Thursday, March 26, 2015

Republicans are not advancing modernity (#2246)

The republican party has shown it's intent and it is not for the benefit of society a large. It's intent instead is to roll back modernity and it's innovative processes for the more ancient paradigm of patriarchy in a plutocratic government. Republicans would have the many dependent upon the few as a rule not to be broken. They want limited access to power and wealth for the masses while they maintain and strengthen laws that protect their power and wealth. I posed this question yesterday in a semi-serious way, when was a bill introduced for legislation by Republicans that actually benefited the middle or poor class? I have yet to think of one instance in my lifetime of watching national politics of any such bill. I am not saying that it hasn't happened but if it has it is a distant memory. On the other hand how many bills for legislation have Republicans offered that hurt the middle and poor class? the number is so high that hundreds would be too low, most likely thousands. From restricting the vote, to cutting winter oil for the poor in cold state, to cutting food stamps for millions of families with mostly children affected, to not continuing unemployment insurance when the need was great, to testing for drugs those who need welfare while not testing for drugs the wealthy who take far more in welfare from our social programs. The intent is clear that Republicans want to stop all social programs that affect the downtrodden while enhancing social programs and further extending tax breaks to the wealthy. Republicans know that our economic system is rigged toward the wealthy yet they want less regulation and less protection of our natural resources. As Republicans continue to cut research and development, the engine that modernizes our society, we see the final nail in our coffin coming toward our democracy. If Republicans are not stopped from their pied piper example, we will all be off the cliff soon enough, all of us, yes even Republicans.

No comments: