Friday, September 16, 2005

Big government Conservatism

Faced with a humanitarian crisis mostly of his own making, last night President Bush offered the same solution he has given to every other problem: throw lots of money at it. The amazing thing is, Republicans used to be the party of fiscal conservatism, and Democrats the party of tax and spend.

Then Clinton ran on (thanks to Perot) fiscal conservatism, and balancing the budget. That was so early 1990s. Nowadays, Bush can't spend fast enough. Hundreds of Billions every month are spent on Iraq, and the security situation has hardly improved. I haven't heard much about the water supply or electricity or schools or oil, but if you can't go outside without worrying if you are going to be blown up, what's the use in all those things?

Bush has never vetoed a single bill let alone a spending bill. Spending has increased dramatically since the halyclon days of the Republican Revolution of 1994. Sure 9/11 greatly effected spending, but tax cuts and the Iraq war were both voluntary and a big chunk of that. Don't forget the massive farm and transportation bills, so stuffed with pork that it puts the gigante burrito I ate the other night to shame (but at least I got a free desert for finishing it, where is US's free desert). Same goes for the energy bill and the prescription drug bill, more corporate welfare for hundreds of billions.

And the Federal government under the GOP feels just fine in spending this money to tell people not to smoke medicinal mary jane, even if your state says it is ok, or to clothe Justice, or to keep emergency contraception behind the counter (despite its own medical panel saying otherwise), or trying to keep alive a brain dead woman, or to prevent research on human blastocysts to prevent diseases. In short, the GOP government is happy to step into your home, your bedroom and tell you what you can and cannot do.

Oh and don't forget the tax cuts for the rich during an elective and non-elective war, gotta have those.

What happened to the Libertarian Republicans of old? Who didn't try to bribe various voting blocs into supporting them? Who wanted to make government as small and unobtrusive as possible? What happened to those Republicans that wanted to balance the budget and get rid of departments, instead of creating new ones?

They only surfaced when Katrina's price tag game in, and Rove decided the best way out of the political mess was to exponentially increase it. "They will for get our screwups when our political allies have contracts to clean the mess up," thought Karl. Cronyism abound, but that is not what spooked the GOP congressmen, it was the price tag. And not the amount, but that the largess wouldn't extend to their districts and states. They are fine with boondoggles that take money from blue states and redistribute it to red states, but heaven forbid that everyone pay for one ravaged area.

It seems they misunderstand the purpose of government. It is not a tool to give money and jobs to your cronies, or to reelect you, but rather, it is a system by which society demonstrates its values through actions. Americans have said that we value the hard work of our elders, and would be happy to make sure they have adequate health care and income in their later years. Americans have said that poor children shouldn't go hungry at school. Americans have said that children shouldn't go uninsured just because their parents can't afford it. Americans have said that discrimination, whether by race, religion, or physical impairment should go punished no matter if the offender is a person, corporation, or state. Americans have reached out with our blood dollars, clothes, food, and homes to those effected by Katrina. We all want to help. We don't want to segregate those who have survived, we don't want to slash their wages while they try to repair their homes. And we certainly don't want people to make profits off of all this suffering, especially when their only claim to this profit is that they were roommates of some guy who is a big donor to the President.

No comments: