| Love that the New York Times has freed up its columns for all to view. So now I can link directly to today's op-ed by Paul Krugman, "Conservatives Are Such Jokers," a gut punch to conservative rhetoric about the poor. In short, from the President on down, many conservatives show no empathy for those less fortunate, only cruel humor and callous disregard.
In anticipation of the veto, William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, had this to say: "First of all, whenever I hear anything described as a heartless assault on our children, I tend to think it's a good idea. I'm happy that the president's willing to do something bad for the kids."
Heh-heh-heh.
Most conservatives are more careful than Mr. Kristol. They try to preserve the appearance that they really do care about those less fortunate than themselves. But the truth is that they aren't bothered by the fact that almost nine million children in America lack health insurance. They don't think it's a problem.
"I mean, people have access to health care in America," said Mr. Bush in July. "After all, you just go to an emergency room."
And on the day of the veto, Mr. Bush dismissed the whole issue of uninsured children as a media myth. Referring to Medicaid spending - which fails to reach many children - he declared that "when they say, well, poor children aren't being covered in America, if that's what you're hearing on your TV screens, I'm telling you there's $35.5 billion worth of reasons not to believe that."
The thing is, with Bush and Republican policies favoring the rich at the cost of the rest of us, more and more folks are feeling the pinch of rising health care and housing costs and stagnant wages, while shouldering a disproportionate share of the taxation burden. So GOP contempt is hitting a pretty broad swath of voters.
I'm with Krugman. I believe this contempt is genuine not feigned. And it would take an exceptional amount of empathy for someone like Bush - a pampered son of privilege and power who was given everything he's had in life - to feel anything but contempt for his economic and social "lessors." He's never had to choose between credit card payments and the mortgage, health insurance or the heating bill.
Closer to home, it's telling that our state's contribution to the list of richest Congressional representatives, Dennis Rehberg, is dismissive of concerns for health care costs:
CALLER: We've talked a lot tonight about healthcare, and it seems like the government pretty selective about health care. I imagine you get government health care, too? Would you be willing to give up your government health care until the rest of us Americans can at least buy into the health care plan that you're allowed to have as a Congressman? Because I know it would help our business a lot, it would lower our costs.
REHBERG: I gotta tell ya, I've gone many years with minimal health care, and, frankly, while I don't find your question to be offensive, I pay for my health care, it comes out of my salary, I have Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
I always like it when someone calls and says, "you, Congressman, don't pay any Social Security!" Well, excuse me! Yes, we do. In 1984 they passed a law saying we're on Social Security like everyone else.
And so, I pay for my health care, like anyone else pays for their health care. I have Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
And you wonder why we're seeing difficulty in reforming our health care system?
Just another reason to elect Bill Kennedy... |
