home
about
archives
|
REPUBLICANS AND RESPONSIBILITY (OR WHY REPUBLICANS ARE LIKE TWO YEAR OLDS)
07/10/2008
I sat in a booth at a local eatery a few days ago, trying to enjoy a midday meal with my husband. And, of course, Murphy's Law, or some other law about why life always craps on you, ensured that we would get seated next to the family with three kids, one of whom insisted on shrieking at an unbelievable decibel level about every three seconds, not mind you because there was anything wrong, but just because he liked to hear himself shriek. His mother and father either ignored him or laughed at him, ensuring that the shrieking would never, ever stop.
That's when I thought about Republicans and their idea of personal responsibility. This little kid and his parents reminded me of every neocon, every corporate con, every rugged individualist, and every elected official who currently make up the Republican Party.
Confused? Let me help you out.
Republican leaders and talkers say they want to get the government off your back, lower your taxes, and – of course – allow you the privilege of handling your own problems without help from the government. They say they believe in "personal responsibility," and the implication always is that Democrats who want government to provide assistance to those in need do not believe in personal responsibility, and ordinary people who need help are not acting responsibly (neither of which is true).
My observation, however, is that what Republicans are really saying when they talk about personal responsibility is that they don't believe in being responsible for and to each other. They don't believe in "being their brother's keeper" and they don't care to consider how their behavior impacts negatively on others. They believe in the individual's right to do what they want, not the individual's responsibility to care for and acknowledge the needs, rights, and comfort of others.
This little boy did not care one bit about whether his screaming bothered anyone. He liked hearing his own voice. It gave him a sense of power and made his time at the restaurant more fun. The other people in the restaurant simply didn't exist in his world. The only people who could have stopped him were his parents and they were not so inclined. They were busy eating and talking with a friend who had accompanied them to the restaurant, and because they didn't particularly care about the other people in the restaurant either, they paid no attention to him. By doing nothing, they were giving him permission to continue screaming, and when they ordered desert for him, perhaps to shut him up, they were actually rewarding his bad behavior.
In the meantime, my husband and I, as well as many others nearby, had a very unpleasant dining experience.
Similarly, many of us have had a very unpleasant eight years under the presidency of George W. Bush, whose appointees and corporate supporters think only of their ideologies, their desire for power, or their lust for profit. The hedge fund managers who get tax breaks on the millions they make, the mortgage bankers and lenders who destroyed this economy, the Enron executives who nearly bankrupted the state of California, the accounting firms that cooked the books, the corporations that sent American jobs overseas, the oil companies reaping record profits as Americans can not afford the gas to visit their families this summer, the corporate war profiteers who, like John McCain, want the Iraq War to last 100 years, have all been out of control children, thinking only of themselves, as their unchecked behavior devastates families in this country. The massive numbers of political appointees who have shown their gross incompetence over the years (think FEMA) have cared only about their salaries and prestige, not about the people whom they are supposed to be serving. And Republican ideologies of "personal responsibility" and "government is the problem" enable this behavior to continue.
Democrats look at things differently. While not rejecting the importance of being responsible for oneself, Democrats also stress the importance of being responsible to and for each other. Thus, Democrats believe in a progressive income tax, so that those who have benefited most from the blessings of this country (and the infrastructure and corporate tax breaks provided by the federal government) are expected to pay a little more to help those who are less fortunate and to maintain that infrastructure. And Democrats believe that at those times when personal responsibility is not enough and an individual falls on hard times, we the people, through our government, ought to help out.
Both Republicans and Democrats know that left on their own, some individuals will harm the public through criminal acts, and both are willing to use local, state, and federal government agencies to punish these people. But Democrats also believe strongly that left to their own devices, and especially given permission by their cronies in power, many large corporations will harm the public and the only entity able to prevent that is a strong government that can step in, like a parent with an errant two year old, and say "enough!"
Republicans, who are all too willing to throw individuals in the slammer for their personal irresponsibility, are completely unwilling to put a stop to corporate irresponsibility for two ideological reasons: they believe the free market can be trusted to police itself, and they fear that government will get too big or become a socialist system. Democrats disagree. They believe that, in the hands of responsible officials, with the three powers functioning as a check on each other, and with the public looking on and voting irresponsible officials out, government can be the means to ensure that we the people, as individuals and corporations, honor our responsibility to each other.
Herein lies the big problem with the past eight years. We have not had responsible officials in Washington. The branches of government are no longer co-equal. And the people have allowed themselves to be fooled into believing the words of dishonest and irresponsible officials.
George W. Bush has functioned as two-year-old-in-chief, thinking only of his own power, his need to outshine his dad, the profit of his corporate buddies, and the decisions he alone wanted to make. He acted unconcerned about how his behavior, his decisions, and his arrogant attitude affected ordinary Americans, like the soldiers who are deployed three and four times to the Middle East, the more than 4000 families who have buried a warrior, the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs because of his failed economic policies, the many who drowned and the thousands still homeless after Katrina because he thought they should take care of themselves, the thousands more who have fallen into poverty and/or lost their health insurance because he doesn't think their plight is his concern, the millions of Americans who have lost their privacy rights because he is on a quest to find the terrorist in the haystack, or now the millions of Americans who cannot afford the gas to get to work, let alone go on vacation. For the past eight years, as the climate changed because of carbon emissions, Bush's wars destabilized the Middle East, and demand for oil increased in the developing countries of the world, Bush did everything he could to reward his oil buddies by maintaining an oil based transportation system here in the U.S.
At the same time, this administration, prompted by the beliefs of Dick Cheney and others, has neutered the Congress and claimed vast executive powers. For six years of the Bush administration, the lapdog Republican Congress gave Bush everything he wanted and provided no oversight as the executive branch amassed more and more power. In the past two years, after Democrats took over, officials in the Bush administration have stymied all attempts at investigation of executive power by refusing to testify before Congress. In addition, as conservative Southern Democrats joined with Republicans on many votes, and as Bush vetoed or threatened to veto anything the more progressive Democrats tried to enact, the Democratic Congress has been toothless. The two year olds were running the show and parental control, in the form of the legislative branch, was completely ineffective.
Many of us who watched this horror unfold believed the people would see the light and correct the situation in the 2004 election. They didn't, because the two year olds in the White House both lied to and intimidated them. By the 2006 election, enough of them had seen the light to change Congress, but they would not be able to kick the two year olds out of the White House until 2008.
Sadly, the people may once again fail to provide the corrective that is needed. John McCain is only a few points behind Barack Obama, and with the right political circumstances, enough swift boat type lies and some clever fearmongering, we could end up putting another two year old in the White House. Yes, John McCain is a two year old, who espouses the same policies as George W. Bush. He believes in threatening or bombing other countries, even when they haven't attacked us. He does not want the government to help out those who have no health insurance. He wants the outsourcing of jobs to continue and he thinks the unregulated free market and more tax cuts will help the same economy that has been destroyed by them. He has no more concern for the veterans, the soldiers, the military families, the unemployed, and the sick and uninsured than George W. Bush. He has voted against veterans' benefits, and wants to continue the wars in the Middle East indefinitely. And he supports the same conservative economic policies as the current president. As for his maturity, he thinks joking about bombing Iran and killing Iranians with our cigarette exports is clever and appropriate behavior for a presidential candidate.
As I look at the polls each week, I see that McCain is consistently at about 44% and I don't understand, considering his party, his ideology, and his position on the unpopular Iraq War, how he could have even that high a number. Perhaps it is because the press has not yet scrutinized his positions, or perhaps there are a variety of reasons some Americans will simply never vote for Barack Obama.
But one thing seems clear to me: if you believe that we have an obligation to each other and not just to ourselves, if you believe government is the one entity strong enough to keep large corporations from harming the public, if you believe we need a strong middle class, if you want grown-ups in charge of the government, and if you think too much power has accrued to the Executive Branch over the past eight years, leaving the president as unchecked as a misbehaving two year old, the only choice for president in 2008 is the Democrat.
All content © 2005 outragedcitizen.com
|
