They're at it again- The Party of No - a.k.a. The Grand Old Party, a.k.a. The Republicans.
I have heard those of you who have said, "but you are not non-biased if all you do is bash Republicans" and I have responded, hopefully with wit and good humor; "I am an equal opportunity basher". However, still, with that said (or written), I just can't help it. They're all such Douche Bags, earning today's nod as D.O.T.D.
In the latest round of so-called negotiations (so-called because NEGOTIATION implies a certain level of give and take and, therefore, COMPROMISE) between the Republican controlled U.S. House of Representatives and President Barrack Obama, Speaker John Boehner (I'm resisting calling him bonner, because he's constantly pulling one!) suddenly broke of talks. Once again, Boehner had a bad case of economis interuputus: i.e. he pulled out too soon! Boehner stopped returning the President's repeated phone calls, citing rank-and-file Republicans' complete lack of support for the President's plan to attack the county's staggering deficit by limiting spending on certain social programs (like Medicaid) and raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. The GOP, supported by The Tea Party, refuses to support the President in ANY WAY, SHAPE, or FORM, if his proposal includes ANY increase in revenue by raising ANY taxes. They also demand that the President hamstring many social safety programs through outrageous and unnecessary cuts in their funding.
The GOP has claimed that they have at least put something on the table while the President has offered no viable plan in return. WTF?! From what I've read in various sources, the President has consistently offered various plans to reduce the deficit and raise our debt limited. However, because they include tax hikes for the wealthy and will NOT cut social programs to the point of their demise, the GOP will NOT support him.
Well, folks, it's pretty simple. We all dislike paying taxes. Hell, I work hard for my money and often feel that I shoulder too much of the tax burden. However, I also have a conscience and that conscience leads me to compassion. I understand that if we are truly to live in a great society, those of us who, for whatever reason, have achieved a certain level of financial success, must be willing to aid those who have not. In the long run, it's beneficial to ALL. Compassion leads to a healthy society where the privileged are proud of their ability to contribute and those who benefit from those contributions are uplifted to the point of self-sufficiency.
I remember a comedy routine by Richard Belzer a few years back. He offered his version of Reaganomics (of course, we all know that Ronald Reagan is the gold standard among the GOP). When describing its impact on Planned Parenthood (another, current GOP target), Belzer presented this example: "hey, unwed teenage moms, next time, suck dick"!
It's time to choose again. Do we want the few to control ALL of the wealth? Or, do we want a certain level of balance, established through compassion and compromise. Simple, isn't it.
No comments:
Post a Comment