Dialogue? Giving your opinion and insisting you're right is not dialogue.
Posted By: I do just fine, thank you. on 2006-03-10
In Reply to: Discussing ideas is antagonistic? - my 2 cents
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I agree you can't have a dialogue with the
but for lots of the others, such as Russia, Venezuela and much of South America, China, etc., our disagreements with them shouldn't send us into all-out war. (Especially with Russia and/or China, which might very likely WIN.)
I heard it to on the radio, the entire dialogue. He has been taken totally
x
Why It's IMPOSSIBLE to Have an Intelligent Dialogue with Conservative *Followers*
I would strongly advise watching the video. I saw Mr. Dean on this show, and everything started to make a lot of sense as to why it's impossible to have any kind of intelligent debate on these boards. In the couple times I have tried, I never received any substantive responses to the issues. I only received (and continue to receive) personal attacks.
Video: 50 year study says conservatives 'followers'
07/11/2006 @ 11:48 am
In an interview with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, former Nixon counsel John Dean explained a largely unknown 50 year academic study. The data shows that conservatives are much more likely to follow authoritarian leaders.
Dean discovered the ongoing study while researching his new book, Conservative Without Conscience.
Dean believes that the study helps to explain why the Republican party has been driven further right.
A rush transcript follows the video.
Video can be found at: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Video_50_year_study_says_conservatives_0711.html
DEAN: Goldwater Republicanism is really R.I.P. It's been put to rest by most of the people who are now active in moving the movement further to the right than it's ever been. I think that Senator [Goldwater], before he departed, was very distressed with Conservatism. In fact, it was our conversations back in 1994 that started this book. That's really where I began. We wanted to find answers to the question, Why were Republicans acting as they were? -- Why Conservatives had taken over the party and were being followed as easily as they were in taking the party where [Goldwater] didn't want it to go.
OLBERMANN: What did you find? -- In less than the 200 pages that the book goes into.
DEAN: I ran into a massive study that has really been going on 50 years now by academics. They've never really shared this with the general public. It's a remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality. Both those who are inclined to follow leaders and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. It was not the opinion of social scientists. It was information they drew by questioning large numbers of people -- hundreds of thousands of people -- in anonymous testing where [the subjects] conceded their innermost feelings and reactions to things. And it came out that most of these people were pre-qualified to be conservatives and this, did indeed, fit with the authoritarian personality.
OLBERMANN: Did the studies indicate that this really has anything to do with the political point of view? Would it be easier to impose authoritarianism over the right than it would the left? Is it theoretically possible that it could have gone in either direction and it's just a question of people who like to follow other people?
DEAN: They have found, really, maybe a small, 1%, of the left who will follow authoritarianism. Probably the far left. As far as widespread testing, it's just overwhelmingly conservative orientation.
OLBERMANN: There is an extraordinary amount of academic work that you quote in the book. A lot of it is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and may have faced other nations at other times. In German and Italy in the 30's, come into mind in particular. But, how does it apply now? To what degree should it scare us and to what degree is it something that might be forestalled?
DEAN: To me, it was something of an epiphany to run into this information. First, I'd never read about it before. I sort of worked my way into it until I found it. It's not generally known out there, what's going on. I think, from the best we can tell, these people -- the followers -- a few of them will change their ways when the realize that they are doing -- not even aware of what they are doing. The leaders, those inclined to dominate, they're not going to change for a second. They're going to be what they are. So, by and large, the reason I write about this is, I think we need to understand it. We need to realize that when you take a certain step of vote a certain way, heading in a certain direction, where this can end up. So, it's sort of a cautionary note. It's a warning as to where this can go. Other countries have gone there.
OLBERMANN: And the idea of leaders and followers going down this path or perhaps taking a country down this path requires -- this whole edifice requires and enemy. Communism, al Qaeda, Democrats, me... whoever for the two-minutes hate. I overuse the Orwellian analogies to nauseating proportions. But it really was, in reading what you wrote about, especially what the academics talked about. There was that two-minutes hate. There has to be an opponent, an enemy, to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart. Is that the gist of it?
DEAN: It is one of the things, believe it or not, that still holds conservatism together. There is many factions in conservatism and their dislike or hatred of those they betray as liberal, who will basically be anybody who disagrees with them, is one of the cohesive factors. There are a few others but that's certainly one of the basics. There's no question that, particularly the followers, they're very aggressive in their effort to pursue and help their authority figure out or authority beliefs out. They will do what ever needs to be done in many regards. They will blindly follow. They stay loyal too long and this is the frightening part of it.
OLBERMANN: Let me read something from the book. Let me read this one quote then I have a question about it. Many people believe that neoconservatives and many Republicans appreciate that they are more likely to maintain influence and control of the presidency if the nation remains under ever-increasing threats of terrorism, so they have no hesitation in pursuing policies that can provoke the potential terrorists throughout the world. That's ominous, not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counter-terror here which we've already argued that point on many occasions. Are you actually saying that they would set up -- encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a boogey man to have, again, that group to hate here -- more importantly, afraid of?
DEAN: What I'm saying is that there has been fear mongering, the likes of which we have not seen in a long time in this country. It happened early in the cold war. We got accustomed to it. We learned to live with it. We learned to understand what it was about and get it in proportion. We haven't done that yet with terrorism. And this administration is really capitalizing on it and using it for its' political advantage. No question, the academic testing show -- the empirical evidence shows -- when people are frightened, they tend to go to these authority figures. They tend to become more conservative. So, it's paid off for them politically to do this.
OLBERMANN: This all seems to require, not merely, venality or immorality but a kind of amorality where morals don't enter into it at all. We're right. So anything we do to preserve our process, our power -- even if it by itself is wrong -- it's right in the greater sense. It's that wonderful rationalization that everybody uses in small doses throughout their lives. But, is this idea, this sort of psychological sort of review of the whole thing, does it apply to Dick Cheney? Does it apply to George Bush? Does it apply to Bill Frist? Who are the names on these authoritarian figures?
DEAN: You just named three that I discuss at some length in the book. I focused in the book, not on the Bush Administration and Cheney and The President because they had really been there done that, but what I wanted to understand is what they have done is made it legitimate to have authoritarianism. It was already operating on Capitol Hill after the '94 control by the Republicans in Congress. It recreated the mood. It restructured Congress itself in a very authoritarian style, in the House in particular. The Senate hasn't gone there yet but it's going there because more House members are moving over. This atmosphere is what Bush and Cheney walked into. They are authoritarian personalities. Cheney much more so than Bush. They have made it legitimate and they have taken way past where anybody's ever taken it in the United States.
OLBERMANN: Our society's best defense against that is what? Do we have to hope, as you suggested, the people that follow, wise up and break away from this sort of lockstep salute to, of course, they're right, of course there are WMDs, of course there are terrorists, of course there is al Qaeda, of course everything is the way the president says it. Or do we rely on the hope that these are fanatics and fanatics always screw up because they would rather believe in their own cause than double-check their own math.
DEAN: The lead researcher in this field told me, he said, I look at the numbers of the United States and I see about 23% of the population who are pure right-wing authoritarian followers. They're not going to change. They're going to march over the cliff. The best thing to deal with them -- and they're growing, and they have a tremendous influence on Republican politics -- The best defense is understanding them, to realize what they are doing, how they're doing it and how they operate. Then it can be kept in perspective and they can be seen for what they are.
You're entitled to your opinion. I guess it depends on what side of the spectrum you're on.nm
x
The thing is you're not giving him
I agree, we were brutally raped by the last adminstration and I am also wary, but for crying out loud, you are making these statements after less than a week in office. You can't justify that by saying you're "keeping an eye" on the government? If that statement is true, then you have to give the man a REASONABLE amount of time to implement his agenda. The engine hasn't even cooled down on the moving trucks yet. Don't be unrealistic, you lose credibility that way.
The smart ones are giving the $$ back. They're
.
Oh good, thanks for replying. Glad they're not just giving it to the right....lol...thx.
:-)
You're entitled to your opinion.
No matter how skewed it is. 
"Democrats, too, are insisting that the rescue ....sm
include mortgage help to let struggling homeowners avoid foreclosures. They are also considering attaching additional midle class assistance to the legislation despite a request from Bust to avoid adding controversial items that could delay action. An expansion of jobless benefits was one possbility."
Translation == dems (i.e., Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, et al.) are going to try (and probably succeed, buried in deep in the bill) to add at least $50 million more to this bill for their social agenda programs, that we the people are going to foot, yet again.
Imagine that. Nice way to pile on Democrats....nice
People keep insisting BC issue has been debunked
You really do need a reality check here. Obama "could be" the next president? The electoral college is going to confirm the WAY more than comfortable 192 electoral vote lead he holds over McCain (365 vs 173). I hate to break this to you, but the pubs' October surprise is not going to be a November surprise, December surprise, a 2009 surprise or any other kind of surprise. I have answered your BC ramblings before and will not take any more of my time to try to get this through your thick skull again. Like I said, if I were you I would not hold my breath. Everything else in your post is pure fantasy. I prefer to take my politics with some semblance of substance.
Palin, the candidate that just keeps giving and giving...
x
Your opinion of torture is your opinion. Tough
nm
History is history and opinion is opinion. You need to learn the difference.
x
what are you giving up?
What are some things that you and/or your family are giving up due to the high price of gas and now the rise in food prices? My family - just me and my husband now - buy 2 large packs of water at Sam's every 2 weeks and drink this, sometimes getting some crystal light or something to put in it. We eat a meal once a week and that's it. Needless to say - we are both losing weight. But to fill up his truck - that's $100 a week - even though he only works 3 days a week now - and I work at home - so I only go out twice a month - to a dr. appointment and then the second time to get the water.
I'm giving up
It is so hard to have a positive outlook on society anymore. I think I should have been born about 100 years ago. This country has no more morals, all people care about is political correctness and not stepping on anyone's toes. The God of this nation has been pushed out, and people want to know why kids are shooting each other. We have become so pompous we think we can take care of ourselves. I want to live in a time when women respected their bodies and didn't just give it up to anyone. Where rapist were few and far between because they would be hanged if caught. They couldn't wiggle their way out of the judicial system on a technicality. Where we didn't need welfare because neighbor helped neighbor and everyone worked hard and worked together. Where there wasn't an obesity problem because kids played outside from after school until "the street lamp came on". Where people knew God and had a relationship with him. Where "love thy neighbor" was not just a commandment, but an action.
At 22 years old, I wonder if there will be an USA when I'm 40? Is it possible for our nation to survive at the rapid rate of decline we are experiencing for 18 more years? I used to pray to Jesus to wait to come, knowing it was selfish, because I knew so many people who didn't know his love and were not saved, including my own parents, and it killed me to think that we may be separated eternally because of that. Now I just can't help but to pray that He comes soon. All these movies about a post apocalyptic United States don't seem so far fetched now, minus all the zombies that is. We have to wake up. We need to fall to our knees and beg God for forgiveness and beg him to come back to our nation. If you don't believe in Him or want to scoff at me for saying this, I am so sorry. I am so sorry that you do not know the love of Christ. I just hope you get to know Him before it's to late.
God help us.
Not particularly.....just giving
the board a good lookover before I go lie down.
Too many with no b*lls giving in to a few who believe
nm
For all those that think O is giving you a tax cut.....what
//
You are giving her credit for something
she will NEVER do. She will never unite the party. She will only go on and on and on until it is impossible for a democrat to win this year, making McCain the president. All she wants is to be president, and if Obama gets in there, she will have to wait until 2016 when she'll be going on age 68. She doesn't care about the country or the democratic party. All she cares about is power, not about anything but HER and Bill. Sad, but the truth.
Um, excuse me, since when did giving
intelligent, well thought-out replies and giving one's opinion constitute bullying?
Gimme a break. Sam has every right to be here and she brings a lot to this board. Maybe if those who bash follow her lead in effective posting, the atmosphere here would be shall I say more of a good debate than a circus?
No, he's just giving them HOPE. Something that
Get used to it. She's the story that just keeps on giving
there will be plenty more where that comes from.
Why are you being so mean to everyone giving the O in Obama a bad name!
nm
I am giving him a chance and I
know that this isn't a quick fix. I'm realistic enough to know Obama cannot wave a magic wand and make this all go away. I'm just saying that for a man who hasnt' been pres for a whole week......he has made a lot of promises already with 2 already broken. I'm not trying to get a lynching mob together. I just want to stay informed of what my president and the government is doing because I refuse to just assume they are making the right decisions. Holy crap people.....seriously! Xanax....try some.
You mean too many with brains giving in.
There is a big difference between intelligence and lack of cahones.
I was just giving figures from what they said.
Dont' burn me for that.
AIG - the gift that keeps on giving. sm
Beginning with the first bailout under the Bush administration, and accelerating apace (which one wouldn't have thought possible) under Obama, the ineptitude in dealing with every aspect of the current economic problems is simpy staggering.
This ineptitude includes both Presidents, both Treasury secretaries, the man who was/is Fed chairman under both Presidents(Bernanke), Congress, and regulatory agencies such as the SEC and FDIC.
Consider this interesting little fact: It has taken six months for the Ethics Committee to investigate some fairly simple charges of financial misconduct by Charlie Rangel, but Congress can pass three major bills, two of which were so large they couldn't be read by anyone, in a matter of a few days (and in the case of the third bill which unconstitutionally taxes AIG bonuses, in just one day).
My dear friends, this country is in trouble. The government is behaving impulsively and has, in my long life, never before been in such a state of disarray. Our response to the financial crisis is beginning to look like nothing so exquisitely as a Chinese fire drill.
We are apparently determined to prove to the world that we're going to make a pig's breakfast out of this crisis, but hey...at least we did it fast!
Impulsive and reckless government - THAT is what the American people (and the world) are seeing, and THAT is what I believe is beginning to frighten us even more than the economic crisis itself.
No, the administrator is not giving me any information, nor would I ask. sm
I made a rejoiner when you once again accused me of something I didn't do (see above posts). Have you got all the meat off this bone yet!
Very sad. Our soldiers are giving their lives....sm
and they are coming home severly injured to less than adequate medical care after excellent care in the field, no psychological counseling, no support for their families, deplorable living conditions, and on and on. I believe this war is wrong but support the troops 100%. Disgraceful!
Okay, now those of who make $50,000 are giving to those who won't work
Every year at tax time, I have to pay more taxes, more taxes, more taxes. Every year at tax time, my friends and family members who make less than me get back these huge checks of 3, 4, and 5 thousand dollars because of earned income - did they earn that money? No, it is coming out of our checks to give to them. Can't ya'll see that is the way it works now, but it is not just the people with a lot of money giving it? It is us - the middle class!
First of all, there is nothing wrong with giving money...sm
to an organization to get out the vote. The trouble is there was no oversight by ACORN to ensure that the registrations to vote were legit.
Not ignorant, just giving a truism. nm
m
I don't agree with not giving them the bailout.
I think part of the problem is that now the foreign car makers who have plants here want a piece of the pie if the big 3 get it. I think that's what is turning them off.
They should never have started this bailout crap. I was against it from the start. But do our lawmakers listen to us? Nope. They should have held a special election and let the people vote on it.
I think we need to start throwing out the guys who are not listening to their constiuents. A good wake up call might just straighten these jerks up.
Sorry, I don't feel like giving him a break.
He has trampled the Constitution, declared himself to be the "decider," started a war in a country that did nothing to provoke it, run this country into the ground while making his good friends on Wall Street richer. And let's not forget his "boss," D*ck Cheney. (Well I'll be danged, I had to take the "i" out of his name as when I went to submit the post it said it was a bad word.) LOL Bush had his chance at a "break." I gave him 2 thumbs up after his speech following 9/11 and he blew it and that was just the beginning of his blowing everything that he came in contact with. Sorry...Bush has already had his break from me and he gets no more. I'd be happy to buy him a 1 way bus ticket back to Texas myself....assuming Texas wants him, which I seriously doubt.
Obama I will give a break and if he doesn't hold up to what he has said he will do I'll be all over him like ugly on an ape all over this board and any other one I can find.
So giving tax breaks & loopholes to the
ultra-wealthy top few percent & the corporations, and incentives to offshore, (the republican way), thereby putting us in the economic crisis that we're in right now & during the Great Depression is really a great plan that works so well... NOT. It took a Democrat to un-do the republican mess during the Great Depression, and it's going to take a Democrat now to un-do Bush's economic nightmare he's created for us. Time and time again, every republican creates a recession and/or depression, and we have a thriving economy under Democrats, and I can understand corporations and ultra-rich people voting republican, but I have no respect for any working person who votes republican because they're just not bothering to pay attention. And thanks a lot for the Bush nightmare by the way.
She should be giving interview and she is most certainly is not "whining"
I don't agree with you on this one. I just watched different news stations and all say pretty much the same thing. They are saying at least she is not playing the victim like HC did with her phony crying episodes and the poor me they're picking on me because blah, blah, blah.
Gov. Palin should be giving interviews (just like Kerry and Edwards did after the last election). The public also deserves the right to know how she was treated. Whether you like her or not the truth is she was treated most unfairly and disrespectfully. She's not whining about it. In fact time and time again she has said she has a tough skin and you don't make it in politics by having a thin skin. You take the rolls with the punches and you just keep going. She said it takes a lot more than what has been dealt to her to make her want to quit. You can't let yourself get beaten down. Did she do well during the Couric interview? No she did not. I heard a news reporter on MSNBC say afterward that to be totally fair you could see she was quite nervous. Were there questions she should have known the answer to, you bet there was, but in all fairness she should have never agreed to be interviewed by Katie Couric, who was most definitely one out to destroy her. There are plenty of reporters who are fair that could have treated her respectfully. Katie Couric did not and Katie Couric even admitted to meeting with someone to "bone up" on how to make an interviewee look bad. Did the news media treat her unfairly through the election. Most certainly. And they are still doing it. Did they treat the democrat woman (HC) differently than the republican woman (SP) you bet. I watched it every day. Is Caroline Kennedy being treated differently, My gosh do you even have to ask that question? Caroline Kennedy (whom the media is calling Princess Caroline) is being treated like royalty by the media. I don't know why because the Kennedy's are not royalty. But the media has always treated them that way. We all know that if Gov. Palin was running on the democrat ticket she would have been treated with grace and dignity. The media is in love with the democratic party and have wanted to destroy the republicans for a long time (Olberman, Maddow, Matthews, CNN, etc). They had their hay-day and had a blast doing it, while at the same time poo-pooing the poor me, everyone is picking on us routine. I think it's time America deserved the truth. I'm not saying the media lost the election for the republicans because they didn't. John McCain/GOP did that all by themselves himself (and without the help of Sarah Palin). But the media's love affair with Barack and the democrats were so blatanly obvious it was sickening. I watched the interviews. Never did I see Barack or Hillary get the kind of questions they gave to McCain and Palin and it was so obvious after awhile I just lost interest. Which by the way it was interesting to see the media never interviewed Biden or covered him the way they did Palin. The news media knew not to interview the next VP because he would certainly say something that would screw up their chances, but yet they went after the republican VP candidate. So once again another display of how unfairly the media treated certain people.
I will most definitely watch the interview. I think Sarah Palin is a fine person and I hope to see more of her, but in honesty after what the political rape of Sarah Palin and what the media and public has done to her and her family I wouldn't blame her not going through the witch hunt/inquisition again.
Well, giving Obama an 80% approval before
nm
I don't think giving NASA more money
or increasing WELFARE or "honey bee insurance" creates job. None of these items belong in a stimulus package. It belongs in a BUDGET, not STIMULUS.
That's what some people can't understand. There are over 600 pages in this package and hardly anything helps the people.
You are giving the Republicans WAY too much credit.. sm
Clinton was the one who started the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fiasco by "helping" folks who couldn't afford a house to have one. Bush called for reforming FM/FM, but the Democrats fought him down on that one, with Barney Frank leading the charge saying that they were not in trouble.
Now with Obama leading the way to financial disaster for the US with his frantic spending, you just can't lay this all at the door of the Republicans.
Personally, I think both parties are flawed and there needs to be a thorough housecleaning, starting at the top, but I don't know if there is anyone left in this country, even T. Boone Pickens or H. Ross Perot, who could straighten this mess out.
Let me say that I hate giving up my money too, but -
I agree with the OP. I feel like everyone is getting really mad about it and all along nobody has been saying anything or doing anything, but now that Obama is President everyone is fussing like it is something he just started.
I hate turning over 25% of my check to somebody I don't know every week... I hate the fact that I bust my butt and barely get by and my friends have it great because they get EIC of 6000-7000 a year and no money held out of their check for taxes during the year, therefore making their $10 an hour equal to/or surpassing my $20 an hour.
I hate that we pay thousands of dollars every month to schools to teach our chidren and the teachers are not teaching them and are making $50-75,000 a year for doing not much more than babysitting! I hate that we have 6 teachers in our small county that they made them a job because they had money to spend and all they do is go to workshops to come back and tell the other teachers what they should be doing - that they never do.
I hate that we are using schools as babysitters for handicapped children who cannot learn in any way and yet they are "entitled" to an education, and therefore that money cannot be spent on things that the other children need... I'm sorry if that steps on some toes, but school is not the place for some of these kids that get sent there. If you want specific examples of the children I am talking about - God love them - I will provide them to you. If a child can learn even basics, then I say send him to school and let him learn as much as he can to help his/her, but a child who is deaf, blind, severely mentally retarded, has constant seizures, wears diapers at 10 years old, and has to be restrained into a wheelchair and by law has to have 2 paraprofessionals assigned to just them all day does not belong in a public school. Don't you think that is wasting our tax money?
I hate that I am killing myself to pay taxes and the politicians are not paying them and nobody is doing a darn thing about it...
Want me to go on about the things I hate - I am just like you all. I just think you are mad at the wrong people.
If a program is in place and you meet the guidelines to utilize the program, I don't blame anybody for using it. I don't care what it is. Lots of people have paid into the system and are just getting back some of what they are entitled to. Believe me, right now, if I could get foodstamps, I would be right there getting them; at least that way I would be able to stay in my home and not have to worry each month about where my rent is coming from.
you are the kind giving Christians a bad name
How hypocritical can you be? This is not God's work and any Christian would know it.
Taking from the poor, giving to the rich
US House of Representatives approves $50 billion in social cuts
By Joseph Kay
19 November 2005
In the early hours of Friday morning, the House of Representatives
passed a budget reconciliation bill that includes cuts of nearly $50
billion over five years, primarily in social programs for the poor.
At the same time, Congress is considering extending tax cuts that
overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy in the amount of $60 billion-$70
billion over the same period.
The budget reconciliation bill modifies requirements for mandatory
spending programs, in particular, entitlement programs such as
Medicaid, Social Security, Food Stamps and Medicare. Unlike the rest
of government outlays, known as discretionary spending, which are
allocated each year in appropriation bills, spending for these
mandatory programs is determined by legal requirements. If the
reconciliation bill is signed into law, it will mark the first time
since 1997 that entitlement programs have been slashed.
The House passed the bill 217-215 after Republican leaders kept the
vote open 25 minutes to drum up sufficient support. It will now go
to a House-Senate conference committee, where negotiators from the
two chambers will work out a compromise between the House bill and a
Senate bill passed earlier this month.
The Senate version includes cuts amounting to $35 billion over five
years. While leaving out some of the most egregious cuts in the
House version, the Senate bill includes one major provision left out
by the House: the opening up of the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR) for oil exploration.
The compromise will then be subject to a final vote in both chambers
before going to President Bush to be signed into law.
Major cuts in the House bill include:
* Cutting Medicaid spending by $11.8 billion. The bill would place
new restrictions on the ability of elderly people to transfer assets
to relatives so as to become eligible for Medicaid, and would allow
states to charge higher premiums and co-payments for emergency room
visits and some drugs. It would give states greater discretion to
cut services for low-income recipients who earn more than the
poverty level, including such services as eye and ear care.
* A $14.3 billion reduction in spending on financial assistance for
college students. The bill repeals a previous 6.8 percent cap on
interest rates for federal student loans, increasing it to 8.25
percent. One estimate calculates that this would lead to an increase
of $5,800 in payments for a college student graduating with a debt
load of $17,500. The bill includes other increases in taxes and
interest on a variety of loans, as well as a provision to reduce
subsidies to lenders.
* Cuts in the Food Stamp program totaling $700 million. The bill
would end a provision that automatically enrolls welfare recipients
in Food Stamps, denying eligibility to approximately 165,000 people,
mainly among the working poor. It would deny Food Stamps to
approximately 70,000 legal immigrants by extending the waiting
period for eligibility from five to seven years. Since eligibility
for Food Stamps automatically gives children access to free school
lunches, thousands of students may be stripped of this benefit. This
cut will worsen an already growing problem of hunger in the US. An
article in the Boston Globe of October 29 noted, The number of
people who are hungry because they cannot afford to buy enough food
rose to 38.2 million in 2004, an increase of 7 million in five
years. The number represents nearly 12 percent of US households.
* Other measures include nearly $5 billion in cuts associated with
child support enforcement; $577 million in cuts for child welfare
programs; a reduction of $732 million in social security income
payments, including payments to some disabled people; and more
stringent work requirements for welfare eligibility.
House passage of these draconian measures demonstrates the
determination of the ruling elite to continue its assault on social
programs. Hurricane Katrina, which laid bare the persistence of
poverty and the growth of social inequality, as well as the
devastating consequences of decades of neglect of the social
infrastructure, is being used as an excuse to accelerate the very
policies that compounded the disaster.
The position of the Bush administration and the Republican-
controlled Congress is that the tens of billions appropriated for
immediate hurricane relief and reconstruction in New Orleans and
other Gulf Coast areas must be offset by a more determined assault
on entitlement programs for working people and the poor. At the same
time, there is to be no retreat in providing tax windfalls for big
business and the rich.
This was spelled out in a summary of an earlier version of the bill
published by the House Budget Committee, which stated that the bill
was intended to provide a down-payment toward hurricane recovery
and reconstruction costs and begin a longer-term effort at slowing
the growth of entitlement spending and stimulate reform of
entitlement programs, many of which are outdated, inefficient, and
excessively costly.
Speaking before the right-wing think tank, the Heritage Foundation,
Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader who was forced to step
down after being indicted on corruption charges, made clear that the
budget was intended to spearhead a permanent rollback of social
programs. He said the budget would not only provide the nation
immediate fiscal relief, but also institute permanent reforms of the
way our government spends money and solves problems.
Last month, Bush urged Republican congressmen to push the envelope
when it comes to cutting spending. On Friday, he welcomed the House
bill and called for Congress to quickly pass a final version for him
to sign into law.
The ultimate bill as agreed by the conference committee will likely
include many of the cuts in the House bill. Senate leaders,
moreover, have vowed to reject any bill that does not include the
opening up of the ANWR, which has been a major goal of the energy
industry and the Bush administration.
At the same time that Congress is negotiating these cuts in social
spending, it is preparing the passage of a separate tax cut
reconciliation bill. The two bills were deliberately separated in an
effort to obscure the connection between tax cuts for the wealthy
and cuts in social programs.
Early on Friday, the Senate passed a bill that would cut taxes by
$60 billion over five years. This includes $30 billion in cuts
resulting from an extension in exemptions to the alternative minimum
tax. It also includes $7 billion in tax cuts for corporations as
part of Bush's so-called Gulf Opportunity Zone—a scheme to use the
hurricane as an opportunity to give handouts to businesses. The
Senate rejected any windfall tax on record oil company profits;
however, it did include an accounting rule change that is expected
to increase taxes for oil companies by about $4.3 billion over five
years.
The House is considering a companion bill. However, its version
would focus on extending tax cuts on dividends and capital gains
that are not due to expire until 2008. These taxes are paid
overwhelmingly by the wealthy. Once the House version is passed, the
two bills will go to a conference committee. Bush has vowed to veto
any bill that includes the accounting change for oil companies.
There is some nervousness within the political establishment over
the budget process. House Republican leaders were forced to delay
their budget bill for a week as they sought to win enough support
within their own party to push the bill through, and the final
version slightly pared down some of the cuts in Food Stamps and
other programs.
The two measures—the one cutting social programs for the poor, and
the other providing tax cuts for the rich—constitute such a blatant
redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top that several
Republicans have opposed the measures. Congressional elections are
only a year away, and the mounting popular opposition to the Bush
administration has caused Republican representatives to fear losing
their seats.
On Thursday, the House voted down the appropriations bill for the
departments of Labor, Education and Health and Human Services, after
the defection of a number of Republicans. The bill, which includes
cuts in various pet projects for representatives as well as in
social programs such as rural health care, may have to be modified
or attached to the defense appropriations bill in order to push it
through.
In spite of this nervousness, the consensus within the ruling elite
is that social programs must be cut one way or another. Democratic
opposition to the size of the current cuts notwithstanding, both
parties agree on this basic policy, which has been ongoing for more
than a quarter century.
The Democrats are themselves proposing no significant measures—
whether for jobs, housing, health care or education—to deal with the
acute social crisis exposed by the Hurricane Katrina disaster,
underscoring their abandonment of any policy of social reform.
The current budget reconciliation process is in many ways a
continuation and deepening of cuts initiated by the Clinton
administration, which ended welfare as a federal entitlement. The
1996 budget act, moreover, permanently barred legal immigrants from
receiving Food Stamps. In 2001, the Bush administration modified
this provision to allow legal immigrants to receive Food Stamps
after a five-year waiting period. The House is now proposing to
extend the waiting period to seven years.
The bulk of the tax cuts for the wealthy enacted under Bush were
voted in with the support of the Democratic Party leadership, while
at the state level Democratic governors are overseeing massive cuts
in Medicaid and education programs.
The new budget bill places in sharp relief the fact that the entire
political system is an instrument of big business, dedicated to
increasing the wealth of a financial aristocracy at the expense of
the working class. It is one more _expression of the crisis and rot
of the profit system.
I remember reading that Mississippi is a very giving
nm
See my msg above please - you should not begrudge giving to those who CAN'T work. How selfish of
x
Instead of giving us specifics of what John McCain will....sm
do if we elect him you continue to avoid specifics and, like Sarah Palin, ignore the question and disparage the opposition instead. How is he going to reform Washington, how is he going to make healthcare more affordable, how is he going to freeze spending, and which programs does he consider nonessential? Not your opinion, what does he say specifically he will do.
I've been giving your question some thought
Webster defines socialism as "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or government ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods".
Now, that being established, my sister gave my 6-year-old nephew this analogy after he said he'd vote for Barack because "he has a cool name." She said the kids in his class get prize tickets for doing homework, raising their hands, etc. She said to my nephew, now suppose you have 3 tickets and the girl next to you has 3 tickets, but the boy across from you doesn't have any tickets because he acts up and doesn't do his homework or whatever. Now suppose your teacher says to you and the girl beside you to each give 2 of your tickets to the boy that doesn't have any so you all have tickets. His response...Well, that's not fair. He didn't EARN any tickets.
If a first grader gets it, I don't see why the supposed adults in our society don't get it. So, kids, get ready to give away even more of what you have to those that don't have anything because they're here illegally or too lazy to work and have a gigantic sense of entitlement. After all, we have to be FAIR!!! Right?
Higher taxes are not my interest, neither is giving.
@
Also, so what if she is giving the clothes to charity, she sneakily did not say they were given to h
She never disclosed the clothes were bought with campaign funds. She didn't think it would come out, but I am not running for anything and I am not dumb enough to think I wouldn't be scrutinized for everything I do and had done. I just don't think she is a very bright bulb and I have read the good with the bad and feel I made an informed decision for myself. I just have a hard time with people in our profession that would fall for someone like her.
even brittany stopped giving interviews
She is under no obligation to stay in the spotlight and should decline all further interviews. seriously.
the folly is in giving all the power to a union...
The union may not be a thing of the past but their concern for the average worker is and their usefulness is. Now they are greedy and selfish entities in and of themselves.
Wailin Palin -- the gift that just keeps on giving...(sm)
That's right...she's back. Now she's giving interviews for a documentary. She's whining about how everything is her handler's fault, admitting that she bombed the first Couric interview but the handler's made her go back for more. She's saying Caroline Kennedy is getting different treatment because she is in a different "class." Yeah right, Caroline is getting killed by the media right now. And my personal favorite, she said if she had run on the democratic ticket she would have been treated differently. What a goof.
|
