Respected Dr. Tickner:You have several very big advantages against me; you are a professor of the Universidad de los Andes for starters, a Ph.D. in International Relations from the University of Miami and a MA in Latin American Studies at Georgetown University. Besides, you are an American also. I am just a blogger, but I dare to question (perhaps unwisely) a few things about your column, "Losing is winning?" Published on October 26, 2010 El Espectador.
The TEA Party is not a radical faction
If they would behave like a new "John Birch Society”, I would accept the point, but the political platform of the Taxed Enough Already people is precisely no new taxes, no more waste, fiscal responsibility, putting an end to the runaway bureaucracy, make government officials actually more accountable to voters and not to a coterie of lobbyists and colleagues, that is, unless things have changed so much that those simple things are meant to be considered radical.
Andrew Breitbart, the director of new media of conservative orientation, offered $ 100,000 for evidence to prove racism in the TEA Party. No one was to claim the money. A favorite banner of the TEA Party said: "No matter what I say this poster, it will be considered racist anyway."
I think "Organizing for America" is even more radical, which it seems they want to make a group of popular pressure astroturfed by the same government.
No bipartisan collaboration: Republicans are to blame
The bipartisanship ended the very day Obama met with Republicans and said "I won", just after the congresspersons made a few suggestions (quite surprising for a non-sectarian, post-partisan President, isn’t it?). One of the lamest arguments to decry the current state of affairs is the lack of cooperation from the Republicans, a/k/a the "party of no." Democrats control until January the two chambers of Congress with large majorities, enough to pass any legislation they want. Pelosi and Reid used all the muscle and resources to pass health care reform (by any means necessary, the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts was futile), not because of Republican obstructionism but because of the doubts and objections that housed many of their fellow party members on the relevance and viability of that particular 2.000-pages plan. Now, the "blue dogs" are discarded by their own party machine after having served for the purposes set forth.
The debate is unfair to compare Obama to Lenin and Hitler as leaders and totalitarian ends.
It seems that comparing Bush to Hitler for eight years is fair, but you cannot do the same to Obama, God forbid. Let's see: the reform of the health system may end up giving the state the total control of one-sixth of the U.S. economy. General Motors and Chrysler were virtually nationalized, rather than allowing them to undergo restructuring under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Act. Chavez, who knows what he's talking about, did not miss the opportunity to comment that Obama was further to the left than he is.
On the other hand, Democrats should not allow that a great portion of its history could be explained only with the words "George Soros", who undeniably through his contributions and organizations supported by him, have a strong influence on party decisions. Just as Republicans have been criticized for being nurtured by corporations and corporate power, I really don’t see why the Democrats can’t be held accountable for the same reason.
Obama also has failed to sell successfully his accomplishments.
This is puzzling for someone with the oratorical skills that is supposed to have. Obama has delivered so many speeches; he has held so many meetings with the electorate at the Town halls and has made so many television appearances, including Letterman, The View and The Daily Show (lowering the dignity of the office as not much different than it did Uribe to appear on Big Brother), it is very difficult to believe there has been a communications problem.
I would like to be corrected if wrong, but before taking office as President, at least 40% of US taxpayers pay no income tax, so it is plain appalling to present that the 95%-tax-cut-figure. Everyone knows that so-called Bush tax cuts are still in the new government's sight, and the creation of a federal VAT (to finance health care reform!) is not indifferent to it, either. Thus, the unemployment figure of over 9% makes more sense. Who wants to create businesses and expand them, and create jobs in such a toxic environment as toxic, full of regulations?
The press begins to shake off the hypnotic trance that was sunk by the election of the first African American to the presidency, disqualified by more than one of his own ethnicity because he didn’t have "no slave blood (!)" Speaking of racism ... well, the mainstream media also has its peccadilloes to be recognized in its daily news coverage. The media can acrimoniously claim its objectivity, but when a scandal like Journolist hits the road, it would be better to recognize once and for all their partisanship, and thus we would know what to expect.
Faced with a Republican Congress the President will have someone to put the blame in
I agree completely, the most paradoxical of all is that most of the Republican establishment, ignoring the will of their constituents, is more than willing to lend a lifeline to the Obama presidency, which could eventually help in his re-election, leaving the GOP flat and wondering why.
Sincerely,
Dr. sipmac
P.S. I also find unacceptable the disqualification made by RCN’s Francisco Santos to you and Laura Gil, and let me please extend my solidarity.
