After eight years of rule by Democrats, a far-right Republican touting a return to GOP principles was elected. Not just that, but Republicans took control of both houses of government to make a one-party government that could not be stopped by Democrats — only by public pressure. After a series of increasingly right-wing measures, the Republicans began to split over budgetary issues. Soon, it was viewed that the moderates were the sticks in the mud blocking real change. At the midterms, moderates were ousted in favor of those who would hew closer to the Republican in charge's policies. The Republican in charge called for tax reform of the grandest scale. It was trickle-down economics in action: cut taxes for corporations and small businesses drastically, as well as simplifying the tax code. It would mean tax cuts, and who doesn't want tax cuts? Promises were routinely made that if only taxes were lower, the economy would finally be free to boom again. The cries of both moderate Republicans and Democrats that this would prompt massive cuts and not produce results fell on deaf ears. You don't know what you're talking about, and you don't want to see taxes be cut! said those in the Republican in charge's camp.
But the economy never did boom. The effects of those tax cuts was devastating. As opponents said repeatedly warned, the tax cuts caused devastating effects on the budget. There are only two ways to fill holes in the budget: increase revenues (higher taxes) or cuts to services. At first, the Republican said the economic woes were temporary and cut services. He cut from transportation and education. (Around this time, the Republican in charge won a narrow re-election campaign). He cut from them again the next year. He made "changes" to the disability services, but they really amounted to cuts. The same was true for state retirees. He cut services to those who were reliant on services — those who could absorb the cuts the least.
Eventually, he ran out of places to cut. As the economy continued to flail and services were slashed, the voters grew wary of the Republican in charge. The continued to plead for more patience by the public — No, this year it'll work out! All the while, he refused to admit the tax cuts had failed. He vetoed attempts to restore many of the tax cuts that had forced such drastic spending and service cuts. He stood in the face of the mounting failure of his policy and refused to admit defeat. Soon enough, the voters chose for him. They picked moderates and Democrats who would be willing to overturn the tax cuts. They grew tired of the Republican in charge's schtick to the point that he became terribly unpopular, even in areas inclined to trust him. Before the end of his tenure, he declared victory by leaving his job for another. It was not his problem any longer.
The previous three paragraphs are about Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback. I was an editor for the first two paragraphs and watched from afar for the third. I interviewed him in person and listened to his campaign speeches. I covered elections and watched the whole thing go down.
I feel like I'm watching the same thing happen. If you replace "The Republican in charge" in the first paragraph with Trump, that's kind of where we're at today. Trump has touted a tax plan still being worked out by the GOP that is an echo of Brownback's tax plan. Maybe lower and middle class families get out a little bit ahead, but those who are incredibly wealthy make out like bandits according to the details available to us. And none of the tax cuts are offset by cuts anywhere else, meaning deficits are likely. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this won't all play out the same. But so far it is, and I just want to get off the train.
Anthem Origins and False Patriotism
I'm really trying to stay out of the NFL/Trump/NBA/"Why won't this story just go away already?" issue. That's because it's like World War I: Everyone's in their trenches and hoping Americans will break the stalemate so we can get on with our lives (topical similes — that's what you came for!). We've been talking ourselves in circles on this issue for more than a year now, but President Trump came in and picked at the scab, re-opening the wound and arguably making it worse.
I made my stance clear last year, and nothing's changed since then. But what I've been surprised about is discovering the origins of the national anthem in football and remembering the origins of Colin Kaepernick's decision to kneel.
Before 2009, players during the day games (noon and 3-ish on Sundays here in Central time) would come out and stand before the anthem. For the primetime games (Sunday and Monday night football), the players came out after the anthem for TV reasons. At any rate, the anthem was rarely a part of telecasts. In 2009, the NFL decided to make it standard: Players are on the field before the anthem. Players back in the 1980s remember being out for the anthem, but it wasn't necessarily standardized until 2009.
This is not to be confused with a different issue during the same time period: paid patriotism by the Department of Defense. In a report filed in 2015 by two Arizona GOP senators — McCain and Flake — the Department of Defense paid the NFL and other leagues millions of dollars for "patriotic tributes" in roughly the same era. It's hard to be specific given that the money was mixed in with other marketing plans. So instead of saying "DOD spent $6.6 million on paid patriotism to the NFL," it's more accurate to say "DOD spent $6.6 million on marketing with the NFL in a 4-year time period, which included displays of paid patriotism." What constitutes paid patriotism? On-field color guard, enlistment/re-enlistment ceremonies, performances of the national anthem, full-field flag details, first pitches, welcome home promotions, recognizing Wounded Warriors, etc. The National Guard even paid for military appreciation night. Once this was revealed, the NFL returned nearly $725,000. But this doesn't mean players were paid to be on the field for the anthem — they weren't. But the size of those anthem presentations may have been paid by the federal government.
Alright, now I want to touch on the origins of Colin Kaepernick's sitting/kneeling. He sat on the bench during the anthem for two weeks before anyone noticed. If he wanted to get attention — he was interviewed by the media after each game — he could have brought it up. But he didn't. It was only the third week that someone in the media noticed and asked him about it. He explained why he did it, but the criticism he got was not falling on deaf ears. A Green Beret football player, Nate Boyer, wrote an open letter to Kaepernick, which started a dialogue between the two. They reached a middle ground of how to be respectful to the flag while still protesting. Boyer — remember, a Green Beret/veteran — told him that kneeling is still respectful since soldiers do it at fallen soldiers' graves and while on patrol. Boyer also stood next to Kaepernick at the next home game as Kaepernick knelt.
My point is not to argue that what Kaepernick and others did is the right thing to do. I don't think I'll convince anyone that hasn't already made up their mind. But what I'm trying to say is that Kaepernick did listen to criticism and modified his original protest. He sought out someone with a different point of view and changed his tactics because of that. Isn't that the goal of argument, to make someone change? But it seems the vitriol isn't that he changed, it's that he didn't change enough.
Summary Judgments
Repeat to yourself: This isn't a dystopian future. This isn't a dystopian future. This isn't a dystopian future... Apparently it's a strange reality. • • • Good investigation work by Deadspin's Patrick Redford on an inspiring paraplegic hiker who "hiked" the Pacific Coast Trail. Spoiler: She probably didn't. • • • For the record: Just because you want to make something better doesn't mean you don't appreciate it. I like cookie dough, but suggesting we put oatmeal in it doesn't mean I hate cookie dough. In fact, because I love it enough to want it to be the best it can be. Apply this to whatever you think I'm talking about. • • • I ran my last 4-miler on Saturday. It didn't go as great as I'd hoped because it was pretty hot that day. So of the four 4-mile runs I did this year, it went: snow, the sickest I've been all year, full monsoon, and unseasonably hot. Yuk. My only other race of the year is a 5K on Thanksgiving. • • • We went to a class recently to learn how to better discipline our kids. It was pretty helpful. We've made a lot of changes already and incorporated many lessons. The hardest one was "Kids are a mirror of you." Oh, wait... you mean Evie got in trouble for yelling at people in school because I have yelled at her when she misbehaves? WOOF. This parenting thing is going to take WORK. So in the (two days? Really?) time since then, I haven't yelled at them. I can't keep this up. I'm going to blow like a powder keg. I give it until Sunday night before I turn into The Hulk.
No comments:
Post a Comment