Posted on 06/17/2014 1:59:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
The Eric Cantor debacle in Virginia last week demanded a storyline, which was no heavy lifting. In the GOP primary a political newbie had wiped the floor with the majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Bring on the analysts to find the narrative in the rebuke administered, a rather remote if hard-working political power broker linked more frequently -- here comes the dichotomy -- with Wall Street than Main Street.
Cantor, on these terms, updated Cardinal Wolsey's Shakespearean lament from "Henry VIII": "Had I but served my district with half the zeal/I served the Chamber of Commerce he would not in mine age/Have left me naked to mine enemies."
Even before David Brat had become a household word of sorts, the trope -- Wall Street versus Main Street -- was familiar from accounts of the Tea Party rebellion against a whole bunch of things. Not just presidential arrogance, not just Obamacare, not just Big Spending, but also an imputed alliance between the rich of America and the powerful of Washington, D.C. "Establishment" Republicans. The kind who like their reforms mild and their changes undercooked -- Mitt Romney, for instance -- were said to stand athwart the prospects of the middle class.
The so-called establishment's so-called attempt to roll back the Tea Party rebellion by backing responsible candidates, such as Cantor, keeps political pots stirred this year and reporters alert to renewals of a struggle they didn't know until recently was going on. The tale of "Washington cronyism," in short, has journalistic legs.
The tale is worth telling, insofar as it throws light on the involvements of Money with Power. A few points, even so, call for nuance, perspective and -- the rarest of political commodities -- common sense.
Point 1: It's the oldest story in the political books -- not just our own books but those of every nation, going back at least to the Greeks and the Romans, if not to Babylonia and Egypt. The wealthy and the up-and-coming understand government as an important source of protection; more than a handful of the wealthy understand it as a means of advancement.
Point 2: It would be stupid and destructive for Americans to get caught up in another one of the narratives about the evil rich. Not that President Barack Obama hates wealth, exactly. He has a fair amount of it himself, at least as wealth was reckoned until the rise of the billionaires. He can buy himself a lot of steak dinners and resort vacations once he leaves (O frabjous day!) the White House. Did you see where he went Friday after his non-announcement of non-action on Iraq? To California -- partly to raise political money from the rich.
What Democrats try to cover up, with hate-the-rich rhetoric, is their own -- our own -- society's dependence on the rich to create jobs and advance innovation. Where would we be without the businesses that make up the U.S. Chamber and the National Federation of Independent Business? Capitalistic endeavor underpins our economy. I implore my Tea Party friends to let the "progressives" do the anti-business work at which they're already so good.
Point 3: Favors to the seekers of favors are many and munificent in modern America -- the "crony capitalism" point -- due to the power and heft of a government we keep commissioning to do all kinds of good things for us. The bigger the government, the bigger and more numerous the favors at government's disposal. Let's blame "establishment" Republicans less harshly, for seeking favors, than American society as a whole for going along with the post-New Deal notion of government as the supplier of wants and needs that are better supplied by the private sector -- including health care.
The Wall Street/Main Street argument is too crucial to be exploited for fun by the media, least of all by the very politicians whose refusal to shed powers they shouldn't enjoy in the first place keeps the lights burning unwontedly low in 21st-century America.
That sound about right, Congressman-to-Be Brat?
What next are Conservatives to hush when the GOP passes big spending bills too? Just shut up and vote, eh?
Thank you for posting.
A RINO, astride his QE Bull, smites the strawman with his keyboard.
It isn’t business-bashing to state true facts. I’m as big a capitalist as anyone but I don’t like corporations using their money to influence politics. They use laws to create markets for themselves by getting government to buy their products. They use laws to create regulators to protect their existing markets from competition. They move jobs and factories all over the world to avoid paying the taxes which buy their products and maintain the health of their workers and customers.
Vote for Kang or Kodos or throw your vote away.
I suspect that Brat understands more about Capitalism than the author, but the author misses the point that Establishment Republicans like Cantor are happy to go along with the bailouts, and the bailouts were the genesis of the Tea Party revolt.
Cantor was among the minority of Republicans that voted for the bailout bill the first time it came up for a vote.
Good riddance!
NFIB is a good outfit. They were the chief instigators behind the suit seeking to overturn ObaMaoCare which John Roberts stabbed us in the back over.
The main policy initiative of the Chamber of Congress, on the other hand, is to destroy the middle class with illegal alien amnesty.
I never bash business.
I bash crony-capitalism. Because crony-capitalism is not real capitalism. In fact, when practiced by a national-level government, crony-capitalism is a form of national socialism.
Rush had a great opening monologue about this today.
Yes!
It is a two party system.
You MUST vote for one of us.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...
The mainstream media likes to paint Brat’s victory in terms of illegal immigration and xenophobia, but the man spoke far more about crony capitalism and reigning in the banksters. That’s the message voters connected with. I can see why the GOP would just want him to shut up already. Let’s hope he ignores them.
Why not get some leftists on board with us when we can? Why not go after those rich that are not there by merit, but are there by pure greed with no concern for the country that provides the wherewithal for their largess?
So we annoy some dyed-in-the-wool libertarians. BFD.
Somebody has their panties in a twist.
/johnny
I trust larger corporations EXACTLY as much as I trust unions and the fedgov.
This editorial is hooey. I can list 5 major things that big business (not “the rich”) do, that are in and of themselves reprehensible, and are and should be objected to by the Tea Party.
1) For a business to be “too big to fail”, means that at all times they are a threat to the economy. Thus they need to be adjusted so that they are no longer a threat. They cannot continue to operate as they are doing.
2) Business *must* absolutely be loyal to America and Americans first. This means America and Americans over foreigners, international agreements, outsourcing, tax avoidance, etc. If they cannot do this wholeheartedly, then they do not deserve to benefit from our markets.
3) “The rich” as well as businesses need to adopt a hands off attitude to social engineering, anywhere. When they engage in this, often with very dubious and disreputable goals in mind, they invite punishment. They are not our rulers, and if they want to play the game of kings, they must wager their heads.
4) Investments that amount to “heads I win and tales the taxpayers lose” gambling must end. Likewise, the gambling of money they do not have, like derivatives, needs to end. If they have a billion dollars, they can only bet up to that amount. Not a trillion, nor ten trillion dollars.
5) Monopolies, duopolies and oligopolies are destructive to industry, and need to be broken up, along with eternal patents and copyrights. Patent troll companies are illegitimate.
You want a law passed that will benefit you business? Ok.
You want a law passed that will hurt your competitors? Not ok.
Right now they are pushing a law that will make businesses collect and remit sales taxes in any state that their customers reside in.
This is currently the job of the customer. He is suppose to report his purchase and pay whatever sales tax is owed. Some don't but this is not the businesses fault.
This is fine for the big businesses. They have the manpower to do this plus they already have a physical presents in those states anyway so they are set. This law will not benefit them in any way.
What it will do is hurt the small and medium businesses who compete with them.
Crony capitalism is not market capitalism, nor real capitalism of any kind. It is not constitutional, not conservative, not libertarian, not pro-freedom, and not justifiable. We should be talking about ending subsidies and “too big to fail.”
yes when PA enacted a sales tax on computer consulting services, GE cut it’s own deal with the state. They only paid on the net. everyone else paid on gross.
Thanks Kaslin.
Thanks for posting. Fascinating example of the quisling editorial style.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.