How can average Americans support Republicans?
April 1st 2008 03:13
The questions surrounding liberal and conservative thought and what each of those terms has come to mean over the years are always open to debate. What is impossible to deny, however, is how damaging to the American middle class the policies of the Republican Party have been. Since the inception of the so-called "Reagan Revolution," the dismal failure or Reaganomics to deliver for anyone but the very rich is apparent and provable. Of course there are exceptions. There are those who either through good luck or hard work (usually a combination of the two) have prospered. But for the majority, the trends have been the other way.
America had always been about the next generation being able to do better than those who had come before. The neo-conservative movement put an end to that and created an environment that puts more people on the edge than ever before. At the same time, other countries have pushed forward agendas that have been more socially aware and their middle classes have benefited. It's not, as many will suggest, anti-American to say so. To admit that there may be somethings we can learn from other countries whose educational systems or health care systems out strip ours is more noble than to cling to hot-blooded nationalism no matter what the evidence.
This brings up a question that continues to hound me. How can anyone who isn't extremely rich or a theocrat vote for today's Republican Party? I challenge anyone to show me how the policies of Mr. Bush and company has helped anyone but those who count themselves as rich or theocratic. The unabashed transfer of wealth does not "trickle down," whatever they might tell you. Supply-side economics is the folly that has helped to bring about the boom-bust cycles are economy goes through.
I understand the self interest of the very rich who support the Republicans, even though there are rich persons of conscience who are liberals and progressives. At least someone from that demographic is going to benefit. And I understand the theocrats, those who see the need to "reclaim America for Christ." At least they have their visions of theocracy stoked by candidates seeking their blind support.
The evangelical right has been the group that has enabled the excesses and outright crimes of the far right. Without queuing up to them and promising them a little slice of dogmatic theocracy Mr. Bush would have never made it to the place where he was able to slide into the White House. He would still be cuttin' brush in the wilds of Texas, and the world would be far better. The unholy alliance between those who worship greed and those who worship God (often the same people) has been an unmitigated disaster.
But what about the men and women who support him, but don't fall into one of those groups? What, I wonder, is the reason they find to justify giving support to a movement so bereft of real ideas and so bankrupt of compassion and so inept in execution? I know some cling to conservative ideals of the past. Trouble is, the current crop doesn't have much in common with real conservatism. Can anyone tell me what definition of classic conservatism includes broken budgets,
rampant deficits, declining living standards, and war with no end in sight? Answer me that one, eh?
If you value your family, your health, your future, your children's future - look beyond the rhetoric of the right and vote for a candidate who can symbolize the kind of change we need to begin to bring our country back.
America had always been about the next generation being able to do better than those who had come before. The neo-conservative movement put an end to that and created an environment that puts more people on the edge than ever before. At the same time, other countries have pushed forward agendas that have been more socially aware and their middle classes have benefited. It's not, as many will suggest, anti-American to say so. To admit that there may be somethings we can learn from other countries whose educational systems or health care systems out strip ours is more noble than to cling to hot-blooded nationalism no matter what the evidence.
This brings up a question that continues to hound me. How can anyone who isn't extremely rich or a theocrat vote for today's Republican Party? I challenge anyone to show me how the policies of Mr. Bush and company has helped anyone but those who count themselves as rich or theocratic. The unabashed transfer of wealth does not "trickle down," whatever they might tell you. Supply-side economics is the folly that has helped to bring about the boom-bust cycles are economy goes through.
I understand the self interest of the very rich who support the Republicans, even though there are rich persons of conscience who are liberals and progressives. At least someone from that demographic is going to benefit. And I understand the theocrats, those who see the need to "reclaim America for Christ." At least they have their visions of theocracy stoked by candidates seeking their blind support.
The evangelical right has been the group that has enabled the excesses and outright crimes of the far right. Without queuing up to them and promising them a little slice of dogmatic theocracy Mr. Bush would have never made it to the place where he was able to slide into the White House. He would still be cuttin' brush in the wilds of Texas, and the world would be far better. The unholy alliance between those who worship greed and those who worship God (often the same people) has been an unmitigated disaster.
But what about the men and women who support him, but don't fall into one of those groups? What, I wonder, is the reason they find to justify giving support to a movement so bereft of real ideas and so bankrupt of compassion and so inept in execution? I know some cling to conservative ideals of the past. Trouble is, the current crop doesn't have much in common with real conservatism. Can anyone tell me what definition of classic conservatism includes broken budgets,
rampant deficits, declining living standards, and war with no end in sight? Answer me that one, eh?
If you value your family, your health, your future, your children's future - look beyond the rhetoric of the right and vote for a candidate who can symbolize the kind of change we need to begin to bring our country back.
| 92 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
From my interactions with Conservative Americans on the web, the only conclusion I can come to is that they have been fooled into believing that in America, if you are poor it is your own stupid fault. That anyone with half a brain would prosper and that if you have money it's because you deserve it and vice versa.
Even working class conservatives approve of tax cuts for the rich as they feel that is the essence of capitalism- rewarding those who have beaten the odds and made it to the top. They deserve their money and taxes used on public education and health care are tantamount to stealing!
So sad.
I hope Obama kicks McCain's arse. But I can't see that happening. Not with "Rocky' still in the way.
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
The Republican party used to run on the idea of keeping the government small, of promoting positive values, of fiscal conservatism, and of striving for social equality. Clearly things have changed a bit, but they still run the same ads and people still buy it. Obviously, when we have government wiretaps (with no oversight), sex scandals galore, trillions of dollars of national debt, and a focus on tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy, things have changed. I've heard people offer the "Lincoln was a Republican" defense a couple times. Great. That was 150 years ago, and possibly there's been some action in the party since then.
This is not to say that the Democratic party is a bastion of all that is right. It isn't. I do agree, though, that to identify as a Republican at the present time comes with a lot of negative baggage (unless you're rich or a theocrat, in which case I assume you're pretty stoked to be in the GOP).
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
But surely, all but the most Republican party faithful have pondered at least once in the last eight years what if Al had not been robbed?
Comment by Jeff Musall
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Anywho, I wasn't implying that you guys thought that that Dems were flawless. It was more of a blanket statement. Truthfully, if I were pinned down and forced to pick a party, it would be Democrat. I voted for Obama in the primary, and I will be voting for him if he wins the Democratic nomination. Now, if Hilary wins, I need to think things over a bit more......
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
I honestly have no idea why anyone affiliates with a party! It's so much better to have an open choice.....
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
No. Just no.
I even dislike the word. Conservative. Sends shivers down my spine.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone