Whining rats with no hair and one leg.
|
|
Comments |
Mail to a Friend
Categories: Equality / Civil Rights, Civil Liberties / Privacy, Peace & Social Justice, Foreign Policy & Security, Economic Fairness & Security, Environment / Conservation, Smart Energy Policy, Public Infrastructure / Transportation, Effective & Ethical Government, Electoral Reform, Affordable Healthcare, Education, Consumer and Worker Protection, Property Rights, Separation of Powers / Federalism, Media Accountability, Research & Technology, Corporate Accountability / Workers' Rights, Crime & Penal Reform, Budget Priorities, Religion, Immigration, Reproductive Rights, All Network Posts: Front Page
Categories: Equality / Civil Rights, Civil Liberties / Privacy, Peace & Social Justice, Foreign Policy & Security, Economic Fairness & Security, Environment / Conservation, Smart Energy Policy, Public Infrastructure / Transportation, Effective & Ethical Government, Electoral Reform, Affordable Healthcare, Education, Consumer and Worker Protection, Property Rights, Separation of Powers / Federalism, Media Accountability, Research & Technology, Corporate Accountability / Workers' Rights, Crime & Penal Reform, Budget Priorities, Religion, Immigration, Reproductive Rights, All Network Posts: Front Page
Phil Graham former Senator and current Economic advisor to Presidential candidate John Mc Cain, believes we're a nation of whiners. If he were a liberal he'd be accused of hating America. I wouldn't go that far but it does appears Graham hates Americans enough to call them whiners and tell us any economic woes we are experiencing are merely figments of our whining imagination. Can you blame him? After all, a complaint against our economy is a direct attack on the failure of the economic philosophy Graham and his conservative buddies worked so hard to build. He was instrumental in de-regulating the home mortgage industry himself. If you lost your home because you were duped into signing a flexible rate mortgage by being told you could re-do it later, you can thank conservative economics and Phil Graham personally.
This is nothing new. For almost four decades, since Reagan's voo doo economics, we have seen the steady shift of government to favor industry over all else. Any attempt to shackle corporate abuse or to keep the market a fair playing field was killed. Exxon can ruin the lives of thousands of people, take away their livelihood and their food source, killing thousands of animals and ruining the environment for centuries and get off with a slap on the wrists.
Enron can cause rolling black outs
that wind up killing people, and commerce,
to make a buck and the White House will
cover for them too.
The federal government will allow a company to deny thousands of loyal workers their pensions and health care, then ignore them. Don't you think the government has an obligation to protect it's citizens from this? I mean what do we pay taxes for?
Giving more to big business isn't a conservative trait alone of course. This includes Bill Clinton too. He signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that effectively removed rules that prevented one company purchasing all the media sources for any particular area of the country.
Can anyone honestly say the
profit driven giant media conglomerates
have provided better news?
I'm not talking about the dreaded Fairness Doctrine. I'm talking about anti-trust laws going back to Republican Teddy Roosevelt. These laws kept a single entity from owning too much because all too often that lead to a handful of powerful people controlling many living in poverty. The Gilded Age that lead to our Great Depression was this scenario, and just like today, government was bought and paid for.
Teddy Roosevelt would kick
Phil Graham's arse across
Texas, turn around and do
it again.
His spirit shifted America to adopt child labor laws and labor unions. To keep wealthy people from wielding too much power, government had to level the playing field and give regular folks a chance at the American dream. Keep in mind, many of the things we take for granted now, were because of progressives of yesterday. If we hadn't, your drinking water would be less safe to drink, your food would be less safe to eat. Your work environment would be less safe, your wage much less, and your rights fewer.
The conservative economic ideology mirrors
the robber baron's of yesterday. Power to a
few over the many.
They refuse to recognize the Constitution's purpose beyond National Defense to promoting the general Welfare. As we've seen from recent Supreme Court decisions that favor the "big guy" over the little guy, they believe the Constitution prevents government from doing what they allow industry to do to us all the time.
This liberal believes that government also has an obligation to protect citizen's equal protection rights from unfair business practices. Chief Justice John Robert's stated during his confirmation hearings, that when the Constitution said the little guy wins he'd rule for the little guy. And of course, when the big guy wins.... well, you know the rest. The Constitution ain't for the big guy at all though. It's purpose is to protect the little guy, to provide an environment that allows the little guy to become a big guy if they work hard enough.
Can we all agree there's too much money influencing Washington? Can we agree that most of that money comes from and pays for corporate interests? The telecom industry just bought votes for example, including Obama's in my opinion, to get immunity from costly civil cases. Can we agree too, that as Americans we deserve certain things?
We deserve protection from getting ripped off
and from having to suffer through a heat wave
so an energy company can reap greater
rewards for their share holders.
We deserve a decent wage and safe working conditions. We deserve low crime and help in the face of a tragic loss or terrible situation. We deserve, as citizens, open and honest government that represents us and acts in our best interests not solely corporate interests. We deserve the promise of the Constitution fulfilled because
we are from the best country,
with the most freedom and the
greatest liberty, of any other
nation of any other time.
We have a chance to rise above our circumstances because of that promise in the Constitution. But it only works, if we make the government uphold their collective oath of office. To honor and protect it. It's almost as if we have a collective amnesia as to the reality of our greatness. We are ignoring the very foundation of our and other, democracies.
Phil Graham's comments illustrate not only a callous disconnect towards Americans who are actually suffering, it defines the attitude of the conservative mindset today. It defines a philosophy of government that works for business, even should be run as a business and ignores it's obligation and Constitutional duty to ensure equal protection. I'm not anti-capitalist. I just believe there needs to be government regulation, under our supervision, that balances the needs of business with the needs of the citizen.
This isn't a radical concept.
Teddy Roosevelt to FDR to JFK with Dwight Eisenhower and Harry Truman in between, knew that laws must be enacted to ensure that power and prosperity needed to be balanced between business and the people. That this was a Constitutional obligation to "promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." This is not consistent with Phil Graham's economic dogma. He should feel ashamed for dismissing the suffering of millions of folks, at his hand no less. I hope that decades form now, we remember the failure of this mode of thinking and have abandoned it for good.
This is nothing new. For almost four decades, since Reagan's voo doo economics, we have seen the steady shift of government to favor industry over all else. Any attempt to shackle corporate abuse or to keep the market a fair playing field was killed. Exxon can ruin the lives of thousands of people, take away their livelihood and their food source, killing thousands of animals and ruining the environment for centuries and get off with a slap on the wrists.
Enron can cause rolling black outs
that wind up killing people, and commerce,
to make a buck and the White House will
cover for them too.
The federal government will allow a company to deny thousands of loyal workers their pensions and health care, then ignore them. Don't you think the government has an obligation to protect it's citizens from this? I mean what do we pay taxes for?
Giving more to big business isn't a conservative trait alone of course. This includes Bill Clinton too. He signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that effectively removed rules that prevented one company purchasing all the media sources for any particular area of the country.
Can anyone honestly say the
profit driven giant media conglomerates
have provided better news?
I'm not talking about the dreaded Fairness Doctrine. I'm talking about anti-trust laws going back to Republican Teddy Roosevelt. These laws kept a single entity from owning too much because all too often that lead to a handful of powerful people controlling many living in poverty. The Gilded Age that lead to our Great Depression was this scenario, and just like today, government was bought and paid for.
Teddy Roosevelt would kick
Phil Graham's arse across
Texas, turn around and do
it again.
His spirit shifted America to adopt child labor laws and labor unions. To keep wealthy people from wielding too much power, government had to level the playing field and give regular folks a chance at the American dream. Keep in mind, many of the things we take for granted now, were because of progressives of yesterday. If we hadn't, your drinking water would be less safe to drink, your food would be less safe to eat. Your work environment would be less safe, your wage much less, and your rights fewer.
The conservative economic ideology mirrors
the robber baron's of yesterday. Power to a
few over the many.
They refuse to recognize the Constitution's purpose beyond National Defense to promoting the general Welfare. As we've seen from recent Supreme Court decisions that favor the "big guy" over the little guy, they believe the Constitution prevents government from doing what they allow industry to do to us all the time.
This liberal believes that government also has an obligation to protect citizen's equal protection rights from unfair business practices. Chief Justice John Robert's stated during his confirmation hearings, that when the Constitution said the little guy wins he'd rule for the little guy. And of course, when the big guy wins.... well, you know the rest. The Constitution ain't for the big guy at all though. It's purpose is to protect the little guy, to provide an environment that allows the little guy to become a big guy if they work hard enough.
Can we all agree there's too much money influencing Washington? Can we agree that most of that money comes from and pays for corporate interests? The telecom industry just bought votes for example, including Obama's in my opinion, to get immunity from costly civil cases. Can we agree too, that as Americans we deserve certain things?
We deserve protection from getting ripped off
and from having to suffer through a heat wave
so an energy company can reap greater
rewards for their share holders.
We deserve a decent wage and safe working conditions. We deserve low crime and help in the face of a tragic loss or terrible situation. We deserve, as citizens, open and honest government that represents us and acts in our best interests not solely corporate interests. We deserve the promise of the Constitution fulfilled because
we are from the best country,
with the most freedom and the
greatest liberty, of any other
nation of any other time.
We have a chance to rise above our circumstances because of that promise in the Constitution. But it only works, if we make the government uphold their collective oath of office. To honor and protect it. It's almost as if we have a collective amnesia as to the reality of our greatness. We are ignoring the very foundation of our and other, democracies.
Phil Graham's comments illustrate not only a callous disconnect towards Americans who are actually suffering, it defines the attitude of the conservative mindset today. It defines a philosophy of government that works for business, even should be run as a business and ignores it's obligation and Constitutional duty to ensure equal protection. I'm not anti-capitalist. I just believe there needs to be government regulation, under our supervision, that balances the needs of business with the needs of the citizen.
This isn't a radical concept.
Teddy Roosevelt to FDR to JFK with Dwight Eisenhower and Harry Truman in between, knew that laws must be enacted to ensure that power and prosperity needed to be balanced between business and the people. That this was a Constitutional obligation to "promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." This is not consistent with Phil Graham's economic dogma. He should feel ashamed for dismissing the suffering of millions of folks, at his hand no less. I hope that decades form now, we remember the failure of this mode of thinking and have abandoned it for good.
