 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 17, 2005 at 07:33:28
by Rob Kall Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
 
|
They say they want less government, smaller government, less government intrusion into people’s lives. But they really make government bigger. They have massively expanded the military and homeland security. The difference is, people on the left advocate government that produces added value and benefits for Americans. The right wingers create big government that costs hundreds of billions but that does not build roads, improve infrastructure, enhance our technological advantages, improve schools, strengthen our security. They piss away money on contracts with cronies, foreign contractors, mercenaries, foreign outsourced contractors.
They shrink government functions and agencies designed to protect us, to plan for future emergencies, by cutting funds in the tens of millions and then, when the weakened defenses fail to hold, like the broken levees, or the incompetent crony appointments fail to plan and carry out failed Iraq liberation, they must spend tens or hundreds of billions fixing their screw-ups.
Protecting America
They bluster and make a lot of noise about making America safer, and go off to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. They talk tough about fighting evil, about protecting us from WMDs. But they are incompetent, dishonest, corrupt, deceptive and ineffective at what they do. They make war with phantoms that don’t exist. They don’t understand the dynamics of the threats of terrorism and oversimplify a problem that will not respond to their simple-minded approaches.
Their deep seated belief that partisan loyalty (as compared to patriotism) is more important than competence and experience has riddled the USA with layer upon layer of low quality administrators and managers so the leadership at all levels of government ha been severely compromised. No business would work this way, so they even betray their business philosophical approach they claim to take.
Their leadership, because it is so partisan policy and interest driven, proved, in the wake of Katrina, that they cannot function as effective leaders, entrusting leadership to competent heads of departments. Instead, their patronage and crony appointments got stuck waiting for Rove, Cheney and the other real decision makers to give overdue orders and release control of the strings they held too tightly. A well-oiled command structure requires competence and trust. The trust this administration thought it possessed, collapsed due to incompetence.
We are less safe now than ever. The Iraq disaster has created the biggest, most successful terrorist recruiting and training ground ever. It is a the most successful action ever taken to build hate, contempt for and mistrust of the US. The colossal failure to take care of our own post Katrina and the Levee break has drastically lowered the world’s estimation of us as a superpower, so they now see us as a megapowered fascist, third world nation that is incredibly dangerous to the rest of the world and ourselves. If the US was a psychiatric patient, it would be involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital for being dangerous to herself and others.
Anti Tax and Spend
Tax and spend. That’s the phrase they use to describe Democrats. Well the right wing republicans spend and spend. They are incredibly irresponsible with money, dragging the USA down a deeper and deeper debtor’s path. Fiscal responsibility used to be a core Republican value—not any more. USA debt is getting so bad it is endangering our long term international viability. George Bush learned how to get rich by spending enormous sums of Government money. When he was governor and owner of a pro athletic team, he built a huge $200 million dollar stadium. That helped increase the value of his interest in the team and he made a few million dollars. That’s his lesson. Spend two hundred million, make a few million. He’s changed the numbers to hundreds of billions now though. Can anyone doubt that he’ll leave the presidency a billionaire?
Freedom from Regulations
The extreme right wingers who have taken over congress profess to want to get rid of regulations. They suggest that they want to free people of intrusion into their lives. But really, they get rid of regulations that impede big businesses from making more profits and raping the nation—environmentally, abusing employees, grabbing assets held by the nation as part of the commons. And then they go and add new regulations that help corporations to define what they are NOT responsible for. The FDA sets rules so the corporations can claim they met those rules (which were weak and ineffective) and can then claim to no be liable for losses, damages, injuries, deaths.
Protecting Life and Faith Based
They claim to protect life, by opposing abortion. But they really pander to a lie, since they also oppose birth control, which would protect many women and families from unwanted pregnancies. They allow corporations to release toxins into the environment that kill tens or hundreds of thousands in the US alone. They allow pharmaceutical companies to release drugs that are know to kill and then fail to punish them. Why shouldn’t corporations get the death penalty they are so happy to apply to mentally ill and retarded people. Me, I don’t oppose the death penalty. People who kill democracy by corrupting the election process should be tried, convicted and executed. People who lie to start wars should be tried, convicted and executed. Hypocrites who claim to support life while supporting corporate and military killers are blind fools, duped by leaders who sell out for money. Bush even said he would “reimburse” churches for the money they put out helping victims of Katrina. This sounds like dirty money to me. He is buying church leaders who support him. The only thing faith based about the right wing republicans is they have faith that the modern day money changers in the churches—the leaders of the televangelical and mega-church ministries have their hands out for billions in funds that the right wing has handed out to buy their support.
LOWER TAXES
What’s that leave the republican party with—no taxes? That’s not quite true. State and local taxes have gone up. Health insurance is not called a tax, but you know it has gone through the roof. If you don’t pay it and your employer does, then there’s a good chance you will get less of a raise because your health insurance has doubled in the last few years, since Bush came into office. University costs have also risen way above average inflation and now parents get less help with it.
They want to get rid of the estate tax. They’ve already cut off higher taxes for the wealthy. Now with a huge war to pay for and a record disaster recovery—really a repair of damage caused by failure to plan and prevent a preventable catastrophe—we have unbelievably huge demands upon our resources that will cost every family thousands of dollars. We pay for these monuments to incompetence, stupidity and cronyism with higher gas and home heating and electrical prices. Higher prices for airfares and all items that must be transported.
So you got a few hundred or a few thousand back in a rebate check. That was the most expensive check you ever cashed. And if you voted republican, it was based on the biggest pack of lies a swindler ever told.
Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, more...)
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
| 6 comments |
|
I agree in substance
The other evening Bill Maher made a comment re this administration with which I concur. He said that these Bushistas (my term) actually hate government and that their every action was designed to choke and kill it. That the every scheme and action of the Bush adminstration is designed to benefit a handful of very wealthy white guys seems obvious to me, I can only wonder at the denial of so many decent American citizens who seem unable or unwilling to see the truth in front of them. Of course these millions of average folks dont read these blogs, hear any contrary opinions on TV (wherein they get the vast bulk of their news)so how can they be blamed for living in ignorance of the facts? If only we had, here in America, a mechanism wherein opposition views could be heard by the electorate, where differing opinions and differing plans for accomplishing goals was readily available for discourse.....if only we had an opposition party here in the good old US of A, how much quicker would public opinion have turned against Bush.....oh such a dreamer am I.... by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Sunday, Sep 18, 2005 at 9:12:07 AM  (0+)
|
|
The Busheviks and Diebold Voting Machines
Since we progressive liberals know that the Busheviks stole the last 2 elections.. and will do it again..i wonder why we should even vote? an employee of Diebold has come out (tho unidentified as yet) and told what happened with the company and how the election was indeed stolen.and also given the fact if they had a chance the Democrats would steal an election too. that's why i am neither Republican nor Democrat. i know some states have instituted the voter-verified paper trail..but the Busheviks will take care of that too..and they will still intimidate blacks..will prevent them from voting. and yet these Busheviks say they are the "party of morals and of god"..well, i just happen to be gay and also an atheist..our true democracy has been over-ruled by the Nazi/Fascist Police state we now live in..so what i am wondering is..since the Repugs will steal all future elections why should we even bother to vote anyway? does anyone have a plausible answer? probably not!! my plans are to move to Canada when i have the funds.these Diebold machines need to be outlawed!! so how will we do that as long as the Bush Nazis/Fascist are in power? have i said today how much i hate these people of the Bush Crime Family? by lrulfs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, Sep 18, 2005 at 1:57:20 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply to article and Mr. Rulfs
Though I\'ve never commented here, I feel compelled to write. Probably because I\'m a troll, but who knows. Oddly enough, the article seems like something that would be written when the political season is full swing, but I suppose getting started early doesn\'t hurt. Only a year away before the next election cycle. (Looking over the reply, this is to Lawrance Rulfs.) Which brings me to my first question. When it\'s said the last two elections, does the author mean the presidential ones, as seems to be insinuated, or the last actual elections, in the \'04 and \'02 cycles? On national security, it kind of worries me that it\'s basically said that Al Qeada is a fantom, and we\'re off wasting time over in the Middle East. Parts where the author says that certain people at the federal level should be executed does worry me quite a bit. While it may seem to be to certain people that Bush and Co. aren\'t doing things the right way, that they are crooks and cons, I would have to wonder why so many people would beg to differ, as going by last years election numbers. Why would it be that the great majority of people who are against Bush are on the left side of the political line, and barely any on the consertive side? Little things like that make it seem more like this is politically motivated from a non-aultruistic reasoning, or one created from so much information being poured into ones head that they can\'t help but to think of anything but hatred against the current administration. The rest of this is to Mr. Rulfs. You wonder how getting Bush and other conservatives out of power, and how it can be done. Well, I\'ll give you a hint, running to Canada won\'t do a thing to help things out. If memory serves there was a Bush by Mr. Moore to get democrats to go for local office, wherever they may be. Once solidified there, a great deal can be done to prevent regulations from on high severely impacting the local community. Take Wal-Mart for example. While they may own some land they plan to build on, the city council that land resides in could decree that no building may rise above the highest household. This could work in a smaller town, easily, to stop Wal-Mart from building there, since twenty feet would be a very short Wal-Mart. Another thing that could be done to start moving the local community would be to enact retribution laws for a larger business shutting down because the workers unionized. This is a common practice these days, and if it could be found that a business did close down because of unionization, then a fine of, say, a million dollars per person could be quite devesating to the companies pocketbooks. Of course, you\'ll draw the ire from most of the civilized world, but progress does have a price. Of course, none of these things can happen unless you go out there and make them happen. Run for office, see what happens. Maybe you\'ll end up on a city council or in the mayor\'s office. Only one way to find out, and unless you want to start learning O Canada, I suggest you brush up on your local by-laws, demographics report, and other such wonderful things politicains delve into. |Daniel by lrulfs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Monday, Sep 19, 2005 at 11:39:10 AM (0+)
|
|
It is convenient but deadly to pretend to be naive
Let's not be that naive as the last author, Daniel pretends to be. There is no such thing as conservative voter as well as there is no such thing as left- wing voter. People vote on the subconsious level and propaganda knows that. Most of the people who voted for Bush voted because they liked him. Most of the ones that did not voted because they did not. Now, the 'politics as usual' is over. It is either naive or pretty hypocritical to declare that now everyone can run for office and 'see what happens'. The rules have changed and unless you belong to the group or a family you might as well not waste your time and money. Also, you most likely will risk ruining your life. There is no democracy in this country and any 'quasi-naive' perception about this should be avoided. As for other things, it is true that it is the time for the individual decision. If a person has an option to go to Canada, that option is his/her. Many of us, most of us have no such option. As such we need to know what we are facing. We have to understand who is in power and what kind of people we are facing ( that is what Rob Kall shows very well). We also have to understand that the soil here produced them. We better be open about that and clearminded that one of the ingredients that produced those monsters was that perfect ' naivete' about ' eveyone can be a King' or 'everyone can run for office', or 'do not worry, be happy'. We did not worry for a long time. Now we are worried sick. We better be. by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4103 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 19, 2005 at 1:18:32 PM (0+)
|
|
To Mark Sashine
Okay, you got me. I was very into politics for awhile, but fell away after the last election. Putting all your faith into a candidate, and them not only losing, but the community at large (as felt) kind of disapating doesn't really help keep people. Though I've got to question the reason you give for why people vote. Granted, the more you like someone, the more likely you are to vote for them, but beliefs and politics still plays a strong part in the voting process. As to running for office, pretty much anyone can run for city council. Just get people to believe you'll do good, and they'll vote for you. Can't really remember who won though, for some odd reason. Probably because of how tired I am right now. Bed is a very good idea. |Daniel by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4103 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 19, 2005 at 2:32:08 PM (0+)
|
|
HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
These are very dangerous times. I recently read Al Gore's speech of September 9, 2005. He quoted Winston Churchill: Winston Churchill, when the storm was gathering on continental Europe, provided warnings of what was at stake. And he said this about the government then in power in England - which wasn't sure that the threat was real, he said, "They go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent." He continued, "The era of procrastination, of half measures, of soothing and baffling expedience of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences." Ladies and gentlemen, the warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We are entering a period of consequences. Churchill also said this, and he directed it at the people of his country who were looking for any way to avoid having to really confront the threat that he was warning of and asking them to prepare for. He said that he understood why there was a natural desire to deny the reality of the situation and to search for vain hope that it wasn't really as serious as some claimed it was. He said they should know the truth. And after the appeasement by Neville Chamberlain, he sad, "This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This only the first sip, the first foretaste, of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year - unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor, we rise again and take our stand for freedom." When I read the book 1984 it was 1968. Now we are 21 years past that date. I suppose the Bush administation read the book at every cabinet meeting. Decent Americans can not let this BIG BROTHER take over our lives. We owe it to all who fought for this country no matter what decade or administration. by abundidi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 20, 2005 at 7:56:52 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
