Joe says, “Similarly, the insistence of some voters (and the politicians who pander to them) that taxes must be cut while restoring fiscal balance is mathematically impossible—unless we are prepared to contemplate massive cuts in Medicare, defense spending, homeland security, environmental protection, infrastructure maintenance and a host of other essential functions. What would the angry voters say about national security when a spending reduction of 25 percent encourages a new round of terrorist attacks?”

Er, Joe, are you saying that you think our annual “defense” budget of $700 billion plus annual interest of $200 billion on a national debt generated principally from unfunded past “defense” spending is “essential”? Do you really think it’s likely that a spending reduction of 25% of “defense” spending would “encourage a new round of terrorist attacks?

Joe, I think you are blinded by the “conventional wisdom” of the mainstream, and blind to the obvious solution. Obama is commander in chief. If he had any guts, which he clearly does not, he could solve the fiscal crisis instantly and unilaterally. All he has to do is end the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, close the foreign military bases, bring the troops home, discharge 90% of them, fire 90% of the career officer corps (starting with the ideologically right wing generals), and refuse to spend the defense budget.

Would this render us vulnerable to terrorist attack? I don’t see why. So far as I can see, the reason there are so many terrorist attacks against the US is because we have, since 1945, pursued a policy of endless war and global military projection. Those “terrorists” attack US troops because they are there, in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where they have no business, not because the terrorists “hate our freedom” (whatever that is). If our troops weren’t there, interfering with their internal affairs, they would have no reason to hate us. Think about this: the Canadians are at least as “free” as Americans but nobody in Yemen or Saudi Arabia seems to hate their freedom. Ditto for the free people of Sweden, Finland, Norway . . . Do you catch my drift?

Equally, there is nothing quite so effective at ensuring that the federal government will have no money to pay for the rest of the “essential services” you enumerated above than continuing to feed our the sacred cow that is our bloated military establishment.

As the unfunded “defense” spending accrues from year to year, so does the national debt and so also does the interest required to service that debt. It won’t be long before that interest cost, growing like a cancer, will use up all the federal revenue and leave nothing for “discretionary spending”. Check out this graph:

http://blogs.cfr.org/geographics/2009/10/26/interest-expense/

The only thing that “essential” about our “defense” spending is this: it is essential that it be cut deeply, soon, or else there is no point discussing any other national fiscal priorities. The federal government will be bankrupt, and the American people will be subjected to fiscal austerity like those that the IMF and the World Bank have imposed on so many other debtor nations.

Some of those debtor nations have had revolutions as a result. Maybe there’s a silver lining here after all.

Of course, the question is will the teabaggers
recognize, realize that their ‘movement’ had absolutely
no affect, changed nothing, reformed nothing, has not
made their individual lives any better. 

Perhaps the question should be asked of them two years
down the road, “Are you better off now than you were
two years ago?” Not filtered through the media, asked
directly.

Joe Joe Joe Of course none of what they say makes sense.Stop socialism but protect medicare and social security.Joe it is racism pure and simple and the more you in the media debate their asinine positions the more credibility you give them.

saddled or even armed solely with lies, all 99% of the underpeople can believe
in is voting; however, solely against individuals and for same-minded new
ones.
And as always before, mostly concerned how money is spent! tn

The problem with being “mad as hell and not taking it any more” is that anger by itself leads nowhere; it only follows somebody else’s anger to some unknown destination—usually the memory hole, but sometimes to riot or revolution, if enough hate is mixed with the anger.  Common sense is forgotten at that point.
  As to the midterms, chances are that a “head of steam” will have to be built up again after post-electioni deflation.  Of course TV’s hyperventilated “news” plus advertising can do it, and probably will, but the second time around will (hopefully) be more difficult as a certain number of original fanatics will have dropped and have to be replaced. 
  It is problematic whether the next time around will be equal or worse—or not. Partly depends on whether or not information gets spread broadly about how much came from where and went to who, why. Media self-analysis is unlikely, so it will depend on organizatioins like Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting and other free-speech organizations. Suggestion:  Support them. Encourage them. Join them.

Low point:  Leaning on the “terrorist” threat—again!

the tea party’s evident enthusiasm for throwing teachers, police officers, firefighters and other public employees out of work makes very little sense in a depressed economy.

Citation, please.

were not only successful but almost free of cost to the taxpayers.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Do some research. Start here:

http://home.comcast.net/~lcmgroupe/2010/Article-Extend_Pretend-Accounting_Driven.htm

Then follow the entire series by Mr Long. It is all well researched and documented. Most of the information can be found on the pages of the FDIC, the Federal Reserve and FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) websites.

And if they somehow repeal the banking reform legislation that passed this year, that may well ensure the repetition of the same bailouts that inspired the rise of the tea party.

Again. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Have you read the financial reform Bill? I haven’t read it all, but I read a lot of it, and skimmed through the rest. I suggest you read it. Out of the 2,000+ pages, there are only about 20 pages on derivatives trading that is useful. The rest only reinforces “Too Big Too Fail”, and ignores the GSEs. There is no Resolution Trust Authority to break up the large, insolvent, zombie banks like Citi and BoA in an orderly fashion.

I don’t know if you suffer from intellectual sloth or intellectual dishonesty. Either way, it needs to stop. You need to stop spreading disinformation, Mr. Conason.

What would the angry voters say about national security when a spending reduction of 25 percent encourages a new round of terrorist attacks?

Dick Cheney couldn’t have said it better,Mr.Conason.So it was the trillion dollar wars in Iraq and Afgahnistan that have prevented other 9-elevens?  And the Patriot Act ,pat-downs at airports and waterboarding are all working to keep us safe? So in other words, we all just have to get used to the trillions in defense budgets and just go ahead and cut out all of the useless expenditures on job stimulus, social security, education,  and infrastructure ? Great plan,Mr.Conason. By the way exactly how many shares do you own in Halliburton, Blackwater and McDonnell-Douglas?

Partisan fury is the extent of meaning in this political system. It’s simply all they (we) have.

The Tea Party is a very loose collection of poorly articulated anti-establishment anger. It is of course mindless- because it hasn’t thought out how the ‘establishment’ is a collaboration of government and Wall Street. That’s where the contradictions come from. They think bringing down government even to a para-military extreme is all it takes. If these dissidents actually got what they wished for, they would be even worse off - since many public services would be reduced or gone as the economy collapses on their empty heads.

Some truths ,some less than truths, much democratic loyalty and at least one ridiculous non point.

It is true that the voter will not get what they wanted, in part because many want opposites and most do not understand a thing about achieving goals. But, in the main, the only entity that gets what it wants is the corporation, and they spend many, many millions to assure that they do.

A second truth might be that Conason notes the lack of familiarity voters display with the details of that which they protest. An uninformed and manipulated electorate is so much easier to control and nothing demonstrates this point as does the Tea Party.

I would like to believe that a massive cut in defense spending with an equal amount spent on infrastructure, education and real health care reform would appeal to voters, though the author apparently does not. I wish he’d explain why he doesn’t.

Now that the smoke has cleared, now that the GOP has won the House nothing different from the last two years will occur I believe. The Democrats haven’t even the beginning of a clue, as Obama indicated in his press conference yesterday, and the GOP will continue to seek power by refusing to actually help govern.

Me, I will vote third party whenever possible, hoping that my grandchildren will someday note how prescient I was.

JC:>>”...the likelihood that voters will get what they claim to want as a result is even smaller than usual…”

At least he’s being half honest (maybe that’s a start). As if the voters got what they wanted with O’Change’O

JC:>>”...The tea party movement and its followers claim that they were originally motivated by the failure of Republicans and Democrats alike to balance the budget, improve the economy and reduce taxes and government waste. But their energies were diverted toward the restoration of Republican power…”<<

Maybe that’s because, as the Joeys of the world like to repeat ad nauseum, “there are only 2 real parties”. So when the party in power fails, they did as the Joeys preach. Then the Joeys get angina. LOL

JC:>>”..., the tea party’s evident enthusiasm for throwing teachers, police officers, firefighters and other public employees out of work makes very little sense in a depressed economy….”<<

Perhaps Joey hasn’t heard of Michelle Rhee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee
I’m getting more than a bit tired of “Professionals” that think those that are reading their drivel are less informed than them. It happens all the time, and Joey really lets his ignorance shine here. Joey, ask a teacher how much faith they have in their unions right about now. Then, ask what they think about Arnie Duncan and O’Change’Os Charter school snookerthon. Either Joey is faking ignorance, or showing off. Let the reader decide.

JC:>>”...Similarly, the insistence of some voters (and the politicians who pander to them) that taxes must be cut while restoring fiscal balance is mathematically impossible—unless we are prepared to contemplate massive cuts in Medicare, defense spending, homeland security, environmental protection, infrastructure maintenance and a host of other essential functions…”<<<

Apparently Joey thinks certain cash cows shouldn’t be on the table. (and I’m not referring to infrastructure)
Hmmm…

But wait, there’s more! Here’s the money shot:

JC:>>”...What would the angry voters say about national security when a spending reduction of 25 percent encourages a new round of terrorist attacks?”<<<

Now he’s channeling Dickie Cheney. Cheesus. Quick! Man the beaches! Iran is sending Submarines! Or, someone wrapped explosives in a laser printer and MAILED THEM TO CHICAGO! Good God.

Maybe if the USA Stopped drone bombing wedding parties and funerals we might make fewer enemies, therefore lessening the potential for whatever retaliation can come from cave dwellers.

But even the (D) sycophants are so numb to this revolutionary concept they can’t seem to begin to understand it. Very sad, Joey.

JC:>>”...There will be no significant reduction in the deficit or the debt. There will be no substantial reform of the tax system. And there will be no safeguard against future bailouts and corporate abuse—especially if the Republicans fulfill their promises…”<<

He almost seems happy here. But maybe I’m misinterpreting his snarky smirk. He sure doesn’t offer an idea though. Maybe he doesn’t have one.

JC:”...But their madness has ironically guaranteed that they will get more of exactly what they profess to despise…”

Projecting much, Joey?