« 16 November 2004 - 3:32 pm | Main | 29 November 2004 - 8:14 am »

Alright, I've successfully resisted discussing the recent election, but then I read Bob Herbert's column in the NY Times today. In his column he comments on a recent Department of Agriculture report showing that "12 million families [who] represent 11.2 percent of all U.S. households [...] 'were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food for all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources.'" That's right, the poor are starving in America.

So how does this tie in with the election? It's really quite simple: those of you who voted for President Bush on November 2nd cast a vote against the poor in America. We've all heard about the haves and the have-nots, but the Republican party doesn't take part in that struggle. Instead, it focuses all of its energy on a small subsection of the haves: those who have too much. Everything else that you might think the Republicans stand for is really just a smokescreen. A despicable, greedy, bigoted smokescreen, but a smokescreen nevertheless.

How do you verify this premise? Just examine the Bush Administration's enacted policies over the last four years: the only domestic policies passed by the Bush Administration were the tax cuts (which -- despite what you might have heard elsewhere -- were clearly targeted at the wealthy: a study i read recently had the average American getting $300-$600 form the Bush tax cuts while the wealthiest 1% of Americans got in excess of $58,000 in tax breaks.), the under-funded No Child Left Behind education bill, and the creation of the Homeland Security Department. Of these three policies, the rich got their tax cut and the other two were necessitated by politics. The No Child Left Behind act is under-funded because the Bush Administration doesn't actually care about eduction, but some of the people who voted for President Bush do, so this is a smokescreen to deceive them. The creation of the Homeland Security department was a change that the Bush Administration initially opposed and tried to poison-pill in Congress by amending the bill to eliminate civil service protections for its staff; the Bush Administration got on board in end because the country supported it so it was the politically expedient thing to do.

At all costs the rich must be allowed to keep their excessive wealth. Those of you who voted for the Republican party because of your religious beliefs, fiscal conservatism or belief in smaller government need to know that the Republicans desperately want you to listen do what they say, but not to look too closely at what they do. That is why the Republicans must out-and-out lie on the campaign trail. Not even their supporters actually support their policies.

The Republicans still claim to be the party of "small government," but we've come to a point in our politics where no major party can truthfully claim to support small government. The Bush Administration oversaw the largest increase in domestic spending since the New Deal. Both Democrats and Republicans want to spend your money; the question you have to ask is how you want it to be spent. The Republicans believe in tax the middle class and the poor in order to give money to the rich. The Democrats want to tax the rich to help the middle class and the poor.

To those of you who didn't understand this distinction on election day, I apologize. Those of us who understood failed to make the distinction as clear as it should have been.

To the Christian Right (or the "evangelicals" as you call yourselves these days), I ask that you try to understand the difference between a Christian nation and a nation of Christians. The United States is (mostly) the latter. It is not now nor has it ever been the former. Those of you who think the Ten Commandments are the foundations of our laws don't seem to understand the difference between morality and the laws. Morality is something you and I must decide on individually. Laws are designed to protect our society as a whole. The law here in the US has evolved to the point where in many ways it is better than the religious rules that societies were governed by for so long. Our laws give power to the majority while protecting the minority. If you succeed is forcing your morality on those who don't share it, America will be changed greatly from what it is today.

I wonder to, why those of you on the Christian Right feel so strongly only about some parts of your moral code? You rise up in great anger against the gays, but seem not to care at all about the poor and the needy. Because of this, I'm left to conclude that you aren't acting on true religious convictions but are simply using religion as a prop to support your bigotry. America is a multi-faceted society and clearly a great deal of work remains to be done to make our society whole.

With Thanksgiving approaching, I think we should all take some time to give thanks for all that we have. Then we should take some time to think about those who have less to give thanks for and what we can do to help them.

Posted by on 22 November 2004 at 9:58 AM

I take it you saw The Onion's main story headline after the election: Nation's Poor Win Election for Nation's Rich. About as apt as anything I could have said on the subject.

And what you said about people using their religion as a prop was true. But they also use religion to justify their excitement over war, which is disgusting. I mean, really, what would Jesus do?

Posted by Rachel on 23 November 2004 - 4:59 PM