This is the right wing lie variety that most sets my teeth on edge. The loathsome Mitch McConnell made the health care claim ["We urge you to abandon the use of reconciliation to pass a partisan bill that is opposed by the vast majority of Americans."] before the vote and it is a subtle kind of lie. Though factually barely true according to the poll he was quoting, his innuendo was that Americans support his side of the argument. The fact is that the opposition to health care reform was split into to very disparate camps, one that believed like McConnell that the bill went to far and another that was in complete opposition to McConnell that believed (like me) that the bill did not go far enough. These two groups are fundamentally opposed to one another but in the continuing Big Lie to the American people, McConnell has made them one. Again, the fact is that the "vast majority" of Americans didn't believe the bill went far enough and were opposed to the GOP's position. McConnell is, at heart, a lying son of a bitch.
I remember hearing this same horrible man say that GWB had a "mandate" and that he was elected by the "vast majority" of Americans. Shrub was (a) never elected legally and (b) even if the vote count was legit (which it was not as the Republicans were involved in massive vote fraud both elections) Shrub received a minority of the popular vote the first time around and the vote was split almost perfectly down the center the second time. That is not a "vast majority" by any means and makes the GOP and McConnell specifically liars.
Though they have not said so on the record yet, if Obama or the Democrats wanted to pass a resolution saying that kittens should get a little bowl of warm milk the GOP would stand firmly against it and would claim that a "vast majority" of Americans were opposed by adding the people that think kittens should get a little warm cream, the people that think milk is bad for cats, and the people that hate cats together and claiming they think like right wing morons.
"You can't raise taxes during a recession."
This is the mantra of the right wing (including my own repulsive "Democratic" mayor, Jerry Abramson), descending directly from the "Voodoo Economics" lie of "Trickle Down Economics," once poo-pooed by true conservatives and anyone that could add. What actually happens when we cut taxes (and regulation) on the rich and corporations? We saw under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II: The economy tanks. Why is this? Perhaps it's because when you make life easier (as if it needs easing) for the ultra-megas you make it harder on the poor and middle class. State and local governments must rely more on fees and regressive taxes like sales tax and lotteries which disproportionally effect the lower end of the economic scale to provide services that help most Americans in their daily lives. Ultimately taxing the poor is not a good way to fund government and those same services are cut drastically (god forbid you should reduce the police patrols in the rich parts of the city) or eliminated completely in the name of a "balanced budget."
The way I look at it is if you're rich and you don't want to pay taxes get the fuck out of this country. You don't want to pay a local income tax in Louisville, for instance, move to another city. We don't want your worthless, cheap ass. You are a leech on society and the community if you don't want to use a little bit of your wealth to improve it. Better infrastructure, improvement and education programs for lower income individuals, housing for the homeless, mass transit, drug rehabilitation, and so many other publicly funded programs don't only improve the lives of the people they serve directly, the improve the lives of everyone in the community by beautifying the city, reducing crime, and building community.
"America has the highest tax rates in the world."
"America has the best health care in the world."
Only if you are astonishingly wealthy. Otherwise we're 37th, just below Costa Rica and a good bit below Morocco.
My StumbleUpon Page