Monday, September 15, 2003

Grover Norquist is an Ass

The egregious fool Grover "no taxes r kewl!" Norquist has penned a ridiculous screed in the Washington Post this morning sneering happily about the defeat of the Alabama tax reform measure and informing politicians that they should not even think about new taxes as the US spirals into mass poverty and the rich get richer and richer. Rrrriiight.

The lesson learned at the national level in 1990 and 1992 is now being painfully learned at the state level: A Republican cannot be elected and govern successfully -- that is, in such a way as to make possible reelection or higher office -- without staking out an unequivocal anti-tax-hike position.

I hate to spoil your celebration, Grover, but eventually the American people will wake up to this poison you've been spreading so successfully for years. Taxes are necessary, sometimes it's necessary to raise them, and a society of 10% rich and 90% poor or scrabbling is ripe for bloody revolution - especially in a country awash with guns and where the Army comes almost universally from the poor side of town. If you want that, Grover, fine.

And what a shame that the WP thinks it needs to give "equal time" to this idiot.

And Along Those Lines....

Robert Reich, writing in USAToday believes, correctly, that the wealthy parasites ought to pony up for Dubya's Iraq debacle.

The top income tax rate rose during World War I to 77%. In World War II, it reached more than 90%. In 1953, with the Cold War raging, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower refused to support a Republican move to reduce it. By 1980, it was still way up there, at 70%. Then Ronald Reagan slashed it to 28%, giving us the lowest top tax rate of all modern industrialized nations. Because Reagan kept spending record sums on the military, the federal deficit ballooned. A few years after that, the Berlin Wall came down, ending the Cold War. We congratulated ourselves and then faced the largest budget deficit since World War II.

It seems only fair that the rich should pay proportionately more, especially now that the cost of the war against terrorism is rising. They're the only ones with money to spare. Look at the numbers: In 1979, the top 5% of earners took home 16.4% of total family income, but by 2001, their share had increased to 22.4%. In contrast, in 1979 the bottom 60% of earners took home 31.4% of total income; by 2001 their share had declined to 26.8%.

Besides, the very richest Americans benefit disproportionately from a stable federal government that protects their property and maintains public tranquility.

Viz my comments on bloody revolution above. Remember, repugs, the top rate under that notable socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower was 90%, and we still had scads of rich people. We also had a flourishing middle class, which is at this point well on its way to disappearing, and which is the foundation of a stable society.

Pop quiz! Which notable socialist said this:

"The man of great wealth owes a particular obligation to the state because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government."

Republican President Theodore Roosevelt, back in the pre-Norquist days. It's time for the Republicans to purge their party of these sociopaths and return to the fold of true Republicanism as personified by Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt.


Post a Comment

<< Home