Republicans Hate The Middle Class, Labor, and Government

The attack on government, (along with labor and the middle class,) began in the early 1980's with Ronald Reagan.

"The nine words that I fear the most are 'I'm with the government, and I'm here to help.'" Of course, after Reagan delivered this line on a few occasions, it was always followed by chuckles from his audience. But what was Reagan and his conservative movement really saying? They were saying they don't believe in government. How do you expect them to govern then?

We need only look back to hurricane Katrina and to see how a government which can't govern, reacts to a national crisis. Or take for example, the thwarted attack on Social Security, for a "privatized" system, that no matter how you crunched the numbers, did nothing to address any short falls the system may encounter in 40 years.

All that scheme really proposed was an attempt by anti-government, anti-democratic conservatives, to "shrink government down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." as conservative brain, Grover Norquist stated. It always seems to boil down to the private sector and the free market will cure all.

Our founders created a government that was of the people, by the people, for the people. We, as a collective whole, decide that it is in our best interest as a society, to have certain programs that benefit society. Conservatives want to call such things "socialism." Things like the socialist Social Security system, like the socialist public education system, like socialist police departments, like the socialist fire departments, like the socialist military. Oops, wait, the military is ok.

The mistake that many Liberals and Progressives make, is to focus their wrath on George W. Bush. In essence making an unpopular president the fall guy for a movement that started over 40 years ago.

The true enemy of democracy and freedom is the conservative agenda. It's bigger then Bush, Cheney, Abrahmoff, Rove, or any single Republican extremist that draws the ire of the masses. It's about a movement that doesn't believe in democracy. It doesn't believe in rule by the people. It believes in rule by multinational corporations. It believes in a Aristocracy. Wealth and power to the few, as the rest of us become serfs to their accumulating monopolies.

The Republicans/conservatives don't serve the best interest of the public as a whole. Try to find 1 law introduced by Republican's that has served the benefit of the people and not corporations in the past 6 years.

These traitors to democracy don't believe in our system of government. They are the same corporate royalists that took arms against the insurgent colonists in the Revolutionary War. There agenda is not new.

These are the people that so incompetently run or government today. Remember, you can't govern if you don't believe in government. The Republican's and conservatives don't believe in government.

__________________
AMERICA LAND OF THE FREE HOME OF THE BRAVE--BECAUSE OF OUR CONSTITUTION.

I beleive in goverment but I should be responsible for my on decisions.

__________________
An informed voter scares the Goverment lackeys.

An American first and always a Conservative.

The attack on labor and the middle class began in 1964 with LBJ's "war on poverty" (really just another name for salary redistribution).

__________________
If you want change stop electing "liberal: democrats and "radical" Republicans. Find and support true Conservatives; those who believe in fiscal responsibilities, individual accountability, and a smaller government, with less control of your daily life.

Rasta, Hey Mon.

I've been doing some analysis on Social Security. While I've been a critic in the past of the privatization I've come across a few ideas that you may agree with although they are more of ideas you'd think the Republicans are presenting.

First, name the most regressive of our tax methods....

social security, (flat with cap)
sales tax, (flat no cap)
medicare, (flat no cap)
income(progressive)

lets say a hard working American who makes 90k a year working for Boeing has a stay at home wife and 2kids. He might actually get ahead of SS tax system but all of a sudden, bang, it is raised to 200K, like Clinton and Obama want. Now that guy has a long way to go to get ahead of that 6.2% flat tax, not to mention businesses will have to match that. I'm glad they want to "save" social security, BUTTTTTTT, who are they really helping. Think about it. I mean why not turn it upside down if they really wanted to help the little guy. For example don't start collecting until you've reached 100K, 200K?
See the point. Social Security, in its present form is the most regressive tax system we have. Saving it by raising the hurdle from 90 to 200K just locks in the regressive system for the better part of our working lives, thus ensuring the 6.2% you've been paying to some rich old retired person to keep collecting for the next 25 years of your working life. That is not helping you and I, the little guys of this world is it?

I guarantee you'll never hear a politician come out and say. Social Security is the most regressive tax system we have and we've got to change it for that reason.

So, you take responsibility for your part in increasing the price of gasoline to $4 a gallon by not supporting government policy to develop biofuel alternatives to fossil fuels that would cost half as much??

So, you take responsibility for your part in increasing the price of gasoline to $4 a gallon by not supporting government policy to reduce domestic demand for fossil fuels so the US consumption of oil is 5% of the total world oil consumption, in line with the US 5% of the world population???

You ignore the benefit SS provides to those well under the age of 62-70, depending on retirement age.

Millions have recieved SS benefits from birth and they got the benefit before could possibly pay a dime, and in many case get the benefit for life.

I didn't say a social welfare program for the needy wasn't desirable. And you can call it social security if you like, and I'll gladly pay it. But should it continue to be regressive? As it is now. Think about it. Who is it helping when you consider the lot of us.

You make a couple of good points but are you willing to pay more for food to invest in biofuels? I have no idea why fuel is going up when the price of oil is going down and we have large reserves.

__________________
An informed voter scares the Goverment lackeys.

An American first and always a Conservative.

We had larger reserves when Reagan was elected and the tap into them was opened wide throughout the world, and you must admit that those reserves you claim are so large were opened up in the 70s, but the oil companies diddle around with them and then abandoned work on them because they were too expensive to use for producing oil. And those reserves are still ther and still open to the oil companies.

For example the oil shales have been available since the 70s with claimed reserves as large or larger than Saudi Arabia. No one claims ANWR will have more reserves than in the US oil shales, so ANWR is small potatoes when it comes to US oil reserves.

Your claims that the US has lots of reserves is one that excludes most of those oil reserves in order for you to shift your responsibility to other people because you refuse to face reality that those huge reserves are much more expensive to produce that even $4 a gallon gas can justify.

I gather you want the price to go to $10 or $20 a gallon to tap the reserves that have been open to oil companies for nearly four decades. But not while you are alive; you grandchildren are the ones to pay $10-20 a gallon for gas, because youy take responsibility for dictating they pay, not you.

You have got me wrong on this one buddy. I don't want my kids or grandkids to pay anything like the price that you mention but Americans have gotten spoiled with cheap gas. We need to develop new energy sources.

__________________
An informed voter scares the Goverment lackeys.

An American first and always a Conservative.