Skip to main content

Bush&The Right wing Republicans say Hunger wiped out by the stroke of a pen?


More remarkable miracles carried out by the right wing politics in the age of "New Speak. " Hunger wiped out by the stroke of a pen. Who could have thought it would be so easy?

Reminds me of when the Reagan administration was cutting programs to the poor and classified Ketchup as a vegetable. They also declared that "War is Peace" and "Helping people is actually hurting them."
The difference was Reagan was a master at propaganda. He was a second rate actor but a first rate liar. Of course the corporate media covered up his flubs, not all, but a lot.

They also cover up many of Bush's flubs but he makes so many and is so ridiculous they can't hide them all.

W. Bush has had unlimited power (both houses of Congress were Republican, the media was owned by Republicans and they highly slanted it, the Supreme Court was Republican (Jimmy Carter didn't have an opportunity to appoint anyone), etc. So W. Bush could do crimes openly without being challenged (no-bid contract war profiteering, for example).

So, Bush wasn't even concerned about covering up some crimes and flubs, he just wanted to cover up the major ones.

Reagan was ruthless (as governor of California he ordered the beating of Vietnam War protestors at UC Berkeley). He was also a master propagandist (example: "Tear Down That Wall" occurred after East and West Germany agreed to do it, and Reagan had nothing to do with it).

I joke about W. Bush going to China and telling them to "Tear Down That Wall." (Referring to the Great Wall of China--one of the wonders of the world). Bush has little understanding about world affairs (nor is he particularly interested in learning). When Bush attends an international meeting he is focused solely on the menu ("where's the pork dinner" he constantly interjected). Such concepts as "diplomacy" and "peace" are of no concern to him (he probably gets drowsy a lot while listening to plans that could help the US and the whole world (Reagan slept at meetings)).

Republicans rule in bubbles. . .surrounded by warmongering yes-men and they eat the finest foods. They advocate guns for the public while no guns are permitted in their environment. They eat luxury items while saying that "hunger doesn't exist" or "the poor never had it so good" (Barbara Bush, post Katrina), or "the poor are used to poverty" (again, Barbara Bush, post Katrina). They blame poverty on the poor (Reagan blamed the farmers for losing their farms though his lousy economic conditions caused their collective downfall and Japan subsequently buying up formerly family farms in the heartland of America).

Republicans don't consider the poor, and don't realize that a wealthy populace makes a wealthy nation. What good does it do to be the richest person in a staving nation?
Original Post
It probably does a lot of good to be the richest person in a starving nation. I doubt you would be starving. Plus, you would be paying a lot of taxes that would go to welfare. Assuming, this starving nation you speak of is the United States. I was considered in poverty while I was in college, but I never starved being out on my own.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×