Originally posted on the JollyRanter.com
It's OK to be angry. In fact, you should be angry at some things. You should be angry about the deaths of innocent children and civilians in unnecessary wars. You should be angry when the sick are not cared for. You should be angry when Wall Street Banksters steal the life savings of retirees. When you see abused children, don't you get angry? How about defenseless animals being abused by sadists?
So anger is not the issue. What you are angry about is. You're angry about the deficit? OK. First, why don't you figure out what caused the deficit. And where was this anger when the Republicans turned a surplus into a deficit in 2001? The same Tea Party people have continued to vote for Republicans in 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008. Now they are firmly behind Republicans in 2010, so the deficit can't be the reason for their anger. Even so, I would agree that deficit spending is not viable long-term. But during times of economic crisis, deficit spending is not only acceptable, it is absolutely necessary. Once an economy is running at full strength, we should work towards a balanced budget. But did you know the deficit has come down this year? That's right, President Obama is already cutting the deficit!
Are you angry about taxes? Why? You've received a tax cut as part of the Stimulus Plan enacted in 2009. True you didn't get a lump sum check as in the the past. Instead, it was spread out over the course of the year in the form of lower withholding on your paycheck. Or are you upset that the Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts on incomes over $250,000 expire? Do you believe the lies that tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs? It isn't true, but those who would benefit from lower taxes continue to proffer the lie. They try to refer to tax cuts by JFK in the 1960s or Reagan in the 1980s to justify further cuts today. What they won't tell you is that JFK cut rates from 91% to 70%, and Reagan cut rates from 70% to 35% (of course Reagan raised taxes every year thereafter). Do you really believe letting the rates on incomes above $250,000 increase from 35% to 39% would really make much difference? Of course not! But at least it shows that we are willing to start to pay down a little bit of the deficit (I thought that was something you said you were angry about).
Are you angry about "Big Government"? Contrary to popular lore, President Obama has not significantly increased the size of government. Do you really believe government is too big? Where do you want to cut? You say you want the government off the backs of business. Really? Ask yourself, was the BP Horizon disaster the result of too much government regulation? Would cutting the budget of the regulators prevent future disasters? How about food inspectors? Do you want more inspectors, or less? (Make sure to cook your eggs well done!) Should we replace old bridges, repave and widen congested interstate highways? (I know, just the ones in my town, screw everyone else!) How about our troops? Are we really showing support for them if we don't increase VA medical benefits for those injured in our wars? Should the government stop its support of research to find cures for diseases?
You're angry about health care insurance reform. Why? President Obama's reform plan is very near what he campaigned on. His plan was the most conservative of the three leading Democratic candidates in the primaries. In fact, his reform plan is very similar to the Republican plan prosposed by Sen. Orin Hatch of Utah in 1993 in response to the Clinton health reform plan. The health care reform law keeps private for-profit health insurance companies in control. The current system is intact- there is no government takeover of health care. A few regulations have been placed on insurance companies regarding pre-existing conditions, annual and lifetime caps, and allowing children to stay on parent's plans after college. But the current private system is fully intact. Are you angry that more people will be able to afford insurance in the future, and that insurance companies' worst practices are being curtailed? You say we are becoming like Canada (as if that would be a bad thing!), but really we were headed in the direction of Mexico- a shrinking middle class with a few at the top and many at the bottom. You don't have to look too hard to see how that system works out. Not a very stable society, to say the least. One of the few areas where U.S. healthcare is on par or better than the rest of the Western industrialized nations is senior care. And that is thanks to Medicare. And you want to dismantle Medicare? All because a Democratic President passed it? Many of you call yourselves conservative or fundamental Christians. But you would turn your back on those in need of health care. You say let the market decide. Well, it has. And it says that average people should be left out of the system. How can can a family afford $15,000 to $20,000 a year in health insurance premiums on a gross income of $40,000? Are you willing to let them stay outside? As their numbers grow, how long do you think they'll stay docile about a system that excludes them and has no plans to ever let them in? Common sense would tell you that is an unsustainable system.
I keep hearing you say you want your freedom back. Who's taking your freedom? Grow up! Stop acting like children. The United States was not founded as a pure libertarian nation. We have always had restrictions on our freedoms. The founding fathers wanted freedom from foreign powers and from royal, religious or wealthy powers. Thomas Jefferson warned of the super wealthy having undue control over society. He envisioned progressive taxes on wealth to prevent the entrenchment of the few to control government. He forsaw that the super wealthy would use their power to enact laws to further enrich their status, not to use it for productive endeavors that produce a better society. We see it today in the wealthy paying lower taxes on their financial investments than ordinary citizens pay on their income from labor. Why do you think that is? The wealthy have power to influence government to entrench their wealth at the rest of society's expense. The wealthy control the media to propagandize the nation with economic myths (see tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs, etc.) and people have heard the lies so often, they start believing them.
So we come to the election. You can vote for your Tea Party candidates to show how angry you are. But like a child that throws a tantrum, nothing good will come of it. Sure, there are plenty of Democrats that deserve to lose (in fact, there are many I hope will lose). But maybe you should ask yourself why anonymous billionaires are funding all those attack ads. Do they really have your best interest in mind? Do you think they care about your job? Do you think they won't cut your job the second they can make more money sending it overseas? Beware of crossing a river on the back of a crocodile. The first part of the trip might be fun. But do you really think you're going to make it to the other side?