The ‘Mad-As-Hell’ Party Scores as the Anxious Class Stews, RobertReich.org, May 18, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Kentucky Tea Party hero Rand Paul scores a knockout victory over Republican Trey Grayson. Before that, Utah Senator Robert Bennett loses to a Tea Party-fueled Republican insurgent. Is the lesson here the rise once again of the Republican right?

Not so fast. Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln is also in a tough fight – threatened from the left by Lt. Governor Bill Halter. In Pennsylvania, newly-minted Democrat Arlen Specter lost the primary race to Joe Sestak. Meanwhile, thirteen-term Democratic representative Paul Kanjorski is challenged by 36-year-old Corey O’Brien – who’s waged a spirited campaign from his RV, accusing Kanjorski of being too tied to Wall Street.

Okay, so maybe all this signals increasing strength on both political extremes?

Not really. To the extent these races represent anything at all (and it’s easy to read too much into early races), it’s a swing against the establishment.

Kentucky’s Trey Grayson was handpicked by Mitch McConnell, who campaigned vigorously for him, as did Dick Cheney. The President and other Democratic notables came to the aid of Blanche Lincoln’s and Arlen Specter.

It’s the economy, stupid. American politics is turning anti-establishment because so many Americans feel screwed by the economy and they blame the establishment. If there’s a trend here, it’s not left-wing Democrats versus right-wing Republicans. It’s the “Mad-As-Hell” Party against both.

Unemployment continues to haunt the middle class – the anxious class of America. There are still more than five jobless workers for every job opening.

But it’s also low wages. The much-vaulted first quarter of this year produced zilch in terms of wage growth. Private-sector hourly earnings rose at a .4 annual rate while prices climbed at about a 1 percent – leaving most workers with less purchasing power than they had when the quarter began. The only reason weekly earnings showed any growth at all is because some workers put in more hours.

What does all this portend for November’s midterm election? Unless the economy moves into high gear, and unless America’s anxious class feels substantially better, incumbents are in trouble.

But the probability of the economy moving into high gear between now and then is not great. Consider that almost eighty percent of the increase in GDP in the first quarter was due to the growth of consumer spending. Where did consumers get the money if their real hourly wage dropped? From drawing down their savings. Obviously, they can’t continue to do this. Had consumers not spent their savings, the GDP would hardly have grown at all

In fact, if you exclude temporary boosts like the government stimulus and the restocking of company inventories, the U.S. economy would not have grown in the first quarter. As these temporary boosts fade later this year, consumer spending is the only thing that will keep the economy going. But consumers won’t be able to spend what they don’t have.

Some economic cheerleaders predict employers will increase wages as their profits grow. That’s nonsense. With five jobless workers for every job opening, employers are under no pressure to raise wages.

Other cheerleaders say the stock market’s rise will boost consumer spending and confidence. That’s nonsense, too. How many consumers feel richer because the Dow is up from what it was at the start of the year? They may see a bit of a rise in their 401(k)s, but their biggest asset is their homes, and housing prices are going nowhere. One out of four Americans with a mortgages now owes more than their house is worth.

The real lesson from today’s political races is the economy still stinks for most people. And the real lesson from the economy’s first quarter is the recovery is so weak that the anxious class is likely to remain anxious through November. Incumbents beware.

See Rand Paul’s meltdown on TRMS, Daily Kos, May 19, 2010, by snowman3, excerpt quoted verbatim:

I’m not sure if someone else has diaried this yet (I didn’t see a diary on the list), but tonight on The Rachel Maddow Show, newly minted Kentucky Rebublican senatorial candidate Rand Paul refused to say whether or not he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He repeatedly said he was not a racist and said he abhorred institutional racism (I wonder if this is a dog whistle to the Tea Party about affirmative action) but he said he could only support 9 of the 10 Titles of the Civil Rights Act, saying he could not support the Title referring to private institutions. Presumably he was talking about Title VII which “prohibits discrimination by covered employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin”.

Rachel repeatedly pressed Paul on the issue, in fact the entire interview was about this issue, but Paul refused to budge. He said he would have tried to change that Title if he had to vote on the Civil Rights Act. Rachel correctly pointed out that without government enforcing non-discrimination at private businesses, businesses could refuse to serve people based on their race or sexual orientation or on any other basis the business decided. Paul was unmoved and called the issue a red herring, while saying he was personally against discrimination and institutional racism. Rachel pointed to the concrete example of Walgreens refusing to serve blacks at lunch counters back in the 60s, yet Paul stuck to his guns.

Commentary by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans: I am somewhat troubled by Tea Partiers’ ubiquitous claims that they are not racist juxtaposed with statements by them which ARE racist. Not only do these people use the “N” word with no compunction, they are belligerent towards blacks and also towards the sub-species of human scum know as — liberals. That’s right, for Tea Partiers, liberals are the new blacks… They don’t like us, they are certain God doesn’t like us, and they vigorously shun us in public. To tell the truth, I don’t feel completely safe when I park my car, which has a few prominent liberal bumper stickers, in a public lot. I know that the public always HAS been “a great beast” and that you are kidding yourself if you think you are safe “out there” but my two housemates were robbed at gunpoint last week at a gas station.

I don’t quite get why society has to be this way. I know that the poor situation of our economy is just making it worse, too. People are really hurting, and if you venture in to the old parts of our major cities, you’ll see what economic devastation looks like. What is absolutely appalling to me is a conclusion I have reached intuitively about our government and jobs and the economic plight of the poor and the middle class. I don’t think they care beyond propping up the economy just a little – just enough so that they barely get re-elected. I don’t think they care about someone hurting, losing their house, living on the streets, or wasting their life’s savings just to get by. Our government, I fully believe, is quite capable of pouring resources into the economy and fixing it so regular people can once again get decent jobs. But they are not doing this, are they? Our leaders are so insulated from what it is like to be poor right now, that I really don’t think it resonates with them at all. I always believed in the Democratic Party, and I know some few Democrats ARE caring. But mainly they’re politicians. And they do NOT care about the little guy. I wish I hadn’t discovered that, but there it is. Politicians largely don’t “get it” and they basically don’t care. Somebody convince me otherwise – I dare you.

See Why The President’s Next Big Thing Should Be Jobs, RobertReich.org, March 25, 2010, by Robert Reich.

Highly Recommended: 13 Bankers: The American Oligarchs And The Systemically Dangerous Institutions (SDIs) They Rule, The Huffington Post, April 27, 2010, by William K. Black (who is the nation’s premier authority on banking fraud), excerpt quoted verbatim:

We know that Simon Johnson and James Kwak have hit a nerve because Larry Summers, the administration’s principal economic adviser and the man that carries water for what the authors rightly call the financial “oligarchs” — has been forced into an open defense of the oligarchs’ rule. Summers has kept a low profile and protected the oligarchs from substantive reform by using his power as gatekeeper to minimize the presentation of views by those that support effective financial regulation. Summers’ ability to marginalize Paul Volcker demonstrates his power and success — and the harm he causes the nation.

The issue that has caused Summers to publicly carry water for the oligarchs is the inherent insanity of allowing systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) to continue. The oligarchs are all SDIs. Under the administration’s own logic, if any SDI fails it creates a serious potential of causing a global financial crisis.

Check this out: Glenn Beck and Rep. Anthony Weiner: A Fight for the Gold, Politics Daily, May 19, 2010, by David Corn, excerpt quoted verbatim:

The end is near, buy gold.

That’s been right-wing talker Glenn Beck’s advice to those who listen to his syndicated radio show and watch his Fox News show. You need to “think like a German Jew in 1934, maybe 1931,” he has said — and that means loading up on the yellow, shiny stuff, so that when economies and currencies collapse, you’ll be able to buy food (or letters of transit).

Beck is free to give whatever economic advice to his fans, but he has blended his analysis with self-serving commerce, promoting a particular gold coin retailer called Goldline, which has too often ripped off customers by peddling coins at much higher prices than their true value and selling them as solid financial investments. Not coincidentally, Goldline is a major sponsor of Beck’s radio and TV shows. My Mother Jones colleague Stephanie Mencimer has written a thorough exposé of Goldline and the Beck connection, and the story has hit at a propitious moment: just as Beck has attacked a Democratic congressman who has investigated Beck and Goldline.

On Tuesday, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) released a report noting that Beck and Goldline have together used fear tactics to bilk investors. As Mencimer puts it, Beck has been “recommending a company that promotes financial security but operates in a largely unregulated no-man’s land, generating a pile of consumer complaints about misleading advertising, aggressive telemarketing, and overpriced products.” Her article details instances when Goldline reps swindled folks into buying gold coins as an investment — when there was no way such a purchase could be considered a reasonable financial move. One fellow looking to buy gold bullion from Goldline was sold $10,000 worth of 20-franc Swiss gold coins at a price of almost double what was then the current rate for gold — meaning he was deep in the hole at the get-go.

Goldline, Weiner said, “rips off consumers, uses misleading and possibly illegal sales tactics, and deliberately manipulates public fears of an impending government takeover — this is a trifecta of terrible business practices.” He declared that Beck “should be ashamed of himself” for aiding and abetting the company. Weiner noted he would introduce legislation forcing Goldline and other precious metal dealers to disclose all relevant information to its customers — such as the melt value of the coins being sold and how much the price of gold would have to increase to produce a profit for the buyer. Weiner blasted other conservative talkers — including Fred Thompson, Dennis Miller, Laura Ingraham, Monica Crowley, and Mike Huckabee — for also advocating the buying of gold on programs supported by Goldline ads. Weiner has called for the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities Exchange Commission to investigate.

Beck, naturally, didn’t take kindly to all this. He accused Weiner of being a modern-day Joe McCarthy, and he claimed that Weiner’s investigation was part of an anti-Beck conspiracy mounted by the Obama White House.

*****

Robert Reich was the nation’s 22nd Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton and is Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations. In 2008, Time Magazine named him one of the Ten Most Successful Cabinet Members of the century. He has written eleven books, including “The Work of Nations,” which has been translated into 22 languages. His latest book is “Supercapitalism.” For Professor Reich’s book page for Supercaptialism at Amazon, go here. The above article is from Reich’s new blog, and can be viewed here.

Thanks to Professor Reich for permission to publish his articles on an ongoing basis.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top.

We know, if you come here repeatedly,
you like Evans Liberal Politics. So, all we ask is that you
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

85 Great Electronic Rock and Pop Tracks
(Listen to hours of music while you surf the web!)

#1 Rated by Google