| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2005/12/21-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41103 Activity:moderate |
12/21 Republicans declare political suicide, demand elderly and poor
run them out of office:
http://csua.org/u/ee6 (Washington Post)
(Actual title: With Cheney's Vote, Senate Passes Budget Bill)
\_ This is the most bizarre bill I've seen from congress in a long
time. It's practically a caricature of the Evil Republicans. I
don't understand why congress didn't chop out $40B in pork instead
of this. -emarkp
\_ Probably because pork fights back.
\_ The poor are religious. They'll vote with their faith.
\_ Troll harder. This one is pathetic. Young Troll, you are FIRED!
\_ Eh, while there is a heavy element of trollishness to the
post, there is still a kernel of truth in what he said.
\_ More than a kernel. Poor white southerners overwelmingly
vote GOP. This may be partly a racism thing, but I think
that's much less a factor than the bible shit. Maybe pp
thinks all those scare tactics about gay marriage were
targeted at college educated, middle class people?
Convincing the powerless to support the powerful of their
own free will has been the main purpose of organized
relgion for thousands of years, and the GOP happens to
be better at this game and evil enough to exploit it
shamelessly right now.
\_ 'a racism thing'? Do you mean 'racial' or 'ethnic' or
am I misreading what you're saying?
\_ Have you ever been to the south?
\_ Yes. I'm not disputing that there's racism in
in the South -- I'm just having trouble parsing
the PP's use of the word in that context. Is
PP calling himself a racist? It just seems like
a different word seems to fit the context better.
\_ Yes, bad choice of words, sorry. I meant the
GOP's "southern strategy", in general.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
If Nixon had not figured out how to use
"states rights" as a
code word for opposition to civil rights
reforms, those worthless fucks would all
still be voting Democrat because Abe
Lincoln started the "war of northern agression".
\_ Ah, I see -- thanks for clarifying!
\_ I would agree with you on this if the current bill
didn't make severe cuts to Medica[id|re]. That's a
sacred cow for a whole lot of poor white folks, race
and sexual orientation issues aside.
\_ Bullshit. Let's see what happens in 2008, and how
many of these deep south states leave the GOP.
Maybe in the north, you're right. But the demographic
we're talking about here believes the Earth was
created 6000 years ago and that homosexuals should
be jailed for crimes against God. As far as I'm
concerned, they're not even Americans, and there's
no way they'll stop thumping their bibles for long
enough to change parties over some nerdy policy
issue that doesn't involve the Old Testament.
\_ Whatever you may think of them, they'll squeal
when they realize their holy entitlements have
finally been fucked with. Cf. the Pres. inability
to shitcan Social Security. You won't have to
wait for '08; a number of Senators are up for
re-election in '06.
\_ Bush and his cronies fear middle class
mid-western swing voters, who will switch
parties over social security. It's not
the poor southern white trash that they
were afraid of with the social security
debacle.
\_ Yes, remember, all people who vote or think
differently than you are utterly comtemptible
hateful trogs. You have private access to the
only one true way of clear thought. All others
are darkly evil or just plain stupid. You are
my hero. You represent all that is good and
pure and clean in this country!
\_ Young Troll, the Young Troll Hiring & De-Hiring Committee has
received updated notice from the Sub-Committee On Young Troll
Quality Control and as per their advice has determined you shall
continue in your present role as Young Troll at current rate.
You do not need to report to the Young Troll Food Vat for
Additional Services. You're doing a fine job! Carry on!
\_ I believe now that the voting majority is now cut off from
actual policy feedback. They vote on sloganeering and perceived
cultural ideology. Some parts of this bill are sickening.
\_ Repubs are the party of the middle class. Screwing the poor
shouldn't be a surprise.
\_ Voting Dem is better somehow?
\_ Bull. Republicans are the party of the filthy rich. Middle
class Americans identify with the GOP because they hope to be
filthy rich themselves some day. Hopefully, mucking about with
Medicare/Medicaid will wake some of these people up.
\_ Most of the truly wealthy in this country are the ultra
rich. Who else can afford to be a Democrat?
\_ MOst of working-class Boston. |
| 5/25 |
|
| csua.org/u/ee6 -> www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122100748.html More With Cheney's Vote, Senate Passes Budget Bill Legislation Would Trim $40 Billion Over 5 Years By William Branigin, Jonathan Weisman and Shailagh Murray Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Taking his seat as president of the Senate after cutting short a trip to the Middle East, Cheney announced he was voting for the legislation, mak ing the final tally 51-50 in favor of passage. Highlights of Budget Bill Highlights of a nearly $40 billion, five-year deficit reduction bill that passed the Senate by the narrowest of margins, 51-50, on Wednesday. Chris Cillizza provides daily posts on a range of political topics, from the race for control of Congress in 2006 to s crutinizing the 2008 presidential wannabes. The vote came after Senate Democrats used a last-minute parliamentary obj ection to force minor changes to the measure, stripping out three small provisions affecting health care policy. The new version now must go bac k to the House, which passed the legislation Monday 212-206. Although th e House is considered sure to pass the bill again, its members would hav e to be called back to Washington, since most have already gone home for the holidays. Otherwise, final passage could be delayed until early nex t year. The budget legislation would trim federal spending growth by nearly $40 b illion over the next five years. Fearing a close vote, Cheney cut short his Middle East trip yesterday and flew back to Washington overnight after five Republican senators signal ed they would vote against the measure, possibly leading to a 50-50 tie. That turned out to be the case, as the five Republicans joined all 44 Dem ocrats and one Democratic-leaning independent to oppose the hard-fought budget bill, which tackles the growth of entitlement programs such Medic aid and Medicare for the first time in nearly a decade. "The bottom line is, we stood firm and we made tough choices," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said t he bill aims to "put some discipline into the fiscal accounts of the fed eral government." In a final appeal before the vote, he said, "This is t he one vote you'll have this year to reduce the rate of growth of the fe deral government." But Democrats argued forcefully that the budget reductions take too much away from the poor and are essentially wiped out by a new round of GOP t ax cuts passed earlier this month. The bill "robs from the poor to make room for tax giveaways to the wealth iest individuals in the country," said Sen. The five maverick Republicans-- Susan M Collins and Olympia J Snowe of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln D Chafee of Rhode Island -- joined James M Jeffords, an independent from Vermon t, and all Senate Democrats in opposing the bill. The legislation would allow states to impose new fees on Medicaid recipie nts, cut federal child support enforcement funds, impose new work requir ements on state welfare programs and squeeze student lenders. Opponents said the po or would bear the brunt of the cuts -- especially to Medicaid, child sup port enforcement and foster care -- whereas original targets for belt-ti ghtening, such as pharmaceutical companies and private insurers, largely escaped sanction. A House-passed provision, for instance, would have allowed states to esta blish preferred medication lists for Medicaid, then steer patients to ch eaper drugs by charging higher co-payments for medicines off the list. But the final House-Senate compro mise eliminated the preferred-drug list provision, even though it mainta ined a House provision that allows states for the first time to charge p oor Medicaid patients co-payments, premiums and deductibles. Likewise, the compromise eliminated a Senate-passed provision that would have saved the federal government $36 billion over the next decade by el iminating financial incentives to lure managed care companies into Medic are. Under White House pressure, the Senate provision was gutted in the House-Senate compromise. Under the provisio n, student loan interest rates would be locked in at 68 percent and cou ld not be refinanced as commercial rates fluctuate. Private lenders woul d continue to be able to borrow money at a rate guaranteed to generate a profit. Currently, any time the student loan interest rate is higher than the ban k's guaranteed rate, the bank gets to keep the extra profit. Under the b udget bill, that windfall would have to be returned to the federal gover nment, a change that should yield $18 billion in savings. The change has strong Democratic advocates, including Sen. But student groups, higher-education advocates and their allies in Congre ss say much more of those savings should go toward expanding higher-educ ation assistance or lowering student loan rates, not deficit reduction. "They could give students a lower interest rate, but their choice is to keep interest rates high," said Luke Swarthout of the US Public Intere st Research Group. |
| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy More recently, it has been used in a more general sense, in which cultural themes are used in an electi on primarily but not exclusively in the American South. The use of the term, and its meaning and implication, are still hotly disputed. Reconstruc tion drove the Southern whites into the Democratic Party, but the Republ icans could still compete in the Southern States with a coalition of bla cks and highland whites. After the North agreed to withdraw federal troo ps under the Compromise of 1877, black voters in the south were left unp rotected. Jim Crow Law s to disenfranchise black voters, the Republican Partys base in the Sou th. The Republican Party lost its ability to effectively compete. The So uth became solidly Democratic until the middle of the 20th Century. Dixiecrat Pa rty, which ran Thurmond as its presidential candidate. The Dixiecrats, f ailing to deny the Democrats the presidency in 1948, soon dissolved, but the split lingered. In the 1964 presidential race, Goldwater adopted an extremely conservativ e stance. In particular, he emphasized the issue of what he called "stat es' rights". As a conservative, Goldwater did not favor strong action by the federal government. For instance, though not a segregationist perso nally, he strongly opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on the grounds t hat, first, it was an intrusion of the federal government into the affai rs of states and second, it was an interference with the rights of priva te persons to do business, or not, with whomever they chose. there can be no doubt that however some individuals might have interpreted Goldwater's discourse, the Stat e's Rights appeal was both subtle and profound in evoking, appealing to, and winning racist Southern white voters to the New Right, so called. T he level of violence directed against the Civil Rights marchers, leaders , sympathizers, and indeed the very public shows of deference that South ern political figures lavished upon various White supremacists occasiona lly brought to the docket for activities can leave no doubt as to clario n-like call of the revived "states' rights" arguments. All the more tell ing, indeed, are the results of the election: The only states that Goldw ater won in 1964 besides Arizona, were five Deep South states, Louisiana , Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. At this time, Senat or Goldwaters position was at odds with prominent moderate members of t he Republican Party, dominated at that time by East Coast Episcopalian. Civil Righ ts Act of 1964 than did the Democratic partygiven that the Southern De mocrats, aka "Dixiecrats," opposed their Northern Party matesand their Presidents, Kennedy and then Johnson . moderate into wins in other states, taking a solid majority in the electoral college. That is why the electi on of 1968 is sometimes cited as a realigning election. edit Evolution of the Southern Strategy As civil rights grew more accepted throughout the nation, basing a genera l election strategy on appeals to "states' rights" as a naked play again st civil rights laws would have resulted in a national backlash. The vast majority of Civil Rig hts groups, organizations, and figures campaigned against Reagan, based upon his opposition to the Civil Rights legislation during his governors hip of California, and his long history of decidedly anti-Civil Rights s entiments expressed in his speeches, interviews, writings, and televised appearances dating back to the 1950s. Jesse Helms, which attacked his opponent's al leged support of "racial quotas." as well as Democratic party supporters argue the obvious: support for that which Conservative acolytes depict as a new "Federalism" in the Republican pa rty platform is, and always has been, nothing but a code word for the po litics of resentment, of which racism provides the fuel. The Republicans consistently deny the charges, a position belied by the supposedly avun cular Reagan's allusions to and symbolic deference of the deep South's r acist past, institutions, personages, and indeed purveyors of racial opp ression and or violence. Trent Lott's supportive remarks of Thurmond's past militantly pro-segregation stances during the latter's h undredth birthday celebration, come to light. Typically, media and the R epublicans engage in what critics consider hand-ringing exercises of con trition, before then removing and or otherwise banishing the offending p erson. But the Party and its strategists continue building, refining, an d employing the now canonical discourse and strategies of the Southern S trategy unabated, unabashed, and unashamed. It is all the more revealing that the Democrats, fearing the power of the appeal and the continued loss of their so-called "White" ethnic voting bloc (ie, "Reagan Democrats"), do not pursue, explore, and or confront the Republicans and their New Right movement on their Southern strategy and its full implications after such contretemps have passed. In this, one discerns that the Democratic Party not only enables the Republican P arty to continue its racialized politics, but also has conceded to the p ower of said politics of White resentment within its own ranks. |