I've been reading the editorials and letters in the Post Dispatch about bills in Jefferson City that aim to further diminish the economic power of the working and middle classes in Missouri. It seems each week the writers are getting a tiny bit closer to the bull's eye but are still missing the main point.
Whether it is defunding health services and public education or undermining the unions that protect workers' benefits, whether it is skewing the political process to favor corporate campaign donors or shifting the tax burden down the income scale, or whether it's just down and dirty dishonest fact manipulation, the goal is the same. The real goal is to bankrupt the state so the pretense of "lack of funding" can be used while destroying all public programs and services. Privatize everything. Let private companies offer those services for a profit. Pay no attention to the obvious financial problems when 20% to 30% of a program's income has to go for overhead as opposed to 3%-7% for a public run program. The goal is not delivery of the best product. It's delivery of the greatest profit for the investors.
Ken Curtis comes closest to the bull's eye when he says that the American Legislative Exchange Council is behind the draining of resources from public education. The "free market" extremists in control of the current Republican Party, both in Jeff City and in Washington, do not believe it is government's job to help individuals. Anyone who wants to understand the common thread running through all of the attempts to reduce government services should go to www.alecexposed.org and read all about it. The goal is to move the country away from the progressive political philosophy that produced the social programs of the mid-20th century such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, OSHA, the EPA, and Head Start. Reducing taxes is not just about fiscal conservatism; it is about "starving the beast" so there is no money for social programs. Hysteria over federal deficits was not a problem when “big government” meant boatloads of money to defense contractors. Any honest fiscal conservative would know better than to start two wars and cut taxes simultaneously.
No, the real agenda is something much baser. And this is the political choice we are going to have to make. Do we value each other enough to "just say no" to the Republican leaders pushing us further and further down into the kind of poverty where we have no power to defend ourselves? Do we really want to go back to the days when only the rich could afford to go to school? Or when elderly grandparents slept in the cellar near the furnace? Or when the air was so black with coal soot that no amount of power washing could clean out our lungs? This is the "vision" of the people currently in control of the Republican Party. The Speaker of the Missouri House, Rep. Tim Jones of Eureka, is co-chair of the Missouri delegation to the American Legislative Exchange Council.
Let's at least force them to say openly and honestly what their real intentions are. All of their arguments for not expanding Medicaid have been knocked down by professionals who know more than they do. What's left is the ugly truth. They can't expand Medicaid when their real goal is to destroy it and all the other social safety net programs. Bull's Eye !!
Friday, March 15, 2013
Friday, March 1, 2013
A theory about "moral injury" and Republican guilt
Letter to Post Dispatch February 28, 2013
Two pieces in Thursday's paper helped me make some connections about why Republicans can't stand to talk about how the unnecessary Iraq war bankrupted our country. They like to blame President Obama for spending too much money despite the fact that spending has decreased and the deficit is shrinking. Robert Specker of Wildwood asks "Why is our government spending funds it has to borrow in the first place if the expenditures are not necessary?"
Say what ? "Unnecessary" is the adjective that will be used to describe the Iraq War by future historians, and they won't pass up a chance to mention that we cut taxes while ramping up military spending.
The excellent article by Grady Smith about the "moral wounds" of combat shines some light on why Republicans are going to such great lengths to avoid taking responsibility for driving the nation into debt. Smith quotes a 30 year old article by Peter Marin to explain how terribly difficult it is for humans to come to terms with the damage they do to others when "the dead remain dead, the maimed are forever maimed, and there is no way to deny one's responsibility or culpability."
Over 4,000 Americans were killed in Iraq and tens of thousands have physical and emotional scars that our society will have to take care of for decades to come. Estimates are that over 100,000 Iraqis, including women and children, died in the war of choice by the George W. Bush administration. As more details emerge about how the intelligence was massaged to give the desired result about Iraq's threat to its neighbors and to us, those who supported the war must be facing some pretty difficult self-analysis.
Psychologists use the term "projection" to describe how humans blame others for something they can't face about themselves. I think we're on to something here. I hope Republicans who supported President Bush's ill-conceived war accept partial responsibility for the physical, emotional and fiscal damage done to everyone involved. Maybe then they can start making amends rather than looking for others to blame.
Say what ? "Unnecessary" is the adjective that will be used to describe the Iraq War by future historians, and they won't pass up a chance to mention that we cut taxes while ramping up military spending.
The excellent article by Grady Smith about the "moral wounds" of combat shines some light on why Republicans are going to such great lengths to avoid taking responsibility for driving the nation into debt. Smith quotes a 30 year old article by Peter Marin to explain how terribly difficult it is for humans to come to terms with the damage they do to others when "the dead remain dead, the maimed are forever maimed, and there is no way to deny one's responsibility or culpability."
Over 4,000 Americans were killed in Iraq and tens of thousands have physical and emotional scars that our society will have to take care of for decades to come. Estimates are that over 100,000 Iraqis, including women and children, died in the war of choice by the George W. Bush administration. As more details emerge about how the intelligence was massaged to give the desired result about Iraq's threat to its neighbors and to us, those who supported the war must be facing some pretty difficult self-analysis.
Psychologists use the term "projection" to describe how humans blame others for something they can't face about themselves. I think we're on to something here. I hope Republicans who supported President Bush's ill-conceived war accept partial responsibility for the physical, emotional and fiscal damage done to everyone involved. Maybe then they can start making amends rather than looking for others to blame.
Susan Cunningham
Pacific, MO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)