All cheered by religious conservatives. When did "protecting the comfortable" become a religious thing? A friend of mine, with deep experience with the disabled posted on Facebook that state cuts threaten the lives and health of Oklahoma's disabled population. All while our governor brags about cutting taxes for the rich.
This Maine librarian seemed to put it best:
"I don't think it's a moral decision, because taking money from people who don't have much money and giving it to people who have more money than the people you took it from seems, well, greedy," she said. "Greed is frowned upon in every major world religion -- and I don't think agnostics and atheists look too kindly upon it, either."
She wondered aloud, "Is this about a quid pro quo? A gift from elected officials to wealthy people who have donated, or will donate, to election and re-election campaigns?"
Finally, as the clock wound down, McDaniel dropped the hammer.
"It's not economically sound. It's not morally sound. And I think you know that," she said. "I would be embarrassed to support something so ludicrous -- taking from the poor to give to the rich.
"Maybe you're testing us, checking to see if we, your constituents, are really paying attention, really listening," she continued. "I hope that's what's going on, because the alternative involves me losing faith in representative government, in democracy and in you, the elected officials."
For me it is about losing faith in the people who most often talk about morality. Except for them, it only means being sexually moral. It never means being economically moral.
As I keep saying, there is a class war going on. But it is the rich attacking the poor and middle class, and a big chunk of the middle class is cheering for the rich.