April 13, 2010

Because I am cranky and my back hurts this morning, I wonder why morons keep talking about socialism

And why those same morons seemed to only care about deficits and spending under a Democratic president. First idiot,
Former Sen. Dan Coats, running for the open Indiana Senate seat that will be vacated by Evan Bayh (D), said he is running out of a “call of duty,” because he said he believes the current “radical” administration, is “moving this country rapidly toward a European Socialist style of government.”

“Wasn’t it Margaret Thatcher that said the whole thing wrong with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money?” Coats, 66, said in an interview here with First Read. Asked if he sees this administration as “moving toward socialism,” Coats said, “I do. I do. I think this is a socialistic agenda. It’s definitely moving this country rapidly toward a European socialist style of government.”
Just to reiterate, former Senator, your party passed major Medicare Prescription bill, two wars, and did so all on the credit card. If that isn't using other people's money, then what the fuck is? This is moronic.

And speaking of moronic, check out Arizona's Jon Kyle
Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said, "It's a question of whether we pay for it or we simply say, 'Put it on the tab for our kids and grandkids to pay for it.'"
Benen notes:
"Kyl had no similar concerns when he supported asking our kids and grandkids to pay for the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, Bush's tax cuts, Medicare Part D, and No Child Left Behind. He and his cohorts only seem troubled by deficits when it's the unemployed who might benefit. I wonder why that is."
Again. Moronic. Inconsistent, and not even close.

And speaking of what kind of government we want, read this story on our weak mine safety regulation. Republicans seem to favor a government that doesn't regulate industry. Yeah, yeah, they all say here on the blog that everyone wants some reasonable regulations, but I don't believe that to be true. Not doubting the commenters here, mind you, but doubting that the Republicans running the party want regulation of any kind. They routinely undermine regulatory efforts and just look at how they stand on financial regulation and mining regulation? Profit trumps people every time. The ultimate irony here is that many of the people I argue with about regulation are hard core Christian conservatives--who seem to think that WWJD was to lobby against mine safety because it undermines the tonnage output, and cuts into the profits.



Bob said...

I just got done listening to a bunch of lobbyists claiming to represent industry and small buisness bitch about how the state of Michigan is so over taxed and over regulated. As if.

These guys won't be happy until there are no regualtions and no taxes on buisness.

steves said...

Mine safety is taken very seriously in some places, but it is still an inherently dangerous task from what I have been told (my father and grandfather both worked in the mining industry in some capacity). Unions deserve some of the credit for forcing many of the safety standards we have today. I wonder what the safety record of union mines is versus non-union mines?

The problem is that mines in Africa and China don't have any kinds of safety standards (just look at their accident rates), so they are more profitable. I certainly don't think we should abandon standards, but I can understand the frustration.