I obviously disagree with your perception of history. But you already knew that.
[YT]d0nERTFo-Sk[/YT]
The notion that Reagan is on the other side of the economic spectrum from Roosevelt is laughable. Reagan was libertarian in his rhetoric but not in his actions.
Over time you will realize that you have vastly underestimated the anger Americans have for the Federal Government. The anger at the Tea Parties isn't aimed at a Black Man but a failed Federal Government. That anger is common amongst those that have never considered attending one of those events.
What people are begging for are solutions. To be given some idea of how we can get out of this whole that we have dug. When people can start going to worrk.
Your answer is government - not the concept of government but the same government that has failed to excite any side of the ideological spectrum. You think Americans are willing to trust our government to get us out of this mess? Dissatisfaction with government is the one thing uniting everyone.
Your notion that the Income Tax is a "populist position" is, frankly, bizarre. You are saying that people are fans of our current tax system? The IRS is the most hated institution in America. Support of the status tax quo, support of the income tax, will become labeled SUPPORT OF THE IRS and it will destroy any politician outside of Progressive areas.
And then you start mentioning the fact the FairTax allows workers to keep 100% of their paycheck? Working on a construction site, you see how much people hate having to deal with losing a third of your paycheck (no exaggeration, I lost 450 dollars off a 1500 paycheck). And you never have to deal with the IRS? You never have to keep receipts? You have no fear of being audited? They are intrigued.
You bring up the fact that business won't have to pay taxes and how that means jobs that were going overseas will come back to avoid taxes. That's job creation. You point out the fact that when the government is not taxing businesses, there is instantly less reasons for businesses to influence politicians.
You start with one piece of a small government platform. You simply the effects into relatable pieces and you win people over. When its as successful as it will be you move on to ending Social Security (with guarantees to the next 5 years worth of Social Security qualifiers). You educate while you legislate.
My perception of history? You mean reality?
....I couldn't resist.
Reagan was for deregulating the markets and getting government out of the way. While he spent like a drunken sailor who gets one night off in a major city and blew up our deficit....he still practiced smaller government in the market which led to immediate growth. But to deny that these same policies (which were expanded upon under Clinton and Bush'43 to be fair) didn't contribute to things like the explosion of financial services making up a huge amount of our GDP and over 40% of profits paid in this country, as well as the creation of the highly speculative markets of oil, agriculture, mortgages, etc. which contributed heavily to the 2008 meltdown...well that is just naive.
But I digress.
The Tea Party is not the mark of a new style of governance in your lifetime. It is a populist outrage that has sprung up in times of economic fear, paranoia and discontent. They appear throughout history and whether they claim America is on a Cross of Gold, or that we are better off siding with Hitler than Roosevelt, or that Medicare will turn us into a Socialist Empire "like the Soviet Union," they always are the contrarian voice of history that live in the footnotes and in the minds of those who prefer living in ideology than reality.
You deny there is a racist element in parts of this movement at your own peril. In any case, the day Obama is no longer president, there will be no Tea Party. Whether they were the racist bigots that Liberal elites mock as "Tea Baggers" or the passionate patriotic "Freedom Fighters" you and the right build them up as...they will not last. History is cyclical and their role has an expiration date. You will not see them oppose a Republican President's spending habits and you will not see rallies on the first tax day of the next GOP POTUS. It will be up to historians to decide whether they were idealists, libertarians (is there a difference?), disenchanted Republicans, patriots, racists, or a huge pot of all the above.
The income tax is not leaving because most Americans will not part with their Social Security, Medicare, roads, etc. And if you don't think there is a populist anger at the Wall Street elite, then check out the latest poll numbers about what most Americans think of the Bush Tax Cuts. If you believe you can convince these people to sign off on a "FairTax" which is ultimately intended to make the rich richer by starving the government, you are delusional.
....
And again, you seem to think you're in the majority. The Tea Party at most is 10-15% of this country (I doubt that high) and I have met many Republicans from the D.C. area. The ones who run the party or are part of the beltway there don't give a crap about the Tea Party platform. They're biggest interest is in reducing government control over big business and corporate America. It is why the only actual proposed legislation in their 40-page "Pledge to America," besides repealing HCR, is making the Bush Tax Cuts permanent for the Top Income Bracket. I've heard them argue raising taxes on the Middle Class, but never the "job creators."
That is where their heart lies and your dreams of Gold Standards and ending the EPA are insignificant in their eyes. Crap to they say for votes. If you think the TEa Party is going to change the minds of most of these Republicans, I think again you fail to see who wags the tail in this relationship. Crackpot libertarianism has been a part of America for centuries.
It never wins.
