A Promise to America

A letter to tack to the Tea Party’s temple door for the edification of it’s elders, Jason Chaffetz, Carl Wimmer, Mike Lee, and Orrin Hatch.

First, Orrin, you’re so old that I could run against you as the “youth” candidate. What happened to “two terms and retirement?” What was that you said to Senator Ted Moss as you did to him what Jason Caffetz is about to do to you?

Mike, you’re a brilliant man, gifted with a brain by your dad, Rex, and mom, Janet. But Rex was no idealogue. He was witty, and as urbane as a cowboy can be. In serving as Supreme Court clerk to Whizzer White, he worked well with Democrats. Democrats here, certainly this one, could vote for Rex in a second. But Rex could never have survived, let alone have supported the rancid rhetoric of the Tea Party. I knew your dad far longer than you were permitted to do. I wrote the letter for Rex, to Justice White, as he applied as a Supreme Court clerk, over Rex’s signature, all not quite within the rules. He said I wrote better and I knew he knew more “downtown law practice” than I would ever know.

I don’t know Jason Chaffetz, but I get a great deal of joy watching him make great good sense, done with a winner’s sense of timing and theatre. Both Mike and Jason will go far. I have nothing to say about Wimmer, except what I would say to all our Tea Party darlings:

l. Do you promise in the first term of your election-for-life (this is, after all, Utah, the land off dinosaurs) to renounce your Cadillac health care, for life, since it’s provided, unconstitutionally you say, by the federal government?

2. Do you promise to pack heat in the Senate and the House, openly, as you demand we do at the University of Utah? An AK 47 and at least one six-shooter will do. Sooner than later, there will be killings when you combine volatile rhetoric, ramped up “facts” that aren’t, and guns.

3. Do you promise to defile your homes, offices, and the Capitol Building the way you all have defiled our state as lackeys of Energy Solutions, with among other goodies, depleted uranium? What is the aversion of ethical morons, however bright, to the morality of “not in my backyard?” In fact, you have no more regard for your own backyard than four pigs in a parlor, or more accurately, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

4. Do you promise to insure us against global warming, happening right now while your heads are in the ground and your hind parts where your brains should be? Is your only answer to global warming to assure a Nuclear Winter, which you do by your opposition to bipartisan nuclear weapons treaties? These have been endorsed by every Secretary of State from Ronald Reagan’s presidency through the administrations of Bush the elder to our nation’s worst president in a walk, George the Less? One way or the other, you fellas do pack heat.

5. Do you promise to continue to oppose Utah’s reception of federal aid to schools, highways, food banks, unemployment insurance, and health care, already paid for by our own income and other taxes?

This list, drawn from the Tea Party’s manual of destruction of our federal government in favor of the states, could go on. Do the Tea Partyers still think the South won the Civil War?

Ed Firmage, Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law, emertus, University of Utah College of Law, Salt Lake City, Utah.

  1. #1 by cav on January 9, 2011 - 8:15 am

    Ed, the half-life of a promise is extremely short, one reason why promises (along with troubling facts) are that with which we stuff the memory hole. And besides, even though a promise might be made, our opposition makes it so darn difficult to keep ‘em, that each and every stupid citizen should be increasingly thankful that the memory hole even comes to the rescue – otherwise the new reality we are so bent on creating, would just be near impossible, and certainly lacking in suitable sparkle.

  2. #2 by Larry Bergan on January 9, 2011 - 8:35 am

    Non-violent revolution comes with knowledge.

    Action would be helpful in preventing the unthinkable.

  3. #3 by Larry Bergan on January 9, 2011 - 8:47 am

    I have hope.

  4. #4 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 9:06 am

    There is no revolution in societies of material poverty.

    What are seeing now in the evolution of the Tea Party is a Thermidorian Reaction to the revolution imposed by the two party duopoly to control every aspect of economy and people’s lives it can get its grubby fingers on. The over reach of government control has caused this and as the reaction unfolds there is every possibility that social norms many are accustomed will become reversed.

    Revolution comes when there is a class, or classes who see their own opportunity and power thwarted by and existing power structure or oligarchy. In order for a revolution to succeed the class rebelling must have material means in order to pull of the toppling of the existing structure.

    The folks who puppet this two party duopoly farce (corporate/banking) know this implicitly, and have been using their active or unwitting useful idiots in the congress and executive to destroy the economy to the extent that poverty of means becomes the mean, which makes their world so much safer from the forces of real change, which only come via revolution.

    So to wit, as poverty increases, the chances for a wider movement to rid ourselves of Democrat and Republican control of our nation puppeted by the oligarchy which sponsors it, lessens.

    The Tea Party no matter which side of the duopoly a corrupted partisan mind dwells on is a danger to the status quo. The nervous nelly deprecations of it from left and right, has all the look of nervous Tories excoriating the Patriots of Boston, as rabble and demented. More of the same, we’ll wait for the outcome, but as it stands, the duopoly for what it has to offer after repeated deceptions of the people, is looking rather bereft at this point.

  5. #5 by Larry Bergan on January 9, 2011 - 9:25 am

    glenn:

    Can’t argue with any of that.

    Wish I could.

  6. #6 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 11:25 am

    To my observation it is that once certain “Rubicons” of a society are crossed, the direction of how things will resolve is cast. The details are the unknowns, but what is happening now, has happened before. There are a few outcome variations with man involved, but apart from Devyne(had to the word is moderated) intervention, we are headed exactly where we are pointed.

    “There is nothing new under the Sun, except for history you don’t know”. Anonymous

  7. #7 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 11:26 am

    To my observation it is that once certain “Rubicons” of a society are crossed, the direction of how things will resolve is cast. The details are the unknowns, but what is happening now, has happened before. There are a few outcome variations with man involved, but apart from Devyne(had to the word is moderated) intervention, we are headed exactly where we are pointed.

    “There is nothing new under the Sun, except for history you don’t know”.

  8. #8 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 11:27 am

    Anonimouse is a word that will get your post moderated. He is the one that gave the sage quoted advice.

  9. #9 by Uncle Rico on January 9, 2011 - 11:33 am

    Ya know, although I don’t alway agree, I appreciate glenn’s comments more when glenn is “glenn” as opposed to when glenn isn’t “glenn.” Is because “glenn” is a different glenn than glenn?

  10. #10 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 11:49 am

    ….and so it goes, that even if I use the same name the perspective can change, depending on the offerings. Content not the individual is what matters. In that if you are looking at the persona, and not what they are saying, you will never truly know what they are up to.

  11. #11 by Larry Bergan on January 9, 2011 - 12:12 pm

    kaput?

  12. #12 by glenn on January 9, 2011 - 2:37 pm

    For you Larry, Catherine sums it up very precisely. Fools and bad people are a terrible mix.

    http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/1001.html

  13. #13 by Larry Bergan on January 9, 2011 - 5:41 pm

    I hate supporting glenn, but Catherine rocks!

    Seems like a human being.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: