The source of Tea Party anger
If you ignored what your boss told you to do and then made fun of him to his face, would you be surprised if he got angry with you? Would you be surprised if he decided to fire you? When voters made it clear they were unhappy with spending, Congress enacted the biggest stimulus package in the history of the world. When voters made it clear that they opposed the Democrats health care monstrosity, Democrats passed it anyway. As voters we only get the opportunity to fire politicians every few years, but this is one of those years and I expect to see some more Democrats get fired.
I think we all know why the Tea Party movement arose — and why even the polls do not quite reflect the growing generic anger at incumbents in general, and our elites in particular.
There is a growing sense that government is what I would call a new sort of Versailles — a vast cadre of royal state and federal workers that apparently assumes immunity from the laws of economics that affect everyone else.
In the olden days, we the public sort of expected that the L.A. Unified School District paid the best and got the worst results. We knew that you didn’t show up at the DMV if you could help it. A trip to the emergency room was to descend into Dante’s Inferno. We accepted all that in other words, and went on with our business.
But at some point — perhaps triggered by the radical increase in the public sector under Obama, the militancy of the SEIU, or the staggering debts — the public snapped and has had it with whining union officials and their political enablers who always threaten to cut off police and fire protection if we object that there are too many unproductive, unnecessary, but too highly paid employees at the Social Service office. In short, sometime in the last ten years public employees were directly identified with most of what is now unsustainable in the U.S. The old idea that a public servant gave up a competitive salary for job security was redefined as hitting the jackpot.