Tea Party mischaracterizations

Dear Editor:I am curious. What kind of glasses is Ms. Joan Niertit viewing what she considers an "artificial crisis"? ("Tea Party Hype," 8/4/11) Her barb at the Tea Party suggests someone who has swallowed the 'fantasy line' of the liberal media. For Ms. Niertit's benefit, members of the Tea Party are from that breed of Americans - of all parties, including Democrats - who pay taxes, contribute to charity, believe in traditional Christian values and are concerned for the welfare of this nation. Ms. Niertit's notion that the current economic crisis is "artificial" shows just how little she understands the problem. What is artificial was the inflated real estate value spurred on by the federal government's mandate to Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae to make home loans available to people who could not afford them (and who became the big losers when the bubble burst). The government's reckless spending and assumption there would be continuous flow of tax dollars to sustain their pet projects and redundant programs (to attract votes) inflated the economy (artificial as it turned out); reckless credit card debt blew another bubble. All these "artificial" bubbles are linked and when one falls, the domino effect kicks in. As for jobs going overseas, I suggest Ms. Niertit think about the role of labor unions and restrictive government regulations which are the main factors hampering American manufacturers in a global economy. As for "offending the 1 percent," she should be grateful we have a 1 percent to create jobs and ideas for economic growth. Unlike Greece, America is too big for a bail out. Unless government curbs its reckless spending, it will soon have to make do with what it takes in as no lender will be available to extend credit. Higher taxes, fewer jobs, soaring inflation, fewer benefits - the crisis is real. I suggest Ms. Niertit look to her own role before condemning the very people who are trying to extract us from this mess. -- Gerald de Carvalho, Downey

Dear Editor: Now is not the time for recriminations against Tea Party-backed members of Congress who voted in the end for the debt deal. This is not the time to start fighting amongst ourselves. Nothing could make the Left happier than to see a splintering of the Tea Party movement. We have to agree that, no matter how disappointed we are with the final deal - and I am - that final vote was something on which honest conservatives could disagree. The President used his bully pulpit to argue that the Tea Party was leading the nation to Armageddon, and the compliant media acted as a thousand megaphones for that line. It is understandable that some Tea Party conservatives thought this would not help the Tea Party's standing with the public. There have been good and bad actors on both sides of the debt ceiling debate. Let's leave the recriminations to the liberals and stay united and focused on achieving the real spending cuts that Congress promised and electing a President and Congress to support, rather than fight, a balanced budget amendment and other limited government principles. That is what we should be concentrating on, starting today. -- Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com

Dear Editor: There were many letters in last week's paper decrying the debt ceiling debate and lack of leadership in Washington. While I can agree with the general sentiment that "politics as usual" tends to frustrate the average American, there were several statements made that demonstrated a lack of understanding of the parties at play. Ms. Niertit greatly mischaracterized the Tea Party movement as "mean spirited" with wishes to "tear government down." This statement could not be further from the truth. I remain completely puzzled how people could view a movement based on the desire for our government to live within its means as nefarious, unless, of course, the person offended wants reckless spending and an out-of-control big government. Whatever happened to personal responsibility in America? Ms. Trejo wants "American citizens to work for each other." From a Biblical perspective, I agree with her, but I assume she is calling on government to force such "cooperation," which seems like an outdated utopian ideal. (The joy in my heart when I give money to charity or friends and family in need is never replicated when I write that tax check to Uncle Sam.) But what if all Americans worked hard to take care of themselves and their own families? Imagine all the people working hard, living within their means (denying themselves that extra big cable package or latest iPad), and saving enough with which to retire without depending on government benefits that are unsustainable! These government benefits that tend to keep people from managing their own lives would be needed less, and we wouldn't be heading toward the bankruptcy cliff Ms. Nietit believes is greatly exaggerated. Most Americans do not need a hand up at the expense of others; they need opportunity - the kind that comes from a free market allowed to work freely. Ms. Trejo unwittingly provided such a great example when she proudly proclaimed she worked to save enough to pay her own way through graduate school. The fact that she did it on her own makes her a great American. May we all live by her example and not her words. -- Alaina Niemann, Downey

********** Published: August 11, 2011 - Volume 10 - Issue 17