This secular progressive bigotry against religious conservatives has to stop.
As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit…To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn’t soon cometh.
Simply put: Armband religion is killing the Republican Party. And, the truth — as long as we’re setting ourselves free — is that if one were to eavesdrop on private conversations among the party intelligentsia, one would hear precisely that.
Parker is channeling Noonan, who during the primary called the GOP’s religious base "idiots." But she gets even more caustic and nasty than even Noonan did.
So it has been for the Grand Old Party since the 1980s or so, as it has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners.…Which is to say, the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows.
For years, Democrats have been told that we "just don’t get" those nice people who believe the Earth is 5,000 years old or that being gay is a choice or that science is the devil’s magic or that Jesus rode around on dinosaurs. We’ve been told that our concerns about the religious right’s theocratic impulse is naked bigotry, and that we’d keep losing elections so long as we failed to genuflect to their nutty demands. Well.
What Parker is doing here, as she clearly states, is just airing out what the Republican establishment has always thought — that the religious right are a bunch of useful rubes (Lee Atwater’s "extra-chromosome conservatives"). When they were winning, it was perfectly fine to feed them scraps at the kids’ table. But now that the Republican Party is going to hell in a handbasket, the oogedy-boogedy crowd has lost their utility. And will soon be kicked to the curb.
Related posts:
- Crazy Pete Hoekstra’s Pre-Emptive Disavowal of C Street
- Is Rahm Emanuel Demanding That Walt Minnick, Bobby Bright, and Parker Griffith Commit Political Suicide?
- Peggy Noonan: Obama’s Health Care Proposals Must Be Terrible, Because No Republicans Support Them
- Washington Post Discovers C Street
- Slowing, Killing Health Care Reform is about Politics, not Policy
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Zed(?), and HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Thirty years of “Fundie Follies” bite the GOPers in the arse! Divine justice if it ever existed!
I’ll provide the crates! Now watch Parker lose her syndication…
Um, oogedy-boogedy? LOL
Jesus riding a dinosaur…too funny. What an image.
someone should ask Karl what he will go on the record as saying about this.
Read the whole thing. It’s worth it. She snarks out Palin with an exquisitely wielded scalpel.
Awfully refreshing to see the Goopers actually indulging in the truth. Parker will of course be impaled and crucified for her audacity of truth.
Karl is the anti-christ and the fundies didn’t even see it. A bigot is a bigot is a bigot.
This is a GOPer I could get behind (not vote for/along with, mind, just support as a rep of the GOP). Smart, funny, correct, and easy on the eye.
The entire core and heart of the modern GOP SHOULD be shoved back to the street corner with their wooden crate (or placard stating, “The End is Nigh”) where they belong.
This is good news. A (John) Lennonist would say that we are on the road “back to where we once belonged.”
A little more of this and we just might, once again, hear a candidate for political office publicly state a firm belief in:
“an America where the separation of church and state is absolute…and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote — where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference…where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials…and in a President whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.”
– Jack Kennedy, September 12, 1960
For years, Democrats have been told that we “just don’t get” those nice people..
Well, actually, apparently it’s not just “us” who don’t get them.
I’m getting increasingly uncomfortable with the Us vs. Them way of thinking about and dealing with others.
It’s too classifying and as long as people view each other that way, we’ll never be able to get along.
Doesn’t mediation usually focus and finding common ground.
This must be good for Republicans. I mean it. Once they find a new way to peddle unrestrained greed to a gullible electorate, they will be back in business. If the Obama administration gets out of the Depression, it shouldn’t take too long. Hope and idiocy spring eternal.
I’m not sure where the fundies fit into this. They may retreat into their mega-churches to wait for the Second Coming, and do the ‘leave unto Caesar’ thing they used to do, before the Republiks riled them up.
i’m having a little trouble enjoying this today when it’s all too obvious that our political class hates us as much as the Rs hate the fundies.
You CANNOT find common ground between absolute red communists on one hand and barking fascists on the other. No way.
Today, the REASONABLE and thinking people are actually as far removed from the howling mad reichwing nutards of the Jesus brigades as the communists were from the nazis in Germany. There IS no common ground. One side wants common ground and maximal freedom for all while the other side wants THEIR way of no way and NO freedom at all to diverge from their interpretation of a bunch of madeup apocryphal stories in a re-tranlated, re-translated, mis-translated book.
Where’s the common ground there?
Yes, we are viewed as unstable. Cough. But what we really are is uncooperative.
First thing I said too.
worse, i’m afraid. we believe in things they see as mad ravings: the same justice for all, mutual aide and respect, concern for those in need and for future generations…
Uncooperative is the worst sin. How dare we. They just let us vote.
I’m hoping that was a rhetorical question.
I have opinions. I share them.
That’s a deep well, but I don’t argue with people who shout.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
Best of luck.
Here’s a dark thought related to my comment about how they just let us vote and the Shock Doctrine comments from the last thread. Supposed Obama is about voter nullification?
I hope they stay in the GOP and screw it up even more. Normal Americans, ones who separate their private beliefs with public policy, have gotten more than a little tired of this crowd and their meddling way.
In the end it’s rather fitting that the GOP has been Left Behind.
OT
Waxman beat out Dingell
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/…..man-chair/
This is the third post I’ve seen today on Kathleen Parker. Actually make that four, K-Lo weighs in too:
“She’s someone I know and love dearly but I won’t ever pretend to know her or anyone’s mind. But I do know she is smarter than her column recently has suggested.
And by smarter I am not using conservatism as a litmus test for intelligence, for the record.”
Call it a cat fight, or call it a food fight, I just love it when wingnuts fight.
i don’t understand… would you elaborate?
They’re just pissed she’s spilling. They know she’s right.
Too paranoid to elaborate much. Just thinking that all his actions since he became the D candidate seem to be the opposite to what the voters want. Supposing it was a deliberate plant, and the shocks engineered to make sure he got elected?
i’m with you on this part.
Zactly!
Yup. It doesn’t work. Just how it is.
It’s bad enough when “they” don’t get along with “us”, but even more sad when “the we” don’t get along. :(
i’m not sure that clinton wouldn’t have acted similarly. so i guess i see the gatekeeper type actions operating on a much lower/earlier level.
but will leave it at that, maybe another day…
Ah’m from the south and ah always heered it as oogely-boogely. These Texans talk funny.
Well, Clinton did pave the way …
As you said, leave it alone for now.
no more us v them or zero-sum games. New pair-o-dime = win-win negotiations, even with Repubs and Lieberman.
I agree with those who say WE are the “oogedy boogedy” crowd to the Democratic Party.
The Rational Left and The Irrational Right, all in the same “ignore ‘em, they’re idiots” category.
Don’t like that.
Nope, don’t like that at all.
Yes, m’am.
trying.
We’re going to see the result of that tactic this week as the Senate decides whether or not to bail out the auto industry.
Ya know, after all these years of really nasty partisan politics I’m just as guilty as anyone of falling into that trap. When nominees names started being leaked I’m bouncin’ off walls an’ shit, just fit to be tied. Reading some cooler heads than mine I’ve had to sit down and start to rethink a lot. Now is the time for me to take some of my own advice. Patience, grasshopper, let’s see what develops here. We don’t have all the pieces on the board and the game is not yet afoot. (What a gawdawful metaphor)
Yes, you do.
Thank you for sharing that link with me.
Being without power on the weekend gave me a break from here, and I just haven’t fully come back.
The first 8 hours were rough, but it got easier. I certainly can sympathize with those who have dropped out. But, I also agree with you that we should be able to have constructive dialogs even when we disagree.
Here’s one thing we all do have in common: it’s not easy. It’s not fun. Still, there are caring hearts who want to learn and discuss.
(((Selise)))
Just wanted all to know that I totally agree! I’m tired of all the sniping and I’m ready to go into a cocoon to see how this all plays out. At least until the new President has a chance to take his office, I will be biding my time and trying desperately to reserve judgement!
Constructive dialog would be refreshing. It has gotten so cranky around here that I don’t read much any more. It’s depressing and ugly.
:) You are not alone. But, the thing is, if the saner minds leave, then only the snarkers will be here.
How fun would that be? Not at all.
But, who am I to ask?
I am being facetious AND serious. There IS no common ground between we of this site and the people of “Focus on the Family” or the Palin wing of the nuthatch. These people are anathema to EVERYTHING we stand for.
Where is common ground between a position that no religion should be shoved down anyone’s throat via the law and the position that the Bible should be the source of all law? Where is the common ground between the position that reproductive freedom and privacy should be respected and the position that sex outside marriage is a sin and should be punished one way or another (by forcing pregnancy at best) and that birthcontrol is abortion or sinful and must be banned? Where is the common ground between ‘let gays live as they wish’ and ‘gays are going to hell and should NOT be protected from discrimination’?
There really isn’t always common ground and good will to build upon. Sometimes people are truly diametrically and irretrievably opposed such that there will NEVER be agreement even on common ground.
OT. Daschles selection as HHS Secretary and health Czar was a fantastic choice.
Who you callin’ sane? I ain’t goin’ nowhere. *g*
It’s dynamic. It waxes and wanes.
I’m listening to some oldy moldy songs right now.
Guess what just came on? Judy Collins: Both Sides Now.
Be the positive you want.
That’s just my advice at this moment.
Hugs to you, Twain.
I agree and think he will do a good job.
hush…….
And hugs back. We have lost way too many people and don’t want to lose any more. I love this place but when it get vicious I’m out. Lots of good things going on to spend time trashing people.
Think of each of those “adversarial” groups as an onion. As you peel back the layers there’s bound to be similarities the deeper one peels. For example, we all want what’s best for our children. We have different ideas on just what that means and how to get there. Duality is actually one.
Wow, the hate cometh!
Tex, you give too much credit to the Right Wing Christians (no doubt that hold onto their guns and bibles). The biggest reason why republicans lost were the democrats ability to sound more conservative than the republicans. Go back over Obama’s speeches, he was moving into right territory against McCain. I even told my wife “if I knew nothing about each of these guys, I would be voting for Obama also”. Republicans simply lost their way and were trying to compete with Dems on liberal ideas.
The only thing that kept McCain afloat was selecting Palin. Up to that point, his ship was sinking faster than he could bail.
Dragonman! :)
That CAN’T work and it never ever has.
History repeatedly proves this. Hand-across-the-aisle bipartisanship ALWAYS means do it the GOP way or the right-of-center way when the Dems are in power. When the GOP is in power it means squat: NO bipartisanship at all – it is the GOP way or the highway.
When the Dems are in control, the GOP ALWAYS demands a place at the table (which means killing real reform until they get back into power so they can continue the drive to the right). When the Dems are in control they whine and cry about being allowed to influence bills and policies. When THEY are in control – no Dem need even show up. If the Dems try to “compromise” the GOP steamrolls them or threatens to “go nukular” and eliminate the filibuster.
The country is NOT right-center. It simply isn’t and any “compromise” that leads to right-of-center laws or policies is counter to the objective fact that the country is LEFT-of-center.
No more compromise. No more reach arounds. Rollback means no compromise or reach arounds (reach-across-the-aisle) bullshit. It means doing things DIFFERENT. Period.
I agree that different opinions can be constructive as long as egos are left at the door.
must disagree – you are assuming that people can’t or don’t change, that what a person believes one day is what a person will always believe. just not true.
Agree.
here i will agree with you – how often have those in power been willing to share?
Good to hear. I was feeling like I was the only one.
Keeping up the pressure is good; we’re not going to see the end of that. Even with a new administration, a lot of the faces (especially in Congress and most especially in the Senate and the media) are the same, and we do have an influence, even if we don’t win every battle.
But finding something terminally unacceptable in the background of every nominee whose name is floated has gotten old pretty quickly.
Things will be better. Things won’t be perfect. As we move forward, we do need to keep in mind all the appalling things that aren’t happening any more, rather than letting them slip from our minds just because it’s part of being “back to normal.”
As long as they are listened to their input could help to avoid mistakes.
Did you really think you were the only one?
No. There are other voices here who do not appreciate the ugly, vicious and cynically depressed.
The end of this thread is a witness.
:)
(You Are Not Alone.)
I agree that there’s no common ground with the leadership of those groups, but that doesn’t mean the people they speak to are lost forever. Some people maintain beliefs like that for a lifetime, but others come and go, and I think it’s a mistake to automatically write them off.
Well, hate to say this, but I actually agree with you, although I am agreeing from the right-of-center. In my opinion, liberal ideas don’t work, they never have. I don’t want to meet a bad liberal idea in the middle, I want it defeated with a better idea, don’t honestly care where it comes from.
Where you are wrong is the GOP always demanding a place at the table. Go back to when Tip O’Neill was in power, the GOP was slapped around like used hand bags. They were left out of decision making completely which in turn caused Reagan to use the bully-pulpet the way he did. Another example, we just got finished with a election where the GOP candidate prided himself on going across the isle (as a maveric) to work with Dems, so the GOP does move across the isle when needed.
Thanks. If I’d thought it through, maybe I wouldn’t have felt that way, but it was a vicious circle of not wading through comments I found tiresome to find the ones that weren’t.
Nap time for me.
Thanks all for this little chat.
And, I do mean All, because one comment turned the discussion to something positive and interesting.
Mining for gold? You’re a good ‘un.
Listening to your enemies is essential, always.
Interesting you didn’t cite how nicely the Rs treated Clinton for reaching across the aisle.
It is true, however, with the BASE of the GOP as it currently stands.
My sister is a case in point. She and I have NO common ground on gay rights, reproductive freedom, religion and politics, progressive taxation (even though she will NEVER EVER EVER be anywhere near an upper income bracket), healthcare. There are more areas where we are oil and water and where there is NO compromise possible.
She BELIEVES that we are doing good in Iraq. She believes that Iraq was just. Both are objectively false. She believes that most Iraqis want us to stay and that it is only a loud minority that wants us out. She believes that Afghanistan is winnable. That Obama is a muslim, that all liberals are “blame America firsters” and that the US NEVER does anything wrong (it CANNOT do wrong). The only thing we agree on is evolution – because even most radical catholics such as herself (almost Opus Dei nutty) accept the fact of evolution. What do you build off that?
She is opposed to abortion. Period. No matter what. And is happy and comfortable in making that decision for ALL women regardless of their own beliefs or circumstances.
I’m in the military and I can try to explain to her the military folly and failure that is Iraq and Afghanistan (and the first Gulf War which I fought in) and the bogosity of “missile defense” and she wont believe me. She believes, period, no question, whatever the GOP talking points are.
When people deny objective reality or are resistant to ANY ideas contrary to their personal religion-based ideas, there is no common ground.
Not trying to convert, but your comment made me think of something.
WRT Love Your Enemy. After thinking and pondering on that, I found that the only way to affectively do that is …
to not see anyone as your enemy.
Just my crazy way of trying to make sense.
Must make for interesting Thanksgiving family meals.
Actually, that would be the McCartneyite position.
Let me know how you work it out with OBL.
How many of the Tip O’Neill GOPers are left? Virtually all the remaining GOPers in both Houses of Congress are THE nuttiest, right-wingiest righties of the party. THEY are all that’s left, and you think there will be productive reach arounds with them?
They are all about sabotage at this point. They are all about killing unions, killing social safety nets, killing any chances of healthcare reform (universal is the only valid and true option), environmental protection, green energy, etc. Part of it is just out of spite but part of it is the FACT that the only people left standing in the party truly are the nuthatch brigade. The so-called moderates have almost entirely been defeated by Dems. Those that are left are bomb throwers.
Heh. We have to avoid politics and religion.
Sure, there is. You just don’t see it.
Tomorrow is another day.
It’s clear that you are a passionate person. I admire that. Me too.
Never say never, right?
We live, we learn.
Well, some of Clinton’s best accomplishments were because of (conservative) Republicans…the balanced budget for example.
Leaving the weather & sports?
As long as he/she doesn’t leave their purse there.
I remember last year for you.
How could I possibly remember that? Care about you, blondie. :)
Tip O’Neill was a dem. There are several reasonable GOPers out there. The media doesn’t put them out there when there is a food fight going on.
The point is they just loved him for it, treated him well because of it, and that led to comity between the parties in the following R administration. That’s your thesis, isn’t it?
Gonna give it another try at Xmas. *g*
Fashion and Sex.
Put your drivers license in your pocket.
Ha!
well, you’re talking to someone who was taught to believe all that nonsense and did – for way too long. so i know FOR A FACT that your characterization of having no common ground is just false.
unless you include me among those with whom you have no common ground.
That’s the reason I left my purse. What I need for the day is always in my pocket. Never carry a purse unless I’m traveling.
Wow. Didn’t know that. What turned you around?
that’s where i am as well. it’s one thing to take a considered position that an individual is not worth the effort – different thing entirely to write off a whole group, most of whom i’ve never met.
What a pleasant thread this is.
How different in ‘tone’.
May we have more, please?
Again, did you watch the presidental election? Who was priding himself on being a centrist till it made you sick to hear? It was McCain. We only have a couple true conservatives left in the congress, the others are simply republicans.
I hope your are right about the republicans sabotage. We certainly need to [edited by mod] the UAW (look at whats happening now), DEFUND the abused safety nets, AND limit the amount of environmental regulation that will be spewed forth the next few years. But unfortunately, you are going to have a handful of Republican who will go along with the Washington elites to stay in the ‘IN’ group.
Smart Lady and Hip too!
long story and long time ago – will email you more if you’re really curious. started with a problem with rigid ideas about gender roles for women. being one myself it got progressively harder to swallow. i give a lot of credit to feminism (read a lot of feminist theology for a couple of years). eventually pitched the whole dogma god thing. if i want church there’s always the local UU (which is i think about half atheist).
that’s actually why i asked awhile ago how old your son was. n=1 so take it for what it’s worth, but i wouldn’t write him off yet.
Well, to a degree I guess, although I don’t think there was much love there, maybe professional courtesy. I highly doubt Clinton would have had those accomplishments if a Democratic congress was behind him.
question – are you referring here to the corporate bailouts or things like food stamps?
Weather can be tricky. She doesn’t buy Global Warming and weather can easily lead to that FACT.
Interesting.
But, resorting to my way of making the world into binaries: You are in the group that searches for new answers when things aren’t working. The other group thinks that when things aren’t working, they need to do what they’re doing, only better or harder. I’d say the latter group cannot be talked to in any productive way.
707! That thought would never have occurred to me.
As you no longer hold those ideas, you are not like my sister, who holds fast to those ideas. One is not independent of ones ideas. They ARE you. So long as you hold to certain ideas, then they define you. The fact that someone is theoretically capable of changing their views (so long as they drop their core beliefs) does not mean they will (ever) or are the person that they would be should they drop those beliefs. They are what they are.
Someone actually has to entertain doubt to be able to change their core beliefs. Some people will NEVER release those core beliefs and contain/allow NO doubt. Others are forced to drop their beliefs because they are literally hit in the nads with reality, and that reality turns out to be incontrovertably contrary to their core beliefs. Simply doesn’t happen every day and all that often.
Selise, how did you get won over to the positions most represented here at the Lake? I have a friend who is as Praedor describes her/his sister, and I’d hate to chase her down into her beliefs more… what was the magic? What made you feel those taught beliefs weren’t true? What turned the key?
Yes, the 40 hour work week, women’s suffrage, Social Security, the minimum wage — all disasters.
selise,
On cnbc they’re explaining today’s market drop in part as a result of the difficulty car companies are having in DC. So maybe it wasn’t such kabuki at the hearing.
Both unfortunately. There is no reason for these corporate bailouts for the financial industry, Car industry, or any other industry…that is not the purpose of tax dollars.
With all honesty, I don’t mind funding social programs like Food Stamps to a degree. I understand people fall on hard times, it will happen to use all at some point, so it is nice to have something to fall back on. Where these systems break down is when people become so dependent on the programs that they no longer will provide for themselves, they basically become zombies of the system. That should never be the purpose of any system with the intent to help people out of a bad situation.
Oh, duh. I found your answer… hmmmmm! That angle might work on my pal, who is a sort of up-with-womenfolk feisty kind.
See my 95. Seems your sister would be in my second group.
The coming universal healthcare…a disaster (like it is in France).
Then there is unemployment insurance, the Peace Corps, worker’s comp, worker safety rules, product safety rules, Headstart. All freakin’ disasters.
And even though it was started by Nixon (with liberal pressure from the public): environmental protections. Horrible!
Actually, the extent to which any of the above are “disasters” is not because of their liberal nature, but because of conservative mismanagement (by design).
I suspect that the Christian-right is still a force to be reckoned with. The GOP’s mistake may have been in taking them for granted. This year many of them voted for the Pres. candidate that came across looking more Christian (as opposed to the foul mouthed, foul tempered, adulterous candidate). Many of the Christian-right may be Christian first and right second. I fear that the presidential race would have been a lot closer if Mitt and Huckabee had not split the Christian-right voting bloc.
As opposed to thinking that this election will cause the GOP to forsake the evangelical-Christian politics, I think there’s a chance we may see more of it. What you should be nervous about is that DNC leaders may see the Christian coalitions as up-for-grabs and compromise (or weaken) their positions to woo them.
As you no longer hold those ideas, you are not like my sister, who holds fast to those ideas.a
i held fast for a while.
so it really depends on when you take the data.
Government is the problem (by design).
i don’t know. could also be attributed to pig headedness and an addiction to thinking things through for myself. or maybe i’m confusing the chicken and the egg.
here’s what i do know from my experience. it is not a switch that gets turned on. it is difficult scary process and for me it took several years (the religious part – the rest is still is still in progress and i expect will never end).
i’m still listening to today’s hearing. sachs is testifying – he sounds petrified.
For both posts -> To a degree they are. The first two are a little bit of an argument that I don’t feel like getting into here, but social security and minimum wage…one is failing (no-one on either side of the isle wants to tackle), and the other is limiting the amount of entry-level employees an employer can hire. If someone greatest ambition in life is to work at Mc’Ds, why should they have a higher wage.
Praedor, on your issue’s…go check France. Their country is near colapse, as is England & Germany. Simply put, they cannot continue to pay out the social benefits like they did in the past. Looks at what is happening in their elections…all are conservative based for the reason of restructuring the social wefare they adopted.
BTW: Environmentalism is not a liberal idea. It started in the 1800’s when the mining industries were wiping out animals and resources at an alarming rate. Conservatives (like hunters) were the ones who got that whole thing going (and I am not talking about Gore’s version of environmentalism…liberals can have that).
online or on cspan? I’m listening to mortgage loan modifications testimony.
thanks for the answer. i guess we only disagree about 95% (better than 100% *g*).
here’s part of what i don’t get:
could not part of the problem be that we’ve been taught that the purpose of work is our own enrichment? instead of things like intellectual challenge, creative expression and the feeling of accomplishment that comes with making a real contribution to other’s well being?
here
Link didn’t work & am having trouble finding how to access it.
if there is anyone left at the bottom of this thread with me, i propose we move up a couple of threads to the new one by masaccio:
Gambling Debts: GM and Credit Default Swaps
are you pc or mac?
Is it over? Or maybe all the toobz are full?
pc. I found the same link you sent me by navigating the site, but it still doesn’t work.
yep just ended. my stream is about 5 min. behind. am going to try to convert to podcast or maybe even youtube clip or two. tomorrow the archived version may be up….
Thanks.
Social Security is not “failing.”
Freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of thought, a ban on cruel and unusual punishment, individual rights, minority rights — all liberal ideas.
Please tell us that James Madison was a “conservative” so we can all laugh at you.
No, when you do those things, you are challenging yourself to be a better person…I applaud those people (starving artist for instance), they do what they do because they love it, and they excel in what they do. Hell I even envy them :] .
An example: My sister (happens to be a Catholic Nun), was doing some charity work (teaching) in the Carolina’s. She tried to work with kids whose parents were on every type of welfare/social programs imaginable in order to break the loop of dependence (by educating them). Long story short, no progress was ever made with any of these people to make their lives better for the three years she was there, their kids ended up in the same loop of waiting at hope for the stamps and check. That’s what doesn’t work.
Uh…social security is NOT failing. It is fine as is until 2050. To fix it for perpetuity, all that needs be done is end the cap on income taxed for social security – send it higher than $90,000. Ta-da! Perma-fix.
As for minimum wage, I would argue that it is a good thing that should be part of all trade deals so that there is no downward pressure on the bottom and no pressure to outsource labor.
If you simply do away with the minimum wage, then LOTS of people would suddenly find themselves earning less than it costs to get to work in the first place…and unless unionization is allowed across the board, no way to correct the situation. I STILL hold to a belief that CEO pay should be hard-locked to average worker pay in any corporation. Corporate taxes should be minimized when the CEO is paid/compensated (in ANY form) no more than 6x the average worker pay for that corporation. Go above 6x and taxes skyrocket swiftly. 6x is plenty. It worked during the 60s when workers made out MUCH better than they do today AND the economy was growing at a steady clip. There is no justification for 10x, 100x, 200x worker pay for CEOs. EVER.
So, the CEO of Walmart wants to REALLY pay himself but screw his workers, go ahead! But go above 6x your average worker pay and your corporate taxes go up rapidly. Be willing to pay in taxes and you can pay yourself whatever you want.
No exceptions.
As for France, they are not looking to eliminate their world’s best healthcare system (as yet). They DO need to change their labor laws a LITTLE (or better, the rest of the world should standardize on something similar to theirs so there is no competitive disadvantage from country to country AND people gain the benefits of vacation time, maternity leave, etc). Their healthcare system costs LESS than ours. Period. By getting rid of it they would be turning it into something worse, and more costly. Lose-lose. Or do you argue that vacation is bad, maternity leave is bad, slave labor good, etc?
Oh, an additional item on this: another way for a CEO to pay him/herself more money under the 6x system I mention would be to increase the pay of all workers (to get the average pay up). So long as the differential between CEO and worker average doesn’t exceed 6x, minimal corporate taxes. Win-win.
In the 60s, when corporate pay was in the range of 6x average worker pay, there were STILL rich bastards. Same was true concerning the high marginal tax rates. The rich still existed, they still did crazy/stupid rich person shit and committed rich person crimes, but the tax system was fairer AND the economy was booming nonetheless.
So, higher taxes on the wealthy and a corporate tax system based on 6x.
You also have to DRASTICALLY cut “defense” spending (actually, we are offense spending, NOT defense spending). Between the tax system I outlined AND reduced (drastically) military spending, there is a lot of money available to provide universal healthcare, higher education for all that want it, etc.
are you sure that: it wasn’t a bigger problem than could be addressed in 3 years? that the approach being used was not a good one? had any empirical studies been done on what worked and what didn’t? were the views of the target population solicited? i have way too many questions to conclude that it can’t work.
gotta tell you also, your use of the term “these people” sets off all kinds of warning bells with me.
Ok so you are going back 200+ years amd comparing those ideas to todays. Were does slave right fit into all this-that was a democrat liberal idea at the time.
Social Security is not failing? Almost every administration has to prop that up to some degree (bail it out dare I say), it certainly is not self-sustaining as it was originally intended. The ‘Liberals’ have attach so many other programs that SS needs to pay for that there is no way it will be solvent in 20 years.
However I may have mis-spoken, there are some liberal ideas which have been good in their infancy. Let me say this, most of those ideas have been so blown/abused/raped apart that they barely even mirror what they once were. Case in point: Global Warming. I would agree that we are contributing to green house gasses, and that we should be conserving nature for future generations. However that contribution is so minimal that the need to make such radical changes to our way of life is absolutely ascinine. Besides, we have the leaders of the movement living like royalty, when some granola-head who is afraid to use a piece of toilet paper because he is contributing to ‘global warming. Why should we support issue like this? This is a huge power grab and nothing more.
Excuse my rant :] . Obviously a hot button.
And the alternative?
Let them die? Starve? Disappear like good losers? Out of sight, out of mind?
Does your example describe ALL people using the safety net?
at the moment our problems do not include an undersupply of labor. if some people don’t want to contribute, i’d still prefer that they and their children don’t starve. would rather use social sanctions that value contributions to society than threats of starvation, etc.
That’s my point, doesn’t matter if it is 3 years, or 20 years, the same cycle will persist if changes are not made to modify that behavior. Flip side, thinking of yourself, why should you go out and work an extra hour a day to pay for taxes that are distributed to people who are waiting at the mail box for a government check?
If I offended you “these people”, my sincere apologies. Political correctness is not a strong point of mine, its too hard to keep up with what is PC.
I have to get going, so I will leave on a positive note. I do agree with your idea of CEO pay, it has gotten way out of control, but I don’t want to see the government get involved in capping as that should be left to the shareholders. If you cap CEO’s are you going to cap sports stars or anyone else making more money than another person see’s fit?
We all have choices in this life. If one’s is simply not going to participate in society, why should society have to support them? Also, A safety net is simply that…it implies a temporary safety mechanism. No one here should have to pay for someone (who is not impaired) who simply does not want to work for their sustenance. Anyone who cannot take care of themselves, should be cared for.
because if the purpose of work is to make money then i’m too stupid to bother talking with.
my answer is once again: intellectual challenge, creative expression and the feeling of accomplishment that comes from making a real contribution to other’s well being. seriously. i do object when my taxes are used for things like making war on people who never threatened us – but not to providing food, shelter etc to others.
ah, and how exactly do you determine who can care for themselves? except by threatening a person with starvation and seeing who works and who starves?
strikes me as something like that old monty python scene from the holy grail:
not to mention how much does it cost to make a determination (all the people to inspect, question, etc).
I’ve unfortunately come to the conclusion that you have no idea what you’re talking about. Go read a book.
I hope I am not being too obvious but there is the notion, and empirical evidence, that changing a socio-political ideology based on religious dogma requires redirecting the dogmatic to a liberal or generous understanding of their religions scripture. One example is slavery. The Christian biblical based prerogative for slavery changed through the shift in rhetoric of a Christian movement. Some of this can be found in, “Antislavery Christians, The Minutes of the Christian anti-slavery convention. Assembled April 17th-20th, 1850. Cincinnati, Ohio” a (Paperback)book at Amazon.com. Apartheid can also be seen as changing in the face of a reframe of Christian exegesis. These links are not the definitive scholarship available but they were easy to google in order to quickly support my point. So if I am being generous I would say that we actually could find religious or spiritual common ground for bipartisanship.
The factor of knee jerk emotional reactions against those who perpetrate unthinkable or unjust facts, for some of us, is difficult to over come. I personally yelled fuck you into Harry Ried’s office machine last night. Twice. Not very mature, spiritual, or helpful but I did it. And I am not too sorry. But I think I have to let myself a little off the hook for a very human overreaction to the level of disrespect he showed. Then decide not to make a phone call like that again. Because I disturbed myself and acted outside of my own values, and I was being disrespectful too. Gaaa. I don’t know if the dark suits will come and ask me questions about my state of mind but even then I will be in dialogue with, rather then numbly walking through the crap. It has been said that if you are not mad you are not paying attention.
Maybe that is another common ground. Oure differing view’s, despite the polarity, have created a lot of anger. Maybe we can agree on that.
Thanks I have. Do some research and see who the political parties were at that time.