Testament to the Tea Party Jesus

In 2010, an excavation in northern Somalia uncovered a text dated roughly to the time of the synoptic Gospels, but a text which is not included in any of the various existing versions of the Christian Bible.  The text is remarkable for the fact that the Jesus described in the Testament is wholly unlike the Jesus described in the standard Bibles.  The Testament Jesus appears to embody instead the ideals of the Republican Party of the USA.  

The following is a translation of the ancient Aramaic text into modern American English. 


Oh, my brother Apostles, I cannot believe what you have done.  I have read your stories of Jesus and marveled at your exaggerated tales, twisted history and critical omissions.  Your desire to create a commune in Jerusalem, share things with one another and “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” has led you to change the true story.  You compel me to tell the real story of Jesus, his passion for private enterprise, and his disdain for government and taxes.

I remember the story he told of his birth, as it was told to him by his parents, Joseph and Mary.  He was struck by the fact that a regulation of the Roman government had forced his parents to return to Bethlehem, despite his mother’s obvious pregnancy, for the sake of a census.  But, of course, the census was connected to a Roman tax.  And, because everyone from Bethlehem had to return there for the census, all of the good places to stay were reserved.  The few that were still available were overpriced.  It was for this reason that, according to his parents, Jesus was born in a stable, surrounded by bad-smelling animals.  Jesus often repeated this story to demonstrate the perversity of government regulations and taxes.  And he always sought to avoid regulations and taxes whenever he could.

One of you, my brother Apostles, said that three rich men came and gave Jesus presents of gold, frankincense and myrrh.  In your story, the rich men suggested that Jesus was entitled to such presents solely by virtue of his birth.  Have you forgotten?  Jesus himself said that no one helped him on his path to fame, that everything he had was the fruit of his effort alone.

It was lack of wealth, in fact, which forced Joseph to leave Bethlehem with Mary and his newborn son.  So many people had returned to Bethlehem that there was no work for another carpenter like Joseph.  He had to take his young family across the desert and sneak into Egypt, where there were always a lot of government construction projects.  He returned to Galilee as soon as he received word that jobs were again plentiful in the local economy.

That story of the wine at the wedding was also false.  When the father of the bride realized that his guests were quickly drinking up his stock of wine, he mentioned it to Jesus.  Jesus and I took all the empty wine jugs to the well and filled them almost completely with water.  We returned to the kitchen and poured what we could of the remaining wine into the water jugs.  The result was not a good wine, but the people at the party were just moochers.

You mentioned that Jesus cursed a fig tree that was not producing fruit, even though it was not the season for the fig tree to bear fruit, but you do not explain why he did this.  You did not comprehend his true message, which was this: we should all be producing fruit, all the time, however impossible our circumstances make that.  Otherwise we are only worthy of curses.

You also mentioned the time that Jesus gave a long sermon and distributed loaves and fishes to everyone present.  You omitted the fact that the loaves and fishes lasted because we sold them at the highest price we could get!  Yes, those people were participating in Jesus’ lecture, but that did not entitle them to food at our expense.

Eventually the authorities caught up with us and confronted Jesus, saying, “You failed to pay taxes for 5 years.  Who do you think you are?  A king?  The Son of God?”
Jesus answered, “Whatever you say.”
Unfortunately, this was not the time for sarcasm.  The authorities took offense at his attitude and condemned him to death.  They saw his refusal to pay taxes as theft from the State, which is why, by the way, he was crucified between two thieves.  The Romans were not subtle.  He died for all those who would not pay taxes. 

His body was removed from the tomb because Joseph of Arimathea donated the tomb but expected the rest of us to pay the property tax on it.  Jesus was opposed to paying property taxes.  That was why we kept traveling around.  So, we declined to pay the property tax.  Not long after that, the body of Jesus disappeared from the tomb.  We questioned the few people we found at the tomb, but they only gave us vague answers, and Joseph of Arimathea claimed to know nothing.

Now the lot of you are practicing communal living and giving away money to the poor like they are entitled to it.  Jesus would have rebuked you.  His message was to share nothing, honor the wealthy, despise the poor, and pay no taxes that might end up supporting layabout widows and blind men.

That is why I had to leave you, and why I now must reveal His True Message to the World.

Thaddeus


Thus ends the Testament of Thaddeus to the Tea Party Jesus.

Cut and Hoard Republicans

Are worse than "tax and spend" Democrats.

Our economy is based on a market for goods and services. When Democrats "tax and spend," it means more demand in the market. More demand means more business, and more business means more jobs.

When Republicans cut taxes, and cut government spending, and hoard the national wealth for themselves, it means less demand in the market. They may buy more diamonds [Newt Gingrich] or more expensive wine [Paul Ryan], but they simply cannot compensate for the hundreds of millions of consumers now with less ability to consume. So the net result is less business and fewer jobs. If we cut taxes to "nothing," and government spending to "nothing," the result would be the same.

But, in the end, this is for Republicans a moral imperative, not a question of economic rationale. That is why the economy could collapse around them and they would feel self-righteous, even as their homes are devalued. Their austerity policies could lead to riots, and they would simply blame the rioters for not accepting the destruction of their dreams, the elimination of their expectations, and a lifetime of deprivation....so the rich could hoard more and more.

You simply cannot have both economic feudalism and political democracy. This leads to the question I believe we face in the U.S.: will we accept political feudalism, as the Republicans want, or take measures to "democratize" our economy?

Political Labels

Conservatives in our country have, for decades, created and parroted pejorative labels for liberals and Democrats. Perhaps because we lack their goose-stepping authoritarianism, liberals and progressives have not replied, in a unified fashion, with similar labels. Some liberals and progressives even dislike the notion of "stooping to the level" of Conservatives. Some argue that it "turns off" unaligned voters in the middle.

I did meet a lady who expressed disgust at the nasty political rhetoric she heard. But she did have, at that point, a bias in favor of Republicans, and it only appeared to disgust her when Democrats replied with nasty political rhetoric. It was okay as long as it was only Republicans saying foul things about Democrats.

To hell with that. Political labels evoke passions. Some people go to the polls from a sense of duty, but more will go to the polls because they have been emotionally moved to participate. It may be for reasons of supporting a particular candidate. Or it may be out of antagonism for another candidate. This is reality. And this is a time when voters must decide which side they are on: the side of corporate Christian feudalism; or the side of egalitarian secular democracy.

On behalf of egalitarian secular democrats in the U.S., here are some labels I believe our fascist Republican brethren have earned:

greedy
irresponsible
egotistical, egocentric, self-centered
prejudiced
childish, juvenile
parochial
primitive
gator-brained
paternalistic
feudal [mind-set, attitudes]
dogmatic
uninformed
naive
unthinking
unenlightened
"cut and spit" [they cut public taxes and spending, and spit on the citizens who need public help]
"cut and hoard" [they cut public taxes and spending, and hoard the nation's wealth]
"Antoinettes", e.g., "Congressional Antoinettes" [Paul Ryan] and "Conservative Antoinettes" [Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter]
blinded by their preconceptions

If I think of more, I'll add to the list....

A Suggested Presidential Speech

Fellow Americans,

You can't have tax cuts during wartime. That was a fundamental mistake we are still paying for. We should have removed the tax cuts long ago, to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the party in power then wanted to believe that the wars would somehow pay for themselves, and that tax cuts would somehow stimulate economic growth that would pay for everything.

But the real world doesn't work that way. If what they said was true, we would have no recession now. But we do. Unfortunately, the party that believed in wars with tax cuts still believes in wars with tax cuts. Despite the reality of the recession that confronts us, they believe in continuing the policies that brought us to this crisis. Even now they threaten our international standing for the sake of continuing these failed policies.

Yes, we need to confront the deficits created by past administrations. But we don't have to do that by eliminating the supports to our own elderly, disabled, orphaned, jobless and impoverished. What we need to do is end the tax cuts, loopholes, subsidies and supports which have not helped us and will not help us. We can do this, and we must do this, for the sake of our great nation.

We must also address unemployment. Our nation once faced a Great Depression, and we worked our way out of that. Instead of continuing failed policies, let us follow the policies which have been successful before. It is unconscionable that our nation would both withhold unemployment support and withhold jobs that would provide support. I pledge to you that a top priority of my Administration will be to counter unemployment with all legal means available to me.

I ask you to join with me now, by insisting that Congress stop playing politics and start working with me on real-world solutions to the problems that face us.

Thank you, and may God bless America.

It’s not Welfare, It’s Production Demand Subsidy

Like Dave Johnson and others have said, rich people don’t create jobs because they have surplus money; they create jobs because they see added demand for their goods or services. If they get more money, but demand is stagnant, why create more jobs? They’re not running a charity. They will be doing fine with the jobs already on the books!

Actually, government entitlement payments, such as Food Stamps and Medicaid, help to create added demand for their goods and services. So do government insurance and annuity payments, like Medicare, Social Security, and unemployment benefits.

But Republicans hate the idea of entitlement payments and government insurance and annuities, because that means the government is giving money to people who are not producing. Even if the non-producers need it to survive, the thought galls them. At the same time, Republicans love the idea of the government giving money to subsidize producers. Even if the producers are don’t need it to survive, it is justified in the minds of Republicans. The subsidies to oil companies and agribusiness farms come to mind.

So here is a thought: maybe Republicans will accept Progressive programs if they are presented from the point of view of the producers of goods and services. We could say, for example:

Medicare and Medicaid = “Patient Provider Subsidies”
and
Food Stamps, Unemployment and Social Security = “Production Demand Subsidies”

Do you see the difference? The new phrase shows that the real concern is for the welfare of the providers, not the unproductive elderly, disabled, jobless and poor.

Ronald Reagan used this principle back in 1982. He was persuaded by advisors that the country’s roads and bridges needed government investment, and the best way to do that was by increasing the Federal gasoline tax. But he couldn’t simply say that he was imposing a “gas tax increase”. Politically [and perhaps psychologically], he had to call it a “user fee” increase.

So, let’s take that a step further. We could call taxes “Homeland Security insurance fees.” It’s certainly true that the government needs tax revenue to insure the security of country, in its broadest sense -- militarily, economically, socially, etc. And what happens in any system of insurance when you have more assets to insure? You pay more than those who have fewer assets to insure. Thus, your “HSI” fees will by rights increase as the value of your assets increase. And when the costs of insuring the security of the country go up, your “HSI” fees will also have to go up.

Republicans understand the power of wording. They use it all the time, in the service of producers. Maybe if we speak their language from their point of view, we can get some action out of this Congress.

The Middle is Muddled

There are two conflicting and antithetical philosophies of government at work in America today.

One is the progressive philosophy of government, which says that intervention by a democratic government is morally necessary to ensure that the market and the economy effectively support the general welfare of the populace.

The other is the Teabag Republican philosophy of government, which says that intervention by a democratic government in the market and the economy is immoral and unnecessary, and people need to effectively look out for their own damn welfare.

So what do you get when you compromise? Something that is a little immoral and to little effect in either direction.

To quote Jim Hightower of Texas, "The middle of the road is for yellow lines and dead armadillos."

Alex Budarin

America Held Hostage: Day 10

The rich Republican pirates continue to hold unemployed Americans hostage. The suffering of long-term unemployed Americans means nothing to them. In fact, the Republican pirates mock the unemployed, and sneer at them for being unemployed -- in the worst economy since the 1930's!

If they have no bread, let them eat cake! If their well-being means so much to you, you must give us tax cuts as ransom! Then and only then will we release them to your mercy!

The President has suggested that we must give these rich pirates what they want, because they truly are that callous and cutthroat. But I favor the response of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. To paraphrase:

Not one cent for tribute!

Thank you, Nancy

[photo is from her official website]

America Held Hostage: Day 9

For nine days now, jobless Americans have been held hostage by wealthy Republican Pirates in Congress. The unemployment benefits for the jobless Americans have run out. And the wealthy Republican Pirates will let them starve -- unless they are given a ransom: tax cuts to make them even richer, and estate tax cuts to make their children richer still.

The President tells us that we must give the wealthy Republican pirates what they want, because they just might be willing to let jobless Americans starve.

Somehow this does not seem to me to be an effective way of dealing with pirates and extortionists.

What Has Obama Done?

“What has he DONE?,” scream the Teabaggers. Sarah Palin sneers, “How is that hopey-changey thing working for you?” Fair questions. Here is what I have seen in the news:

New home sales surged in March, biggest monthly jump in 47 years [2010]

Jobless Rate Falls to 9.7%, Giving Hope Worst Is Over [2/6/10]

Signaling Jobs Recovery, Payrolls Surged in March
After losing eight million jobs since the recession began in December 2007, payrolls finally surged in March, the Labor Department reported on Friday. Employers added 162,000 nonfarm jobs last month. Nationwide, the unemployment rate held steady at 9.7 percent. [4/3/2010]

Dow Jones Industrial Average for 1 year as of 4/23/10:
[shows steady increase]

Retail sales surge in March [2010]

"...[T]aking into consideration the effects of inflation, effective tax rates may actually have remained level or even dipped a bit." [for 2009 taxes]

Teapublicans live on the hope that Obama will fail to deliver. They are the Goldman Sachs of US politics.

Alex Budarin