As I listen to Republicans yell and scream about smaller government, balanced federal budgets, and lower taxes, I began to wonder when any Republican president ever balanced the budget. I know that Republicans have deified Reagan, holding up his presidency as the Holy Grail of conservatism and fiscal responsibility. But they know, as well as the general public knows, that this is all malarcky. As a kid of the 1980s, I don't recall Reagan's presidency being all that great.
As a matter of fact, I'm the child of a Vietnam veteran and a school cafeteria lady. Reagan's cuts to domestic funding for veterans and his trickle down economic policies were devastating to my family, and thousands of others like my family across America. He grew government, and increased the deficit to astounding proportions, the likes of which the world had never seen. However, through it all, he kept saying he believed in smaller government and lower taxes for all without actually implementing those beliefs.
My curiosity about the discrepancy between Republican rhetoric and the way they actually govern led me to a wild google search for the last Republican president to actually practice what he preached. That man, who is never mentioned by today's crazy, ubher-Right Wing, TEA Party Driven, birther infiltrated Republican Party was Dwight D. Eisenhower. Yes, the last Republican to actually shrink government and balance the budget served when my mother was a toddler, from 1953-1961. As a leader, Eisenhower was a Republican's dream....A five-star general, a southerner, and former supreme NATO commander.
After reading several academic articles in Foreign Policy Magazine, and all of the valid google articles I could find, I wonder why more Republicans do not celebrate the fiscal genius of old Ike. It's probably because as a general and commander of the armed forces, Ike knew that no army can survive without the well-being of its foot soldiers. Yes, Ike did balance budget while avoiding killing job creation and overly-taxing the rich, and without making the poor and disadvantaged carry the entire country. Ike, though hesitant and conservative concerning racial issues at first, realized the danger inherent in oppressing such a large and important segment of the United States population. Like a true general, Ike saw unequal treatment as a national security threat, which is why he intervened in Little Rock. Also, Ike saw the REAL ramifications of being unwilling to compromise simply on ideological premises alone. Somewhere out there, real people suffer due to abstract arguments in Washington. He reached out to his Democratic Congress and worked to balance the budget. He even put defense on the table, and cut back on defense spending by opting for weapons that were slightly less expensive. He expanded many of the New Deal Policies, and invested in infrastructure by implementing an national interstate system program. Did I mention he also balanced the budget?
While Republicans try to justify giving gifts to their rich benefactors, and ask themselves what would Reagan do, I wonder why Ike's legacy, one of the greatest Republican presidents this country has ever seen, lies in the background collecting dust?
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Friday, April 8, 2011
Immigration and Planned Parenthood Are Social Smoke Screens
As a woman, I am really alarmed at the assault on women's health that has been taking place since January 2011. But, I have to lay aside my emotions, and see things rationally: this Planned Parenthood debate, just like the immigration debate, is a social smoke screen.
Republicans have a pattern: whenever they are in trouble for their obvious hypocrisy, they raise a social issue. Republicans run on platforms -and win elections - based upon fiscal responsibility. Yet, once in office, they do the opposite. When the Right speaks of Ronald Reagan, they can never credit him with balancing the budget. He didn't. As a matter of fact, he ran up the biggest deficit and ran a bigger government than the country had previously known. He just kept saying that government should be smaller. He just kept saying that we needed to balance the budget. He never really did it. Instead, he distracted us with a war on drugs campaign. George W. Bush, who simply re-implemented Reagan-style trickle down economic policies. But in this world, a world with 24-hour news cycles and dozens of political commentary shows on the Right and the Left, he could not get away with it as easily as Reagan. People began to ask questions: how were we going to pay for two wars, tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of the company, and a gift to the pharmaceutical companies via the Prescription Drug plan for seniors? If Republicans were supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, they certainly did not actually govern that way. What did Bush do? Start a roaring debate on immigration.
Remember immigration? Remember the border patrol? Remember the fence the United States wanted between us and Mexico? Yeah. Whatever happened to that? Well, like I said, we live in a 24-hour news cycle society. Some political science professors simply got on some of the television shows and stated the obvious: if we were really serious about immigration reform, we'd simply punish the companies that employ illegal immigrants. Since many Republican lawmakers have financial interests in those businesses, they killed the debate they started. It really died when a camera crew visited Lamar Alexander, a represented from Tennessee and very vocal anti-immigration lawmaker, at a construction site. Yes, he owns a construction company. Who was working there? Illegal immigrants.
But, Planned Parenthood is safe. Those clinics are largely federally funded, and no one has any financial stakes in them. And, since it is illegal to federally fund abortions, this debate and possible defunding of Planned Parenthood, get the base all heated and upbraided without actually affecting abortion anyway. Perfect. And, and...these cuts affect only 12% of the entire budget. We have been focusing so narrowly on this 12% that we haven't asked a pivotal question: what the hell else is contained in the other 88% of the spending?
Republicans have a pattern: whenever they are in trouble for their obvious hypocrisy, they raise a social issue. Republicans run on platforms -and win elections - based upon fiscal responsibility. Yet, once in office, they do the opposite. When the Right speaks of Ronald Reagan, they can never credit him with balancing the budget. He didn't. As a matter of fact, he ran up the biggest deficit and ran a bigger government than the country had previously known. He just kept saying that government should be smaller. He just kept saying that we needed to balance the budget. He never really did it. Instead, he distracted us with a war on drugs campaign. George W. Bush, who simply re-implemented Reagan-style trickle down economic policies. But in this world, a world with 24-hour news cycles and dozens of political commentary shows on the Right and the Left, he could not get away with it as easily as Reagan. People began to ask questions: how were we going to pay for two wars, tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of the company, and a gift to the pharmaceutical companies via the Prescription Drug plan for seniors? If Republicans were supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, they certainly did not actually govern that way. What did Bush do? Start a roaring debate on immigration.
Remember immigration? Remember the border patrol? Remember the fence the United States wanted between us and Mexico? Yeah. Whatever happened to that? Well, like I said, we live in a 24-hour news cycle society. Some political science professors simply got on some of the television shows and stated the obvious: if we were really serious about immigration reform, we'd simply punish the companies that employ illegal immigrants. Since many Republican lawmakers have financial interests in those businesses, they killed the debate they started. It really died when a camera crew visited Lamar Alexander, a represented from Tennessee and very vocal anti-immigration lawmaker, at a construction site. Yes, he owns a construction company. Who was working there? Illegal immigrants.
But, Planned Parenthood is safe. Those clinics are largely federally funded, and no one has any financial stakes in them. And, since it is illegal to federally fund abortions, this debate and possible defunding of Planned Parenthood, get the base all heated and upbraided without actually affecting abortion anyway. Perfect. And, and...these cuts affect only 12% of the entire budget. We have been focusing so narrowly on this 12% that we haven't asked a pivotal question: what the hell else is contained in the other 88% of the spending?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)