A Tea Party take on the news


To the Editor:

Lonnie Barham should change the name of his column from “My Take on the News” to “A Tea Party Take on the News.” Apparently, there is nothing the Republicans can do wrong, to him, and nothing the Democrats can do right. Everything he says further exposes his biased views. It would be too exhaustive and space-consuming to repudiate everything he’s said, so let’s look at some most recent tripe. 

According to Mr. Barham, Obamacare (which will allow millions without insurance the chance to get it for themselves and their family) will deprive others of what they now have. Is that Obamacare’s fault or is it greedy owners who are using the bill to deprive their own workers while furthering their own profits? If there are inequities within the act, they should be addressed in Congress. But, rather than fix problems in the statute, Republicans sit on their hands and only vote to destroy the program.

Today, Mr. Barham proclaimed that the closing of the George Washington Bridge in New Jersey was someone other than the governor’s fault. This despite emails showing virtually everyone in Christie’s office was in on the scheme. Mr. Barham makes a big deal out of the governor firing Bridget Kelly for the fiasco. One would hope she had been canned for inflicting untold pain on the citizens of Fort Lee and everyone traveling interstate on those four days, but no. He fired her because she “lied” to him, not because she closed the bridge. When Mr. Samson, bridge director and a Christie appointee (as well as former state Attorney General) learned, at Easter in 2011, that there had been a three-to-five hour delay at a bridge to Staten Island, he responded forcefully, reaming out his underlings and publicly apologizing for the inconvenience. But when the GWB experience a four-day – not hour but day – shutdown, he said not one word, not even to this day. In fact, one of Christie’s men who ordered the closure e-mailed that Samson was aiding in the cover-up (the nonsensical “traffic study” no one else knew about).

I don’t know about anyone else, but when I was working I had a little leeway in doing my job. But I wouldn’t make a drastic change in what the boss wanted without getting his permission first. That’s what makes it hard to believe that, while everyone else in his office knew about the closure and/or was involved in the action, Governor Christie stood remote from the fray. If he didn’t know, he was incompetent; if he did, then he was complicit.

Why do I ascribe “Tea Party” to Mr. Barham? Because in all the space he devoted to bashing Democrats and praising Republicans and crying over some who lost health insurance, he failed to mention that over one million people have not only lost health insurance, they may lose their house while they try to find funds to feed their children. All this because the right refused to restore unemployment insurance. They offered a specious argument that the payment hindered people from seeking work, ignoring the fact that their own president allowed the economy to collapse to the point where there is no work to be had. Instead of talking about that situation, Mr. Barham wants to excoriate Democrats for the evil they are doing to Chris Christie’s sterling reputation.

Barry Nordin



3 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment

@Barry Nordin. Just trying to keep this in perspective Mr. Nordin, but when the Republicans stated that they wanted to offset the costs of the extended unemployment insurance by changing the law to not allow illegal immigrants to get the benefits of the Earned Income Tax Credit, it was reported that they were ignored. I don't know, but let's weigh this, unemployed legal citizen vs. undocumented, illegal, foreign national? Should there have been a question????

Thursday, January 23, 2014

It is a shame that it has become almost a hatred among the groups. Democrats hating Republicans and Tea Party hating Democrats. So far apart on so many issues. Yet perhaps they all have good points and bad points. Too bad we can't all come back to geather as Americans and work on these problems challenging our great nation. Keep this in mind regarding the Republicans and Tea Party they defend the corporations that are essentially running this country which is shameful. There has been a huge power shift politically and it pretty much has allowed the biggest corporations to do what ever they please. Both sides are extremely stubborn and don't want to budge on certain issues. Yet, when George W was in office the country wasn't better off. Now that we have a Democrat in office still we're not better off. We need a party in the middle of the two extremes. One that won't be afraid to take back the country from the larger corporations.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

"Yet, when George W was in office the country wasn't better off." Hmmm. Let's take a closer look...

Bush cut taxes for people who pay taxes. The economy grew at 3-4% per year, and the workforce participation was in the high 60's to low 70's. In Bush's last year in office about 28 million Americans were on food stamps, and the federal debt was $9 trillion dollars. Fast forward: Taxes have increases to pay for legislation that a majority of the country does not want. The economy is growing at an anemic 1.5% per year, and the workforce participation rate is the lowest since 1978 because millions have simply stopped looking. The number of people on food stamps has nearly DOUBLED to 48 million, and the federal debt has ballooned to just under $18 trillion dollars.

This just in: The country was, indeed, considerably better off. Michael, in future posts, please substitute the word "employers" for "corporations", i.e. "One that won't be afraid to take back the country from the larger employers."

Monday, January 27, 2014