Sunday, June 04, 2006

Even Wingers Admit They Steal

In the middle of a flap about Busby not checking papers on her volunteers, this right winger makes a comment that is supposed to show how both sides are corrupt. However, I find myself agreeing with him ...

Much ado about nothing: Wizbang

"I'll be the first to mention, I'm a member of the GOP, and yes, I believe at least 2/3s of our overall reps are just as crooked as 2/3s of liberals, but the reason why the GOP gets picked on more is the price. The GOP takes money as it's price. Phisical things. Libs tend to want more or less glory for their price. They want to be the next environmental hero, the next civil rights leader, the next tiananmen square hero, and they don't care who or what, to include the country they live in, to get it. Idealism from the left, materialism from the right? NO WAY, can't be."

Of course, the last part about "they don't care who or what ... to get it" is supposed to be the scathing indictment. But let's examine that in whole.

If Al Gore is "the next environmental hero", what will be the consequences to the country? Well, long term of course, we get to save the planet which is hardly a negative outcome for the U.S.

We also will start competing against countries like China, and even Brazil, which in 10 years will be on the cutting edge of green technology and exporting it all over the world.

Think our economy won't be hurt if we ignore this trend? Ask new Treasury secretary Paulson; while he blathers on about tax cuts as all wealthy, elite Republicans must, he also is pro-environment. The guy says we should have signed Kyoto, ferchrissake.

So being an environmental hero seems most likely to only help this country. Civil rights leader? We have 50 years of history showing that movement has greatly improved this country; only theocons like Pat Robertson, throwbacks like Trent Lott, or racist bloggers like Malkin would argue otherwise.

Tiananmen Square hero? I think we have a Freudian slip here. Doesn't this example seem out of context? In general, you could say liberals are against unfair trade and human rights violations; thereby we're against the one-way flow of impoverished-produced goods into the U.S.

But I think this quote is unwittingly deeper than that. I think the poster really is getting at liberals resisting an authoritarian government which spies on its people, condones torture, and now even wants to build a great wall. Liberals who question King George are hurting this country, the argument goes.

Hogwash. The Cheney administration has declared war on the Constitution. Checks and balances are a thing of the past, and thanks to gerrymandering, crooked voting, and a conservative Supreme Court; we have single-party rule. When all three branches are Republican, and the executive branch is setting fire to the Constitution - any resistance can only benefit the country.

Robb H's last paragraph is supposed to be the home run:

"Long short, Dems will continue to waive off this law, no matter how bad it hurts us, and there is no doubt it does, in order to gain that idealistic stance, especially because it's almost required for a California win."

"No doubt" it hurts us. What hurts us is this new business culture where wage depression is the one and only name of the game. Why do businesses ignore the law and hire illegal immigrants? Because you can't outsource landscaping to India.

Some undocumented worker volunteering for a political campaign? Who does that hurt? Her Republican opponent, I suppose; cry me a river.

A huge part of this issue is racism, plain and simple. Republicans see "the browning of America" and, just as the do with terrorism, piss their pants. What, oh what, will we do when whites are outnumbered by "coloreds."

Rest easy, Republicans... very little would change. Rich, white men would no longer be in charge of everything, but believe me, y'all will die of old age before any of that happens.

No comments: