Knowing when to "STFU"

It must be genetic.

Republicans just don't know when to , in the vernacular, STFU.

The GOP had a good issue with the deficit. Cleverly played it could be a real vote getter, after all, who likes debt and" stealing from future generations." You can see the GOP ads full of  crying kids with  big tearful puppy dog eyes , lip quivering:  "How will I pay for college?"

That was, until, Senator Jim Bunning (A: Kentuky) opened his large gaping pie hole.

To be fair to the GOP, Jim Bunning is an idiot. His own party hates him. He is a disagreeable, unbalanced man who apparently takes great pleasure in being an obstructionist. Bunning, a lame duck, for some unexplainable reason other than a mild stroke, latched on to GOP issue number one as a justification to screw with unemployment benefits.

Instead of dropping Bunning like a bad habit, the GOP ,in the form of the Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, made it clear the GOP stands against extending aid to the jobless: "It could be argued it [unemployment insurance] is a disincentive for work

Damn, keep fucking that chicken GOP.  

Yes ,Senator Kyl, indeed it can be argued. A wise politician would have argued it when unemployment was 4%.

Keep in mind that unemployment insurance is not an entitlement contrary to what the GOP claims. Benefit funding is based solely on a tax imposed on employers and in many states requires some employee contributions. 

In that regard you can view unemployment insurance as an earned benefit, much like employer provided or subsidized health insurance.

The genetic GOP tendency towards assholiness and self immolation isn't new.

All one must do is look back to 1928 when President Herbert Hoover took office. In Novemeber, 1928 the US  unemployment rate was 4.4 percent. When he left office, it was 23.6 percent. At the end of his term voters regarded him as a clueless, heartless asshole who would provide federal aid for banks but not for hungry Americans.

That characteristic of Mr Hoover's was particularly odd because Hoover’s efforts in providing relief during and after World War I saved millions of Europeans from starvation.  His generosity and caring made him an national and  international hero (and gave him the visibility to run for President.)

Then he became a Republican politician.

The assholiness gene , stimulated by the ego endorphins of being "conservative" kicked in.He was a proud man and often proclaimed he was a self made millionaire and self made man. Needless to say Hoover became a proponent of  "rugged individualism." (latter plagiarized by Ayn Rand) fantasy.

That ( being a self made man) was partially true. Hoover did go to Sanford to become a mining engineer and made his fortune in that field. Fact was Sanford as a start up university at the time, they only let Hoover in because they needed students that year to remain a "university".

In the speech that closed his campaign, Hoover stated that "the American system was based on rugged individualism and self-reliance." Government, which had assumed unprecedented economic powers during the Great War , should "shrink back to its prewar size and avoid intervening with business".

That was in 1928. We all know what happened in 1929.

Undeterred , Hoover was convinced the economy would fix itself without intervention by the government and the problems of poverty and unemployment were best left to "voluntary organization and community service." Sound familiar? This was a "new idea" hawked by the GOP in the 2004 , 2006 and 2008.

He ofter articulated that sentiment in hopeful speeches.  Americans, being a hopeful lot, listened politely and went on about the business of  trying feed themselves until one fateful day in 1930.

In June of that year, when it was clear that the economy was not going to get better by itself, a delegation of businessmen, civic leaders and Congressmen came to see Hoover to request a federal public works program.

Hoover overwhelmed by the effects of the assholiness gene responded thusly:

"Nonsense*. Gentlemen, you have come sixty days too late. The Depression is over." He insisted that "nobody is actually starving" and that "the hoboes...are better fed than they have ever been."

<Hooverville ( homeless encampment) circa 1930

He also claimed that the growing number of vendors selling apples on street corners had "left their jobs for the more profitable one of selling apples."

Now you know where "Mission Accomplished" came from.

Aghast , the delegation talked to a waiting press. Those quotes where soon wired around the nation.

The GOP legacy was born.

By 1932 , Vaudeville comedians told the story of Hoover asking the Treasury Secretary Mellon for a nickel so he could call a friend.  Melon replies, "Here, take a dime and call all your friends.

I wonder if Hoover is a distant relative of Jim Bunning or John Kyl? They wont need dimes to call their friend these days, there are cell phone plans like "Friends and Assholes"

Sources An American Experience , the Great Depression, Digital History, Wikipedia

* The word "nonsense" was attributed to Hoover by some but undocumented.

< Dropped CNN and FOX News Channels | Obama caught lip-synching? >
 Display:
Seriously, I come from a family of Democrats, all of whom are small business owners. Every time someone claims unemployment it increases the insurance you have to pay and the costs to run your business are increased. For small businesses this can be very difficult.

In our family it was always seen as taboo to collect unemployment even though my family are "yellow dog" outspoken Democrats who raised money and still raise money for candidates.  So, if anyone ever lost your job, it was a pride thing to not collect unemployment. That's why you "save for a rainy day" and that's why you "get out and get a new job."

I'm just sayin... not all Democrats "love" unemployment benefits. Many Democrats are dead-set against unemployment benefits because they know how hard it is to keep your doors open as a sole proprietor.

I know you will probably think I should keep my pie hole shut, but it's just my two cents.  There are some "old school" Dem's out there who agree with the Republicans on this issue 100%.

by ilovecenk99 on 03/02/2010 03:12:05 PM EST

"I'm just sayin... not all Democrats "love" unemployment benefits"

Neither did I. Never said they did. (None of my employees were W2)

Thats not the point of the blog. The benefit are less the issue than the politics of it.

Unemployment insurance has been a fact of American life since 1935.That war has been fought , many many times.

Politically, logically, in the middle of a near depression, suddenly fighting the deficit (after 8 year of proliferate GOP spending) by attacking unemployment benefits (as adding to the deficit) is a singularly stupid idea.

I applaud it.

You go Kyl, Go GOP.

BTW, not all Republicans hate the idea either. Limbaugh collected it.





by MRFred on 03/02/2010 03:31:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I feel like the big-mouthed Conservatives and the Beck and Limbaugh's of the world try to claim that the Democrats are all about "entitlement" . I see that and I cringe. Democrats are not about entitlement.

by ilovecenk99 on 03/02/2010 05:04:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
most of the publicized republicans have a ridiculous amount of entitlement that has come their way.

" And while I'm not much of a writer, and I'm certainly not very smart, for some reason people like to read what I write."- Hugh Everett

by Mutt1126 on 03/02/2010 09:20:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
There is nothing noble about not collecting unemployment insurance. You EARN that by working. It's yours. What you are describing is like someone who makes weekly deposits into a bank account and then refuses to use it when it's needed.

Now, if you want to take a "pride" stance on not accepting welfare, I can understand that. I think it's shortsighted and silly, but I understand where it comes from.

Unemployment insurance isn't welfare and nobody should be ashamed to get it when it's needed.

As far as employers getting dinged when an ex-employee files a claim - that's a matter which should be discussed with your state's legislators and insurance oversight board.

by MedfordTim on 03/02/2010 09:28:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm just saying there are a lot of Democrats who are small business owners who aren't big fans of it.  I grew up in one of those families and absolutely, we were raised to feel ashamed of taking unemployment benefits. It is very hard on a small business owner who's trying to stay afloat. That's all I'm saying. A lot of people don't see it the way you see it and i see their side too.

If it's a big company making money hand-over-fist, that's another thing, but if it's a company of 10-20 employees it's tough on the business owner.

by ilovecenk99 on 03/02/2010 09:43:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I sympathize with the small business owner. I do understand their point of view. I have been one. I have also been unemployed a time or two.

My curiosity lies in the area of "shame." And it is merely curiosity - no one right or wrong way to live life; I would like to find out what the basis is. This has to apply to a employee because the owner of a business isn't eligible for unemployment benefits (assuming typical circumstances) if they have to close.

Is it the same for becoming disabled? That is, don't accept disability insurance payments? Worker's Comp - if one is hurt on the job? What are the limits?

Were you also taught to feel shame for turning in an insurance claim for a car accident that wasn't your fault? If your house burned down, would filing a claim and accepting the insurance company check be somehow wrong? 

Is it based in a "won't tolerate needing charity" type of thinking?

I'm truly not trying to irritate you. I'm trying to get a handle on that POV.

by MedfordTim on 03/02/2010 11:06:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I come from a family of very hard workers (like work til you drop) type people so I guess you could consider that side of the family more blue-collar types... but also all entreprenurial people as well. A "work-ethic" was more important than any other value. Like that's the highest compliment you could pay someone is "he has a strong work ethic". For this side of my family, unemployment wasn't an option because if you were unemployed that meant your business had failed. Otherwise you'd be working.

Remember the scene in the Cinderella Man, where the boxer went into the unemployment office and paid back all the money he had taken from the government during his "bad times".. that definitely rang a bell with me. That seemed like an "of course" moment, like that was 100% morally correct to return the money and why wouldn't someone do that?

So as much as we hated big government, red tape and taxes, we never complained about paying taxes.. the family motto was "thank god you don't get the government you pay for" and also "if you're paying taxes you're making money, so what are you complaining about?".

Yet, we are devout EXTREME democrats... almost as if it is a religion because we believe that it's truly a measure of society to see how the poorest in society are cared for. So charity is extremely important and that's why when Ted Kennedy died, tears were shed.  We 100% believe in charity. We believe in social benefits..... but up to a point. Like disability and workman's comp, well, what are you going to do.. that's reality I guess... However, I also recognize what a huge strain it is on a small business to support someone who's out on disability for an extended period of time. However, we also remember times when we personally had to work while sick & injured because if you didn't work, the doors were closed and bills didn't get paid. So, straight from work to the hospital... straight from hospital back to work... I exaggerate but actually not really too much...

I'm personally torn because I have worked in Corporate America for a large fortune 500 company and if someone goes out for 6 months on disability, well, it isn't easy to cover their spot but it's not going to devastate the company. However, coming from a small business, that's a really tough pill to swallow when you're sweating payroll every two weeks.

Let me put it to you this way. Consider shoplifting. Some people stole from our store and that sucked because that was like taking money right out of our pocket. Some people tell me they wouldn't shoplift from a small store where they know the actual owner, like our store. They would really feel like it's stealing, you know? However, those same people will tell me that it's totally OK to steal from Walmart because it's a huge corporation and it's not going to make a difference.  Well, the truth is that stealing is wrong. And even when you steal from a big corporation it still has an impact to everyone.

While I am certainly not crying crocodile tears for big companies who have to pay unemployment, disability or workman's comp and whatnot... I still resent it when people take advantage of the system and take disability when they are physically able to work and just don't feel like it. I have seen it time and time again. It goes against my grain.  Even in corporate America you see people who work while sick, who would never game the system and who work their asses off.. And then you see the people "gaming" it, taking it easy and looking for every opportunity to slack off and live off the corporate fat.  I have enough management experience that I could write 10,000 words about examples of people taking advantage of the system. I've seen it. I've had to manage through it and you know who's most pissed off? The co-workers of the person who's slacking off because they have to pick up the extra work. To me, that's stealing. And it doesn't matter if it's a from Walmart or from my company.. it's stealing.

So, I think there are two types of people... and I also think that those two types of people are not divided down "party lines". There are probably equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats on both sides of this issue.  I happen to be a Democrat who's pretty hard nosed about benefits... You better really deserve them if you take them and you better appreciate them immensely. Everyone else is working harder so that you can have them. Maybe I'm right, maybe you think I'm wrong, that's just how I feel.

I hate that the Democratic Party has somehow been painted to support free-loaders and people who abuse benefits.  That's not the spirit of this party, IMO. Not at all. This party was founded by working people, with strong work ethics, who just want the wealthy to pay their fair share and not get away fleecing the common person.

Make sense?

by ilovecenk99 on 03/02/2010 11:51:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm the type who tells the cashier when they have given me too much change or have been undercharged. Can't help it; I'm hardwired that way.

When I was in the work force, I admit that my record was checkered. Most jobs I gave more than I got, others I skated by with minimum effort. I've done some work that still makes me proud to have had the opporunity to do and those which made me want to shower while I was doing them (vaccuum sales, call center - yuck!)

When I cut the tip of my finger off in '83 ('84? Hmm), I made it back to the retirement home I was the kitchen manager for from the hospital in time to make sure dinner was being handled right and was determined to keep working. Then the drugs wore off and taking a couple of weeks seemed like the better choice...

I've been on disability for 6 years now(not related to the finger). I am immensly appreciative. If not for that income, I'd either be a homeless street person or, more likely, dead. I know there are some who think I am "gaming" the system (not accusing anything, just acknowledging reality) but I can guarantee, it's definitely not a get-rich-quick scheme. Another thing I can guarantee is 98% of people on disability are there for a reason, not out of laziness. Very few people choose this as a career path. The paperwork alone is enough to make you nuts if you aren't already! No such thing as privacy from the government when they (you) are footing the bill. As it should be, but it gets overwhelming sometimes.

But we were talking about unemployment. Disability really is a horse of a different color.

Best conversation I've had in quite a while. Thanks.

by MedfordTim on 03/03/2010 01:23:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]
First of all, unemployment is definitely NOT enough to survive on... It's a short term bridge but there's no way you could support a family with it. Hell, it just buys groceries, that's about it.

Secondly, disability is a horse of a different color.  I have some experience with it through disabled family members and nobody truly understands what it's like until you go through it or you are an advocate for someone who is disabled and can't handle all the paperwork themselves. I'm totally not against those benefits. They are needed as well.

I guess, I just feel like small businesses need more breaks and the rules should be slightly different. You know, I remember when one of the workers for a family business got cancer. These were the days before "health insurance" took over everything. Since this guy was a farm hand and didn't have enough money to cover his illness, my grandfather took him into the town doctor who operated on him and removed the cancer and of course he paid for it. No big deal. It was the right thing to do and business people did "the right thing" for their employees. Plus, prices were fair back then.  

In just two generations, the whole system has gotten completely jacked-up. That kind of thing is no longer possible and that's sad.

by ilovecenk99 on 03/03/2010 02:34:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Is insurance. It pays out if you become unemployed. If you don't like it, don't file if you ever become unemployed. Problem solved.

IIRC, Rush Limbaugh has admitted even he has made use of unemployment insurance (early in his career).

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 03/02/2010 09:40:30 PM EST

 Display: