Howard Dean Views Tea Party As “Last Gasp Of The 55-Year-Old Generation” (Likes Mitt for 2012)

Mediaite ^ | January 5, 2011 | Matt Schneider

[2ndDivisionVet]

On a day when many Tea Party-influenced Republican members of Congress took the oath of office in Washington, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean is storming back onto the scene, first declaring Tea Party leadership to be fraudulent and now revealing his true thoughts about the whole Tea Party movement at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. Although he doesn’t think Tea Party members are racist, he does think “it’s the last gasp of the 55-year-old generation . . . a group of older folks who’ve seen their lives change dramatically.”

Dean continued:

Every morning when they see the president they are reminded that things are totally different than they were when they were born and I think that has a lot to do with it. . . Economic uncertainty fuels this but this is the last gasp of the generation that has trouble with diversity. The tea party is almost entirely over 55 and white, and the country has changed dramatically as a result of what happened in 2008 and it’s not going back. Every day that goes on, the demographic change continues, and that’s what a lot of this is about.

Given that Tea Party favorites like Senator Rand Paul, Senator Marco Rubio and Sarah Palin are each under 50 years old, and that many would argue the Tea Party has many constituents well under Dean’s age threshold, Dean’s conclusion seems questionable. However, Dean is never one to shy away from giving his opinion, also revealing his prediction that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is the strongest Republican challenger to President Obama in 2012.

Watch the clip from the Christian Science Monitor below:

(VIDEO AT LINK)

[The Pack Knight]

First off, unlike the poll(s) you're citing, the 60 Minutes poll gave respondents four alternatives for how to cut the deficit. Respondents state their preference for only one - the same respondent could not choose both taxing the rich and cutting defense. Therefore, in this instance, it makes perfect sense to add them.

Second, it isn't my logic. I was comparing the absurdity of that poll's numbers to the absurdity of Howard Dean's statements. Of course 81% of Americans don't support the Democrats' fiscal platform. If they did, Democrats would have gained 50 seats in the House.

[kenavi]

the 60 Minutes poll gave respondents four alternatives for how to cut the deficit. Respondents state their preference for only one - the same respondent could not choose both taxing the rich and cutting defense. Therefore, in this instance, it makes perfect sense to add them.

OK, I see. The issue is as old as time, and one recognized by the Founders A majority of the people will always be less rich than the richest. In a democracy, what's to stop the majority from taking from the minority. Ultimately, a wise citizenry, which realizes there are no free lunches.

That is the job of conservatism, to educate the citizenry by appealing to their common sense. We will succeed if our citizenry generally has salt, the common sense. We are doomed if it does not.

At least let's start with ourselves, the so-called "conservative activists." We should look for candidates whose comportment and lives exemplify sobriety and a respect for the hard-earned lessons of history, not those who parrot the lines.

[The Pack Knight]

That's true, but my point was that the poll was very suspect. Even given the fact that the poll was limited to four alternatives (two of the more popular Democrat proposals and two of the least popular Republican proposals) which were clearly designed to make the Democrat platform seem more reasonable and therefore more popular, I have a very hard time believing that only 7% would choose cutting Social Security or Medicare.

While cutting Social Security and Medicare have never been that popular, I've seen at least one recent poll that showed 21% support for phasing out social security, not just cutting it. Cutting Medicare is probably less popular (but probably more necessary), but between them, they ought to have at least broken the double digits. After all, this is America - you can usually get at least 10% of the population to support anything.

Ultimately, while I dispute the accuracy of that poll, I recognize that Social Security and Medicare are both still sacred calves to solid majorities of the American people - just not as large as the 60 Minutes poll implies. Unfortunately, cutting them are really the only thing that can save us in the long run. We can cut everything else and raises taxes on everyone, but the crown jewels of the New Deal and the Great Society will still bleed us dry.

In the long run, though, Social Security and Medicare as we know them will either be eliminated or radically transformed. It's just a matter of how much pain we have to feel before we gain the political will to do it. The good news is that I don't think they'll "bankrupt" the United States, because the "liabilities" they represent can at any time be eliminated instantly by act of Congress.