The TEA Party Was Caused By The Hiss Case, Really?
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:14 pm
Progressives never seem to be able let things go. Some slight or event that would have long been forgotten must be the REASON for the opposition against all those wonderful things the Progrsive wants to do, er for, us Here's a case in point.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-2 ... party.html
It seems that Cass Sunstein believes that the Alger Hiss was the reason for the opposition for the great Progressive ideas that he was forwarding.:
"Chambers’ broader charge -- that liberalism was a species of socialism, “inching its ice cap over the nation” -- polarized the nation. His attack on the patriotism of the Ivy League elite reflected an important strand in American culture, and it helped to initiate suspicions that persist to this day. "
The delusions of the left never cease to amaze me. Does Sunstein rally think that most conservative TEA Pary type really care vary much about Whitaker Chambers or Alger Hiss. I guess he doesn't understand that it isn't some nebulous charge from a once prominent conservative, who unfortunately has been mostly forgotten, a reaction to what Sunstien and the Administration have been doing right now. The angst of the TEA Party has a lot more to do with TARP, the stimulus, the ACA and the whole structure of rules, regulations and taxes that most of us suffer under rather than some long forgotten Communist.
Walter Russell Mead expands this:
"This is a surprisingly lame ending to the piece. After all, if Chambers’ attack on the Ivy League “reflected an important strand in American culture,” then the Tea Party must have deeper roots than one half-forgotten cause célèbre. It’s also not clear what he means by the reference to false accusations against liberals for holding positions that they abhor. Is that what Sunstein thinks the Tea Party is about? That if those unfortunate and paranoid folks understood liberals better, they would oppose them less?"
And more:
"The Tea Party is mostly something much more conventional: a libertarian, small government protest against the centralization of federal power, and a populist resentment of snooty Ivy League professors who think the common people aren’t very smart. We’ve had these movements in America ever since colonial times; when Andrew Jackson defeated John Quincy Adams’ re-election bid in 1828, the 19th century forerunners of the Tea Party were in full cry.
We aren’t seeing a right-leaning populist surge today because of Alger Hiss; we are seeing it because many Americans believe that President Obama’s liberal and technocratic agenda represents a threat to a way of life they value. We are seeing it because many Americans blame the establishment of both parties both for the financial crisis and for the vast transfer of resources to the wealthy that came after the crash. We are seeing it because whether you look at foreign or domestic policy, the technocratic suggestions of the Great and the Good have not been helping ordinary Americans much for the last 20 years."
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... lger-hiss/
Look, we Americans can think for ourselves for the most part. We don't need the Koch Bros., Heritage, or Rush to tell us that the Progressive agenda and it's technocratic elite doesn't work. We get our faces rubbed in it every day. The TEA Party has far to do with people like Sunstein and their trying to nudge us into places we don't want to be and limiting our choices as free people than it does any connection to a central authority figure. The problem is that Progressives are trying to use early industrial thinking and massive bouts of delusion and illogic to try to cope with a world that has moved on. Sunstein has spent too much time in the comfortable of the Ivy Covered Snob Factories and not enough time in the real world the rest of us live in.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-2 ... party.html
It seems that Cass Sunstein believes that the Alger Hiss was the reason for the opposition for the great Progressive ideas that he was forwarding.:
"Chambers’ broader charge -- that liberalism was a species of socialism, “inching its ice cap over the nation” -- polarized the nation. His attack on the patriotism of the Ivy League elite reflected an important strand in American culture, and it helped to initiate suspicions that persist to this day. "
The delusions of the left never cease to amaze me. Does Sunstein rally think that most conservative TEA Pary type really care vary much about Whitaker Chambers or Alger Hiss. I guess he doesn't understand that it isn't some nebulous charge from a once prominent conservative, who unfortunately has been mostly forgotten, a reaction to what Sunstien and the Administration have been doing right now. The angst of the TEA Party has a lot more to do with TARP, the stimulus, the ACA and the whole structure of rules, regulations and taxes that most of us suffer under rather than some long forgotten Communist.
Walter Russell Mead expands this:
"This is a surprisingly lame ending to the piece. After all, if Chambers’ attack on the Ivy League “reflected an important strand in American culture,” then the Tea Party must have deeper roots than one half-forgotten cause célèbre. It’s also not clear what he means by the reference to false accusations against liberals for holding positions that they abhor. Is that what Sunstein thinks the Tea Party is about? That if those unfortunate and paranoid folks understood liberals better, they would oppose them less?"
And more:
"The Tea Party is mostly something much more conventional: a libertarian, small government protest against the centralization of federal power, and a populist resentment of snooty Ivy League professors who think the common people aren’t very smart. We’ve had these movements in America ever since colonial times; when Andrew Jackson defeated John Quincy Adams’ re-election bid in 1828, the 19th century forerunners of the Tea Party were in full cry.
We aren’t seeing a right-leaning populist surge today because of Alger Hiss; we are seeing it because many Americans believe that President Obama’s liberal and technocratic agenda represents a threat to a way of life they value. We are seeing it because many Americans blame the establishment of both parties both for the financial crisis and for the vast transfer of resources to the wealthy that came after the crash. We are seeing it because whether you look at foreign or domestic policy, the technocratic suggestions of the Great and the Good have not been helping ordinary Americans much for the last 20 years."
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... lger-hiss/
Look, we Americans can think for ourselves for the most part. We don't need the Koch Bros., Heritage, or Rush to tell us that the Progressive agenda and it's technocratic elite doesn't work. We get our faces rubbed in it every day. The TEA Party has far to do with people like Sunstein and their trying to nudge us into places we don't want to be and limiting our choices as free people than it does any connection to a central authority figure. The problem is that Progressives are trying to use early industrial thinking and massive bouts of delusion and illogic to try to cope with a world that has moved on. Sunstein has spent too much time in the comfortable of the Ivy Covered Snob Factories and not enough time in the real world the rest of us live in.