OK, the primary elections are over, and we’ve passed Labor Day (it’s disconcerting how those two have been reversed), and it’s now on to the general election.
We Democrats are probably facing anywhere between a severe beating and a serious whuppin’ come November. That sort of thing happens on a semi-regular basis, but while we may lose seats statewide and nationally, we cannot let the Republicans set the tone of the political discussion.
Political candidates in general—and Republicans in particular—are like little kids, prone to repeating the same nonsense over and over, hoping to wear down the listener. We can’t let that happen. We need to be like that good parent—firm but fair, armed with knowledge and ready to refute (not refudiate) any nugget of b.s. the particular Republican is tossing out into the public forum. We have to stamp out the spread of misinformation at the source, lest it spread and be taken seriously by the dreaded “independent” voter.
For example, if a Republican says, “We need to privatize Social Security,” we should say, “Really? Give trillions of dollars to the same people who got us in this mess to begin with—bankers, who salivate at the thought of stealing millions of dollars and would suddenly be given the opportunity to steal millions of millions? Hedge-fund managers, for whom no amount of personal wealth is ever enough? Or Wall Street traders, who drove the economy off a cliff buying and selling instruments that they knew to be worthless?”
Fortunately, the Gabrielle Giffords campaign has jumped all over GOP challenger Jesse Kelly’s call for the privatization of Social Security. Privatization is an insane idea. Just imagine the family of four with the two parents working a combined two, three, maybe even four jobs just to stay above water. Now they’re going to be asked to manage their retirement accounts? They’re going to have to hack their way through an army of scammers, Harvard grads and quick-buck artists (if you’ll pardon the multiple redundancies) to try to find an honest person who will look after their money so they don’t wake up 40 years down the road and realize that they have nothing with which to retire.
Social Security scares the crap out of Republicans for two big reasons. First off, they’d have to admit that the only safe place for honest people’s money to have been in the past two or three years was with the government. They tout capitalism over government, but unfettered capitalism just gave America the old greased pole and didn’t even care enough to apply the grease before administering the pole.
More importantly, Social Security is a government program that works. It’s a great program that has worked remarkably well for 75 years and should continue to work far into the future. Even the “sky is falling” people have to admit that the program is solvent through at least 2037 (when the first Baby Boomers will be in their early 90s and dropping like flies), and with some tweaking, it can remain solvent indefinitely.
This is a painful truth for people who run for office by running against the government. If one of the largest government programs works this well, perhaps other parts of the government also work. Instead of having to admit that Social Security works, they would rather destroy the program so they can chant their government-is-bad mantra without choking.
Also, don’t let them get away with these:
Republican: “I’m a Reagan Republican.”
Us: “Is that the Reagan who ran up the highest deficits of any eight-year president in history to that point (only to be outdone later by George W. Bush) or the Reagan who presided over the largest tax increase in American history?”
That second one kills them. The Big Reagan Myth is that he lowered taxes, and tax revenues actually went up as the economy soared. He did cut taxes in 1981, but in 1983, he signed into law the largest non-wartime tax increase (both in terms of total dollars and percentage of GDP) in American history. This is indisputable. Tax revenues increased because taxes went up. And the economy boomed because the double-talking Reagan used ostensibly hated deficit spending to finance his agenda.
Don’t let them anoint Reagan as some kind of conservative saint, because he wasn’t.
Republican: “Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Rodney Glassman is a know-nothing, self-serving spoiled rich kid who has used the family fortune to buy his way into politics.”
Us: “OK, we’ll give you that one.”
Republican: “Obama is a socialist.”
Us: “Define ‘socialist.'”
I interviewed District 26 House candidate Terri Proud, and she had to have used the word “socialist” 15 times in five minutes. Finally, I asked her to give me a proper definition of socialist or socialism, and thankfully, she just stopped talking. “Socialist” is a powerful political pejorative these days, but most people who use it can’t come close to defining it accurately.
My fellow Democrats: They may beat us this November, but we won’t let them dumb us down.
This article appears in Sep 9-15, 2010.
Danehy is dead-on in his wake-up clarion call to Democrats. Those of us on the left side of the political spectrum owe it to ourselves and the nation to stop kowtowing to the ignorant lunatics on the right who seem determined to transform the United States into a third-world hellhole. When a conservative starts spouting an obviously crazy talking point, it’s time we called them on it. With few exceptions, those on the right blindingly spout outrageous nonsense rooted in reactionary emotionalism, unwilling or unable to back up their claims with any evidence or reasoning.
I believe it’s the age-old adolescent dysfunction we like to call “peer pressure” that is responsible for much of the hysteria behind movements like the so-called Tea Party, the adherents of whom have no clue about the historic Boston event from which they hijacked the name. A bunch of hot-headed no-nothings gather for morning coffee at various fast-food joints and throw “attaboy” mutterings at one another about controversies generated from whole-cloth by cynical radio talk-show carnival clowns. And the meeker individuals among them who might not necessarily agree with the confused consensus hold their tongues, not wanting to appear disloyal or unpatriotic. It’s a sad and disgusting spectacle to watch this mob mentality and, unfortunately, the gutless American media laps it up and proclaims it to be a grassroots phenomenon.
Well, friends, Nazism and the Ku Klux Klan were “grassroots phenomena” just a few decades ago. Democrats and the bewildering spectrum of unorganized leftists in this country had better wake up to the fact that their neanderthal nemeses are driving the debate — and the result will eventually be disaster for the United States of America. Democrats need to get riled up, speak up, and, damn it, they need to stand up and VOTE!
I’m not a Democrat, but the Republicans in my District have been so casual with the facts these last couple of years that there is no way I could vote for them. (And unfortunately I mean ALL of them at the state level.)
Forget the Dems — I can’t figure out why the voters keep accepting this. I don’t know any Republicans that like to be lied to either, but I do know some who have just decided to tolerate it. We aren’t doing our job as voters when we don’t hold our officials accountable. In Arizona, we are failing to pay attention and are allowing ourselves to be placated with the lamest of soundbites.
Danehy is not “dead-on” on this issue; he’s dead in the water. This nonsense is not going anywhere. It is primarily because of the Democrats that families have to work two to four jobs to keep their heads above water in the first place, and Danehy — like all Democrats — wants to rob the people of their hard-earned wages in the guise of “social security,”, when in fact the money goes straight into the general fund where Democrats spend it — and our nation’s budget — into oblivion. The worst aspect of the Republican Party is that they try to be too much like Democrats. It’s time both parties restore the Constitution of the United States as the outer limits of government authority — at all levels of government — and let the people keep what they earn and do with it as they wish. If they will do that, America will return to the growth in prosperity experienced from 1800 to 1900, in which the standard of living of the average working man, woman, and child improved more — in just 100 years — than it had in the previous 25 centuries. Stop arguing for government to solve everything and control everything! Freedom means making your own way, and having the opportunity for success sufficient to provide jobs for those poor downtrodden working families — jobs that provide earnings sufficient that a family of four or six or eight only needs one job to be prosperous. Obama and his cronies in Congress are sociopaths, and need to be locked up.
Being new to Tucson, and the Weekly I would have to say that Mr. Daheny maybe wasting his brain power on this issue as Governor Jan Brewer = SB 1070 which means the game over- Republicans win.
Tom, there is just as much nonsense in the ‘talking points’ on the other side. I wait eagerly (though obviously in vain) for your recommendations for a Republican response to Democrat talking points!
Danehy has nailed this one. The positions provided by the Republicans are paper thin. Challenging them is as if having the finest scissors in the world. Need to fight the emotional demagoguery with facts.
Yeah, 1800 to 1900 that was a great time. Unless you were enslaved because you were a black person (How do you think the economy did well–slave labor make for a great economy as long as you aren’t the slave.) Or had no voting or property rights because you were a woman or you were a working stiff with no oversight on safety regulations at your place of work. Yeah if you were white, wealthy and male it wasn’t such a bad time.
Good writing Danehy, but do you really think factual challenges will change the minds of Frdmftr and his or her ilk? Its the media that has to hold the politicians on their airways accountable by fact checking and asking hard questions. I thought Brewer had it in the bag with SB 1070, Arizona’s brainless attempt to ‘resolve’ border issues by knee jerk reactionary actions. But then I saw her try to talk, evade anyone that dared to question her on anything. Goddard has a lot of name recognition in Arizona too and he sure looks intelligent compared to Jan. I feel embarassed for her.
The DJIA closed at 14,164.53 on Tuesday, October 9, 2007
it closed at 6,547 on Monday, March 9, 2009
If Social Security monies had been invested in the market at that time, Congress would have been unable to keep their fingers out of the mess with more disastrous results than we currently face.
“Rob” the people of their hard earned wages? Only to give them back as a safety net in later years. I notice you couldn’t refute the fact that invested retirement funds have been stolen. And the B.S. that it’s only the democrats that spend the budget into oblivion is priceless, as it’s been obvious who has done the spending! The rich in america have used their time to corral all the money and as they “do with it as they wish” have not created good jobs for the gutted middle class but chosen to keep it all to themselves. Try the years 1940 through 1980 as the real advancement of standard of living. But those conditions have been torn down by Reagan republicans and see what we have now.
Regarding the Danehy article; I couldn’t agree more. Regarding the comment left by “Frdmftr”; what planet have you been spending most of your time on?
Danehy is right on the short-term politics but dead wrong on the long-term politics and on the policy. Jesse’s proposal is very well thought out from an economics standpoint. Saving Social Security from its current $100 trillion acturial deficit requires economic growth. Even a 1/4 point of added future growth peels off trillions of actuarial deficit. Impact from Jesse’s proposal, probably 8 to 15 trillion in positive impact. Jesse: right on policy, right for Arizona, right for America. Gabriel Gifffords, wrong on policy, wrong for Arizona. If you care about Social Security, vote for Jesse.