A few months back, Mitt Romney snarkily opined that any discussion of income inequality was an expression of success envy. He further stated that any such discourse should be confined to quiet rooms.
I guess it's something that The Good Governor believes should be kept out of sight and out of mind --- sorta like the whacked-out step-cousin who lives in the basement, engages in devil-worship, and sports a six-six-six tattoo in the center of his forehead.
Only one piddling li'l problem with that: The vast majority of Americans believe that the very wealthy should be paying their fair share of taxes. A recent New York Times/CBS poll indicated that a whopping 72% of adults hold this view, including more than half of Republicans. An ABC News/Washington Post survey yielded nearly identical results.
Raising taxes on the rich will help erase the deficit in concert with other measures. For instance, our nation's military footprint could be substantially reduced without compromising our safety. Two considerations: According to the Government Accountability Office, 1) The military budget has doubled over the past ten years; and 2) It hasn't been audited in decades. Just incidentally, the deficit could be eliminated in ten years --- without hurting people --- if the will to do it existed. (For greater detail, a link is available: budget for all 2013 ).
As far as Romney's idea of success is concerned, I guess it's all about money! Poor thing! Kinda dredges up some memories for me. I was raised in an economically diverse neighborhood on Chicago's North Side. The rich kids I went to high school with lived along the lakefront; the rest of us, the peons, resided inland. Some of them knew the meaning of humility, but others were possessed by an overarching sense of entitlement.
As a young guy who had worked part-time throughout much of my youth, I readily admit to having felt a smug sense of self-satisfaction when comparing myself to my pampered cohorts, these Young Master Romneys. Regarding many practical matters, they seemed utterly clueless. Yep, I confess! I was a shamelessly incorrigible reverse snob!
Never did I envision anyone hailing from that sort of ilk as having presidential potential. I still don't!
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
The Wisconsin Recall Effort: No, Money Doesn't Talk; It SHRIEKS!
As I write, the recall election in Wisconsin has just been called for Scott Walker. His running mate, Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, as well as the Senate Majority Leader, Scott Fitzgerald (that's really his name!) have also survived the recall. Three other Senate seats are momentarily still in play.
I guess it was to be expected; the campaign of Tom Barrett, Walker's Democratic opponent, was outspent by a ratio of 7:1! Still, after a weekend of volunteer canvassing for Barrett in largely Democratic Kenosha (as well as previous stints in Milwaukee), I had higher hopes.
The canvass itself progressed quite smoothly. A number of voters who had recently changed addresses needed information regarding registration, location of polling place, IDs, etc. (Wisconsin still has same-day registration --- at least for now). The only notable clinker moment was a street encounter. I was sitting in the car doing some paperwork. A 70-something guy with a pot-belly that preceded the rest of him by roughly eleven inches, shambled up to my vehicle, eyeballed my work for a moment, and asked me who I was working for. I told him. He then shouted, "To hell with Barrett! And you can go to hell, too!" I just shrugged. "You take care now, guy, okay?" He then lumbered off toward his SUV and laboriously climbed in. (Unnh-h-h!)
We tried, but our best efforts apparently still fell short. In the wake of the canvass, it was easy to feel complacent. (Kinda reminds me of an old anecdote from the 1948 Presidential campaign: a four-way race among Truman, Dewey, Strom Thurmond of the segregationist States' Rights Party, and Henry Wallace, the Progressive Party's candidate. A starry-eyed young Progressive was asked who was going to win the election: "Why Henry Wallace, of course! All my friends are voting for him!" ).
No doubt the outcome of this election will be analyzed, and micro-analyzed over the coming days, weeks, and months. But it seems clear that with no limits on campaign funding (courtesy of the Supreme Court's Citizens United v Federal Election Commission ruling) the organization with the deeper pockets will continue to have the upper hand. With unlimited largesse from a few billionaires, the wealthier party can fund massive media buys and spread information which may not necessarily be truthful. (The Walker campaign seriously misrepresented the state's employment stats, the condition of its budget, and his own history of illegal campaign activity as Milwaukee County's chief executive).
Like I stated in the subject line, money doesn't merely talk anymore, it shrieks! We'll need to re-energize ourselves in a major way as the year progresses. Onward to November!
I guess it was to be expected; the campaign of Tom Barrett, Walker's Democratic opponent, was outspent by a ratio of 7:1! Still, after a weekend of volunteer canvassing for Barrett in largely Democratic Kenosha (as well as previous stints in Milwaukee), I had higher hopes.
The canvass itself progressed quite smoothly. A number of voters who had recently changed addresses needed information regarding registration, location of polling place, IDs, etc. (Wisconsin still has same-day registration --- at least for now). The only notable clinker moment was a street encounter. I was sitting in the car doing some paperwork. A 70-something guy with a pot-belly that preceded the rest of him by roughly eleven inches, shambled up to my vehicle, eyeballed my work for a moment, and asked me who I was working for. I told him. He then shouted, "To hell with Barrett! And you can go to hell, too!" I just shrugged. "You take care now, guy, okay?" He then lumbered off toward his SUV and laboriously climbed in. (Unnh-h-h!)
We tried, but our best efforts apparently still fell short. In the wake of the canvass, it was easy to feel complacent. (Kinda reminds me of an old anecdote from the 1948 Presidential campaign: a four-way race among Truman, Dewey, Strom Thurmond of the segregationist States' Rights Party, and Henry Wallace, the Progressive Party's candidate. A starry-eyed young Progressive was asked who was going to win the election: "Why Henry Wallace, of course! All my friends are voting for him!" ).
No doubt the outcome of this election will be analyzed, and micro-analyzed over the coming days, weeks, and months. But it seems clear that with no limits on campaign funding (courtesy of the Supreme Court's Citizens United v Federal Election Commission ruling) the organization with the deeper pockets will continue to have the upper hand. With unlimited largesse from a few billionaires, the wealthier party can fund massive media buys and spread information which may not necessarily be truthful. (The Walker campaign seriously misrepresented the state's employment stats, the condition of its budget, and his own history of illegal campaign activity as Milwaukee County's chief executive).
Like I stated in the subject line, money doesn't merely talk anymore, it shrieks! We'll need to re-energize ourselves in a major way as the year progresses. Onward to November!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)