When was the last time you heard Darrel Issa question that?  When has the tea party weighed in on that?  I can’t let Obama off the hook here either, because the administration hasn’t said anything either.

      When I think about politics, economics and whatever else, I have both a macro and micro view.  The macro revolves around what affects everyone and the micro might revolve around impacts related to those of the blood Afric.  It is not possible to exclude the macro questions from our outlooks even though the micro issues might be unique and vexing
      for black people.  The fact of the matter is that if the country goes to hell in a handbasket, the micro is made much worst, but it’s also true that if one is not prepared to take advantage of better conditions, having an improved macro picture is really not going to help.

  • http://twitter.com/MARKTALKdotCOM Mark Williams

    “I assail the tea party for not wanting to cut defense spending and as I was preparing to post this, I just ran across an article where the tea party claims that defense cuts are on the table. ”

    Amazing the things you can learn when you listen. Damn shame facts got in the way of your frothing, ignorant rant.

    • http://theafricanamericanclarioncall.com Greg L

      Guess what’s missing here Mark ? Your facts to support anything. After listening to my talk and reading an entire series of comments, this is best you can come up? LOL!!! Next time, at least try to present a coherent counterargument. Try it, you might like it.

      This typical behavior for most of tea partiers and you in particular. Most of guys run around with a “big hat”, but have no cattle (i.e. facts to argue with). You’re long on sloganeering though. At least Wayne Shissler presented something to argue about (although his facts didn’t support his position).

      You’re a funny guy, although I’m sure that’s completely unintended.

Page 1 of 11