Republican One-Percenters

--- Reap What They Have Sown

(Namely, a wacko Tea Party.)

(2014 Oct blog post)

! Preliminary ! I may add more examples and links to this page.

Home > Blog menu > This page on Republican One-Percenters --- Reaping What They Have Sown

Introduction :

Since about 1960, the Republican party leaders (the 'one-percenters') have been building a coalition based on

  1. the one-percenters themselves (the extremely rich, like the Koch Brothers)

  2. Afro-American haters, like most of the Deep South, but actually nationwide (Mid-West, Boston, Idaho, all over) --- people who do not distinguish Afro-American physicists from Afro-American rabble-rousers

  3. paranoid gun enthusiasts, represented by the NRA (National Rifle Association) and various rogue militias and black and white extremists scattered throughout U.S. cities

  4. anti-abortionists ('pro-lifers'), who are not willing to put up their time (about 18 years) and their money (a couple of hundred thousand dollars) by offering to adopt children --- instead, they shout an hour or two here and there --- and bomb, burn, and kill adults.

  5. intolerant fundmentalist Christians, like 'Reverend' Peter Popoff --- selling his 'miracle water' and getting off tax-free --- while preaching 'God will give you money, money, and more money'.

Since about 2008, we have seen the results from this pretty darned effective coalition of strange bedfellows. The Republican party of Dwight Eisenhower, Nelson Rockefeller, Barry Goldwater, and William F. Buckley is being taken over by the 'Tea Party' --- which is mostly made up of groups 2 through 5 above --- with a lot of overlap.

This coalition seems to have been effective enough to 'turn' Southern states from Democrat to Republican. And the coalition seems to resonate with rural counties all over the nation.

An irony of this scenario is that the Republican one-percenters (as represented by the Koch brothers) would be embarassed to be seen in their country clubs with most of these Tea Party members. If put to a country club membership vote, the one-percenters would, no doubt, vote to deny country club membership to most of these Tea Partiers --- a Grand New Party of wackos.

Anyone old enough to remember TV interviews of William F. Buckley (a Yale man with an exaggerated, condescending-sounding drawl) would find it hard to imagine Buckley welcoming these Tea Partiers into the Republican Party --- and much less into his home.


Images capturing the main elements of the Republican coalition :


The Afro-American haters


The Afro-American haters
(You think this is 'over-the-top'? It's not. This is the way it is out there.)


The paranoid gun enthusiasts


The paranoid gun enthusiasts


The anti-abortionists


The anti-abortionists


The 'intolerant fundamentalist Christians'
(This guy may be one that Goldwater is talking about at the top of this page.)


The 'intolerant fundamentalist Christians'


Some groups/votes the Republicans are willing to forsake :
(since the coalition above will suffice --- as long as
the Republicans manage to whittle away voting rights)


Willing to lose the vote of many women who feel belittled by the Republican party


Willing to lose the vote of women who see the hypocrisy of a Republican party
that espouses no Federal government interference, but wants state
government interference in women's bodies


Willing to lose the vote of women who do not want to enter a Republican time machine
to return to times that Republican men think were better for them


Willing to lose the vote of women who do not see much difference between
Republican laws and Islamic laws concerning women


Willing to lose the vote of people who are put off by
the anti-science stance of the Republican Party


The Republican method of appealing to Afro-American voters ---
those that get by their gauntlet of making-it-hard-to-vote laws


For further information :

In case I do not return to update this page, here are a few Google searches you can use to provide updates.


CONCLUSION :

There are many people in the U.S. who regard the Democratic Party as the 'tax-and-spend' party.

Unfortunately, there are many Congress-people in the Democratic Party who are quite willing to help perpetuate that image by indeed proposing too many not-really-needed, relatively-low-priority spending bills.

These facts make it likely that many border-line or moderate or independent voters will vote Republican, even if they do not identify with any of the above Tea-Party-like coalitions. These voters do not want to vote for a 'tax-and-spend' party.

In other words, Democrats seem destined to go on shooting themselves in the foot, thus allowing the above coalition to succeed.

What is needed is a new party --- one that combines fiscal responsibility with social and environmental concerns.

The Republicans like to hold themselves up as the fiscally responsible party. Then why do big economic meltdowns and huge budget deficits seem to get their start in their administrations? I'll answer that.

Because when the Republicans get into office, they direct tax dollars into the hands of the already-rich --- and they do not reduce overall spending. Why don't they reduce overall spending? I'll give you some examples.

The Republicans begin wars (like in Afghanistan and Iraq) while reducing taxes. Unheard of. And whose taxes do they mainly seek to reduce? The taxes of the richest.

Even in peace-time, they do not reduce spending. They simply shift spending from non-defense-department spending to defense-department over-spending.

Note that the majority of rich Republicans do not want to support the wars (our armed forces) with their tax dollars, even though those Republicans are the ones who benefit the most.

Oh, they are quite willing to support our armed forces with words --- but not with their tax dollars. (That's their real idea of fiscal conservatism.)

It is not the homeless who will lose the most if Communists, or Islamists or whoever over-runs the country. The rich have the most to lose.

Hence, it is only fitting that they pay higher taxes --- to support the most expensive portion of the federal government --- the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service (which fights the counterfeiters who would devalue their horded dollars), the NSA, etc.

It is funny how Republicans accuse the Democrats of re-distribution of wealth. Yet where has the wealth been redistributed in the past 20 years or so (1990 to 2014-plus)? To the upper one-percent. That is where.

We need a third party who really IS fiscally responsible --- and who think that social and environmental concerns need to be addressed intelligently --- and who recognize, like Henry Ford did, that a citizenry that is earning a decent wage is going to 'lift all boats'.

Bottom of page on blog topic Republican One-Percenters --- Reaping What They Have Sown.

To return to a previously visited web page location, click on
the Back button of your web browser, a sufficient number of times.
OR, use the History-list option of your web browser.
OR, ...

< Go to Top of Page, above. >
< Go to Blog menu >
< Go to Home Page >

Or you can scroll up, to the top of this page.

Page was posted 2014 Oct 16.

See some 'new Republican' images below.


The Republican Party (and Fox News) knows that a policy
based on honesty is not going to get them anywhere.


Turtle-face (Senator McConnell) and Orange-man (Rep. Boehner) continually
hold news conferences announcing what the American people want.
This is what they hear from the American people.


Letters-to-the-editor across the country indicate that many people,
who were forsaken by health insurers, are glad that insurers are having
a harder time dropping or denying their coverage. These people do not
believe in the highly questionable 'alternatives' that the Republicans
are suggesting (prayers, family members, vouchers, the good will and
golden reputation of private health insurance companies)






It is no wonder that Republicans always laud Ronald Reagan
and NOT Goldwater or Eisenhower or Teddy Roosevelt or Lincoln.
Goldwater and Eisenhower made statements that would alienate
portions of the Republican coalition of strange bedfellows.
Reagan is the first Republican presidential embodiment of
that coalition of the weird. (Well, Nixon might have really
been the first, but since he was forced to resign in disgrace,
the Republicans had to pick a cleaner standard bearer.)



Congratulations, Koch Brothers. See what thou hast wrought.