The
Anti-State of Affairs
Kevin Pennant is neither a liberal
democrat nor republican
conservative. He claims to be just
human.
I would like to know what it is that they are
having that has gotten them hopping mad over
their government, especially with the current
administration. They are characterized as the
Tea Party but the brew for which they have
drawn their name seems oxymoronic, and if it
is in reference to the Boston Tea Party it is a
far reach comparatively.
A closer inspection reveals that the aroma from
the brew that they have concocted is more of a
disparaging scent, one that enrages and
therefore ignites their rhetoric over government
initiatives, much like the scent of strong black
coffee I suppose.
The very conservative views they hold on a
variety of issues are eye-openers in deed. The
party has grassroots agendas for reform. The
most structured insight into their agenda comes
from a submission of ideas that were filtered to
form the “Contract for America” authored by a
Houston-based lawyer named Ryan Hecker,
whose noble proclamation is “Not only should
we be listened to, we should be shown
deference”, Therefore with all due deference
we will analyze the articles of demands and
dissents here for plausibility.
The first mandate is relegated to reference to
the good basic values of the Constitution, that
every new bill must show evidence that the
Constitution gives Congress the power to enact
it. I am sure they are satisfied with the
Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling clarifying the
meaning that protects an individual’s right to
possess a firearm outside of the militia and
 
 
 
 
to use that arm for traditionally lawful
purposes, such as self-defense within the
home. However, a semiautomatic assault
rifle and pistol (just in case) was outside the
home and in plain sight, on the shoulder of a
man at a pro-health care reform rally in
proximity to where the President gave his
speech. Unfortunately there are many
instances of this where it becomes
irrationally encroaching and threatening to
say the least. The Second Amendment has
been clarified but yet still misinterpreted. It
would prove more sensible to have this right
interpreted the same way a driver’s license
gives individuals the right to drive. Only that
you are prohibited from driving on the
sidewalk or using it to threaten and maim
people. The infractor that I mentioned above
should have been cited with penalty and
repercussions in order to preserve the right.
Right?
Enabling the Supreme Court to monopolize
the interpretations of the Constitution to its
original form will have a profound and
adverse implication to a society that has
capitalized on change.
Furthermore it would show up under the
proposed Blue Ribbon taskforce, that
mandate number 5 of the “Contract for
America” which suggests that it should be
implemented for assessment and
effectiveness of the

federal agencies, which they would deem left
to the states and local governments. The
problem with this is that states and local
authorities apparently and most
predominately are influenced by established
plutocratic institutions, the institutions that
lob dollars at them for favorable policies.
Apparently the tea party candidates are
throwing stones at the very same glass house
they want to occupy. In this age of reality
television and the 24–hour news cycle the
unabashed become famous and highly
regarded it seems. The effervesced and
sensational Sarah Palin is the leading lady,
playing an illegitimate spawn from the GOP
that has seemingly placed its own up for
adoption.
Mandate 7. Repeal the health care legislation
passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal
and replace the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act. A hint of economic or
Social Darwinism here as only the wealthy
should be afforded proven healthcare whilst
the sacrificial lambs of the monetarily
challenged souls are discounted. It is a
neoevolutionist view in which I characterize
our evolving society; the vast majority
paying the higher costs who are increasingly
dissatisfied with the disparaging returns of
income and social inequality. The advantage
goes to the best-adapted and most successful
social groups to survive socio-economic
challenges as a society evolves. Currently,
the healthcare system is the best screener for
the survival of the fittest based on Social
Darwinism.
Rising healthcare insurance costs embedded
in our paychecks correlates with a rising out
of pocket expense. Decreasing coverage
coupled with increasing healthcare costs and
prescriptive medicine equals one major
disease, infection, or accident from filing
bankruptcy. The Social Darwinian aspects of
certain physical and mental traits do not
apply here, not inasmuch the affluent nature
of the individual.
Constitutional theory is not an elitist-driven
idea it only works through the coalescence of
the American society as a whole and not just
in its powerful and rich parts. It subsumes the
American Diasporas of all walks of life
whom toil to borrow, invest, pay, and
compete for resources or rather gain some
comparative advantage, as coined by David
Ricardo that alleges to afford an individual a
subsistent life. The classical economist’s
comparative advantage theory posits that
“even the weaker members of society are
valuable even if the stronger members are
better or can afford to do everything”
furthermore they maintain the stronger
members’ status in more ways than one.
As reported by the NYTimes, if the Tea
Party supporters have deep rooted resentment
and “pessimism about the direction of the
country”, in particular with “the policies of
the Obama Administration who they view as
disproportionately helping the poor than the
middle class” then these disproportionately
white ultra-conservative middle class grass
roots movement just doesn’t realize how
relatively homologous they are to those
“poor people” they despise so much.