In reading through the front-page diary about whether you're one of the people the Teapublicans hate, I was struck by an exchange in the comments asking why (essentially) the Tea Partiers' positions change with the wind.
The diary focused largely on who they hate. And, I think, that's the answer to that question. Their position is based on "I hate the people who I perceive as causing me, or my group, to be reduced in status/caused to pay taxes/offended."
But the thing is, their hate, being equal-opportunity, precludes compassion. It exes out the possibility of compassionate policy. And although I've been told that liberals change with the wind, there is a common thread running through most liberal and progressive policy: Is it compassionate?
Welfare is compassion for the poor. WIC and TANF are compassion for the hungry. Education programs for prisoners is compassion for the imprisoned.
I think this guy called Jeshua ben Josef kind of advocated that sort of thing, didn't he?
I'm also a sociologist. In my experience and research, social forces are what push people to take certain positions. The last time Americans were this un-compassionate, it was the Golden Age of the robber barons, when everyone except the 1% was living on the trembling edge of abject poverty (if not living in it already). Do we have to go through this every hundred years or so to remind us that compassion for those less fortunate is a good thing?
When is humanity going to grow up? More specifically, when are AMERICANS going to grow up?