Tuesday, May 15, 2012
The Republican-controlled House of Representatives recently passed the Ryan budget. As long as there's a Democrat in the White House, and/or as long as Ds control the Senate, it won't become law. But looking at the above graphic (it gets bigger if you click it), it's clear where the priorities are, and what would happen were Rs to get control.
They're fine with this -- more than fine: delighted. When all you care about is lowering taxes on the most wealthy, and increasing defense spending (on party lines, their Armed Services Committee recently authorized money for missile defense on the East Coast, against the wishes of our military! Again, it won't happen. Yet. But it says a lot.)
I get that lots of people, perhaps uncomfortable with their own sexuality, think a party's stance on gay rights is more important (oh wow oh wow oh wow) than the above. Or on immigration (interestingly, illegal immigration has ceased to be an actual problem.) But these economic priorities, were they to become law, will define our future. And by "define," I mean "destroy." It seems pretty obvious, and ought to be, even to a mind washed by Fox "news" into believing that Obama is a socialist Nazi coming after their guns and religion. The numbers are there, in ones and zeroes.
It's not rocket surgery (thanks, Pieter): for anyone but a fellow multimillionaire to vote for Mitt Romney, they'd have to have looked at those numbers and have drawn a positive and specific conclusion: Yes, I agree it's in the best interest of the country to cut help for the needy, to cut spending on education, research, health care, environment, in order to pay for increased military spending (which I agree is vital despite the fact that we outspend the totality of the rest of the planet more than double) and in order to maintain -- no: further lower -- historically low tax rates on those very wealthy people; because I agree it's best for our country when they pay less in taxes. Those are The Rominee's priorities, they're teabaggR priorities, and they're mine. And I'm convinced that despite the fact it's never worked before, this time if we lower taxes, raise defense spending, and cut social programs, it'll balance the budget. Because this time, we'll cut social programs to the point when they don't really exist, and I reject the data that show even then, it doesn't add up. I've looked at it, I've thought about it, I've seen the teabaggR future, and I like it.
Because, no matter how important you think guns and gays are, that's what a vote for The Rominee will get you. So make the case. Convince me I'm wrong. Anyone?
Here comes my next newspaper column: Once upon a time, most Republican members and leaders had integrity. Believed in science. Consi...
My next newspaper column: “Being president doesn’t change who you are. It reveals who you are.” (Michelle Obama.) The same can be sa...
My next newspaper column : Allocated only around 700 words once a week, I’m always playing catch-up. So here’s a time- and space-limit...
My next newspaper column, sent in with too little time to address the latest mass murder. But Trump sent condolences, so it's all ok...
Tomorrow's newspaper column: Bullet points for Trumpists: · Trump said he’d protect Medicare and Medicaid. His budget cu...