Posted on 12/17/2004 10:26:16 AM PST by scrossman
The first edition of George W. Bush's administration was all about a destructive and disastrous foreign policy for which the American people will be paying for a long time. Now comes the second edition, the focus now is on domestic policy, and the plan is to apply the tried and true methods of fear mongering and deception used to sell the Iraq war in order to stampede the American people into going along with a neoconservative domestic agenda against their own best interests.
The war this time will be waged on American soil, and the regime to be crushed is what little is left of the liberal legacy, especially social security and the progressive tax, in the United States.
In a front-page story last Friday, The Washington Post quotes White House officials as saying that the administration intends to push aggressively for the partial privatization of social security, the expansion of tax cuts for the rich, and limits on the amount of money that injured individuals can recover through lawsuits.
According to the Post story, in order to "build public support and circumvent critics in Congress and the media, the president will travel the country and warn of the disastrous consequences of inaction, as he did to sell his Iraq and terrorism policy during the first term."
The campaign to turn back the clock on social policy to the early twentieth century before the Progressive Era and the New Deal leveled the playing field somewhat will feature the same kind of cadre of true believers that brought us Iraq. In the words of the Post, the administration will create "a small, loyal and trustworthy team to press for broad changes largely dictated by the White House."
Just as right-wing think tanks and media were effective cheerleaders for the war in Iraq, the Post reports that in order to influence public opinion the president "is also enlisting well-funded conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation to help build the case for change or 'reform,' the words of the White House through ads and commentary on television and targeted publications."
The campaign of lies and distortions to create the impression that social security is in imminent danger of collapse started early and at the very top with the president's radio address this Saturday, in which Bush raised the specter of the bankruptcy of social security.
What is bankrupt is the administration's credibility; social security has been a fantastically successful program that has assured a dignified old age for tens of millions of Americans who otherwise might have ended up destitute. And a plethora of experts agrees that the problems that social security will face in the next few decades because of the aging of the population can be solved easily, for instance by collecting more social security taxes from higher income groups. But, significantly, President Bush has already rejected that solution. That's because Bush's objective is not saving social security, a program the very creation of which the Republicans fought and that is abhorred by "free market" ideologues because its success and popularity belies their central anti-government dogma.
Under various guises, such as creating a simpler tax code, promoting an "ownership society," and "reforming" social security, Bush's real objective is a system in which those whose money works for them get all the benefits and those who work for their money or who cannot work at all have no safety net to fall back on. By eliminating or drastically reducing taxes on unearned income, including inheritances, capital gains, and income from savings minor sources of income for most people but very important ones for the very wealthy Bush accomplishes both objectives. These policies shift even more resources to the rich while decimating the funding base required for the state to provide a safety net for the aged and other vulnerable Americans.
As with Iraq, Bush's push to remake domestic policy is a bad idea sold by ideological zealots through dishonest means that will yield disaster. This time, there can be no doubt from the outset that the central argument used by Bush to create fear in order to promote his policies is bogus. Even though the administration's categorical charges about weapons of mass destruction were outrageous given the scarce and contradictory evidence, there might have been weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There is no social security crisis, only a political project to destroy it for ideological reasons.
Discussing the 2004 presidential campaign, the writer Joan Didion has called today's American politics "weird." Nothing could be more bizarre than White House officials boasting about replicating the Iraq debacle, this time on the domestic front. As the number of Americans dead in Iraq climbs toward 1,300, soldiers grill the Secretary of Defense over inadequate equipment, and the awful consequences of the decision to invade the country become ever more evident, the White House promises another holy war waged by the same means, this time to slay not Saddam but the ghost of the welfare state.
Yet we cannot afford to underestimate the capacity of the Bush and his right-wing allies to confuse and convince the American public. As Bush and company were exploiting the tragedy of 9-11 to sell the Iraq war to the American people, most Democratic leaders went along with the charade, with the results we see today. This time, if the Democratic Party is to remain viable, it must remain united and mount a stiff opposition to Bush's nefarious new plans for the homeland.
The author's last name is Castro. How appropriate!
These people can never steal enough of your money to make them happy. Pathetic really...
A few points for the commie that wrote this drivel--
Social Security CANNOT be saved unless 80% of the Federal budget is allocated to it 40 years from now
The rich get the biggest tax cuts because-surprise-they pay the most!
Third-STFU
The progreso Weekly... is that like a soup magazine... seriously why are you posting this... let me get a few friend on this... Soup spill aisle 1!
Hmmm ... maybe you should have thought about the support Soc Sec would need when you aborted those 40,000,000 kids.
The writer should change his name to "Marx Castro".
Nice one... and nice tagline!
come on... no response yet? What's the Matter? Kitties get your tounge already?
F*ng master of the Obvious. I could have told him that 4 years ago.....
Go George Go!
Smelling the ZOT, are we?
LOL, Joan Didion called something weird.
either that or I forgot deoderant this morning..
But yeah psuedo socialist website... authors name is castro and no reponse or commentary yet from the poster... sounds like zot bait to me.
"The first edition of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton's administration was all about a destructive and disastrous foreign policy for which the American people will be paying for a long time."
There, more correct.
I think so too although you want to try to give these guys the benefit of the doubt.
Be gone, troll.
We will be recovering from the disastrous policies of the clinton administration for years to come.
Eight years of squandered efforts focusing on short-term, nanny state pandering is a hard thing for any Nation to overcome.
I wonder why the bottom fell out of everything in the last year of clinton?
Is anyone stupid enough to believe that things magically went horribly bad immediately after President Bush took office as a result of anything he himself did or didn't do?
I know there are people who are actually that stupid. Are you one?
Hmmm?
The progreso Weekly = “Progressive”, just another Socialist tag name!
Check my tagline.
Been a busy little troll, haven't you? Check the posting history folks...
First thing I did.
"Now comes the second edition, the focus now is on domestic policy, and the plan is to apply the tried and true methods of fear mongering and deception used to sell the Iraq war in order to stampede the American people into going along with a neoconservative domestic agenda against their own best interests."
This sentence reminds me of something that Orwell wrote, to the effect that propagandists of all stripes produce lousy writing.
Dem moonbats is kinda nuts, ain't dey?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.