In the last fifteen years there has been a disturbing trend among politicians and pundits to behave in a punitive manner. Not just in dealing with criminals but in the over all attitude in policy. Like the worst high school teacher who punishes the whole class because one person misbehaves, systems are now geared towards treating everyone as if they are out to cheat the government.
They make a great deal of noise about the few people who have abused social programs, while conveniently ignoring the many who don't. Programs that were designed to make life easier for life's unfortunates; welfare, government disability programs, employment insurance, and refugee status, have gone from taking each case on its particulars to assuming that everybody applying is trying to cheat the government.
Whilst corporations rack up huge profits and pay little tax, and individual executives receive salary in tax-exempt stock options, politicians claim to be protecting the interests of taxpayers by vilifying those easiest to blame and least able to defend themselves. Welfare mothers, refugees, the disabled, and the unemployed are the ones who will rob you blind if you give them half a chance.
Since aside from refugee claimants these people have all contributed to the tax pool and employment insurance programs (in Canada you can't apply for employment insurance unless you have worked a certain length of time and contributed a certain amount of money) shouldn't they be given the same consideration as those the government is trying to protect? Or does applying for any sort of assistance automatically make you suspect?
Have you ever heard a politician worrying about taxpayers when corporations are applying for tax credits to establish a business? Five years latter when they move the plant to a country with out a labour code or environmental laws does anyone mention abuse of the system?
Corporate Welfare Bums (the term was coined by Canadian politician David Lewis back in the seventies in reference to the ridiculously small amount of taxes paid by corporations and their executives) don't seem to incur the rancour of political parties in the same way that a single mother does. Well look at all the good corporations do. They provide jobs and stimulate the economy by producing goods that people will buy thus increasing our tax revenues.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Temple Stark
between $10 and $15 per hour
Canadian dollars? Because $15 is not bad and $10 is scraping by if with any kind of family but OK for a single person not in a major metro area.
You make some great points - and spell "later" wrong to boot ;-) Bravo.
Blindness is never so acute as when partisanship cuts away "the vision thing."
2 - gonzo marx
once again gypsyman not only gives us a great Read and shit to Think about
but he rips the scab from the festering Wound of our north american psyche, dances away from the spurting Pus and forces us to gaze into the Maw unblinking
scapegoating
in all of human History, it's never been a good Thing
and excercise for the gentle Readers to research, ponder and understand Why
thanks again g-man
Excelsior!
3 - Matthew T. Sussman
We'd be better off if more bloggers did more about it an ran for office.
4 - Temple Stark
Not if they just start fights and run Matt ?????
5 - Matthew T. Sussman
Or if they start every press conference by stating their current mood and the song they're listening to.
6 - Dave Nalle
In honor of this article I'm now going to start calling Bush the 'Scapegoat in Chief', because what single individual in our current society receives more blame for choices made by our nation as a whole than he does? More than anyone I can think of in recent history, he has become the single focus for accusations when people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own mistakes and bad choices. He's our whipping boy and boogeyman all in one. Lucky fellow.
Dave
7 - gonzo marx
oh Mr Nalle...back to being the Apologist?
how disappointing
in Truth, what you are witnessing are the "birds" of this Administrations "choices" coming "Home" to roost
sorry to be the one to break it to you, but most of what i have seen and read are good Questions revolving around the Administrations decision making on a vareity of topics
say it as ya like...but i think it is too late to try and distract the Public from asking those Questions and holding the Administration Responsible
and this is only the Beginning...as i have pointed out (with help from troll among others) in a few other Threads today
"interesting times" indeed
Excelsior!
8 - Dave Nalle
I don't believe anything in #6 could rationally be described as 'apologist'. There may be some good questions as you point out, but there's far more going on in the way of paranoid and completely unfounded allegations.
It's fine to have questions or critiques of the president, but the 'bush is evil' mentality which you and others exhibit, laying every imagined wrong at his feet and spinning every action into some sort of great conspiracy only makes you look like cranks or partisan hatemongers in the face of facts and reality, and it makes what good points you have appear as invalid as the crazy ones.
Dave
9 - gonzo marx
now now, Mr Nalle..when have i EVER described Bush or this Administration as "evil"
i defy you to find me saying such
have i said i disliked their policies...yes
have i shown WHY i find said policies/decisions objectionable to my sense of Ethics?
yes
have i put forward any "conspiracy theory" ?
nope
have i shown the clearly stated PNAC Agenda, pointed out the signatories and clearly delineated their significance in this Administration and the formation of certain aspects of Foreign Policy?
yep
do i give a shit about the Individuals involved or their political affiliations?
nope
it's the ACTIONS that i deplore and talk about ...NOT the individuals
and again, i defy you to find where i have spoken about those people other than to discuss their actions, afilliations and self proclaimed objectives as well as the consequences of those actions
so nice try attempting to paint me as some kind of "loon"
i freely admit to being quite crazed on many levels...but i will gladly let the record of my Words stand on their own and be held Accountable and Responsible for them
just like i hold our elected Representatives Accountable and Responsible for theirs
try reading and responding to comments #30-34 here
THAT is the kind of thing i am talking about...and if these Facts don't concern you, as well as the implications...then i don't know how to communicate with you effectively
Excelsior!
10 - Bliffle
Dave: "In honor of this article I'm now going to start calling Bush the 'Scapegoat in Chief', because what single individual in our current society receives more blame for choices made by our nation as a whole than he does? More than anyone I can think of in recent history, he has become the single focus for accusations when people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own mistakes and bad choices."
Hey, I know how to parry this one, I learned it from my 1st wife who was an expert in it's use. Goes like this:
I confess. it's all my fault. I supported the invasion because of WMDs. I didn't know. I was too trusting. That's my big fault: I trust people too much. Sob!
11 - Matthew T. Sussman
Of course the POTUS is responsible for everything that happens in the administration and beyond.
I remember when Bush told the American people "I am responsible" for the failures of the hurricane response.
He totally fooled everyone, because he didn't accept an ounce of blame. There is a big difference between fault and responsibility.
Surely there were some things he could have done better, as is with everyone in the government. They know who they are.
I'm not gonna deal out blame because I'm not an expert on the hierarchy of federal/state government, or FISA bills, or CIA leaks, or propaganda in the times of war.
I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess thsi means my commenting in 2006 is off to a bad start.
12 - gonzo marx
nah Suss, yer off to a great start, IMO
why? because you are coming at it from the Issues, NOT from any kind of partisan stance, you are willing to Ask the Questions...and that IS important
my Question on this "theme" is...
where does the "buck" stop?
we know Truman's answer
Excelsior!
13 - Matthew T. Sussman
I'm inclined to say it's not all the President's fault, because it takes so many people to make a government work and I'm not gonna aim at the executive branch like it's the hip thing to do this days.
Of course, in this day in age that makes me a Fox News sheep card-carrying neocon.
The more and more I think about it, the more and more I am confused on what's really going on at 1600 Pennsylvania. Maybe that's what they want, but hey I got a sports section to run.
And maybe in a few years when I don't have a travelling job I'll consider breaking myself into the world of politics as a man who hasn't been elected to anything since a crossing guard lieutenant in sixth grade.
But here's to fewer typos in 2006 comments.
14 - gonzo marx
Suss sez...
*I'm inclined to say it's not all the President's fault, because it takes so many people to make a government work and I'm not gonna aim at the executive branch like it's the hip thing to do this days.*
note i have NOT used the word "fault"...instead i say "Responsibility"
big difference, and i am fairly certain you Know that
Suss sez...
*Of course, in this day in age that makes me a Fox News sheep card-carrying neocon.*
never would i even think something like that about you, or your Opinions that have been voiced here on BS...and allow me to state for the Record, anyone the even tried to make such an Accusation woudl quickly get WTFpwned by yers truly for being partisan Idiots who simply can't read
Suss sez...
*But here's to fewer typos in 2006 comments.*
now THAT one this dyslexic mad typist can get behind
my Best to All this New Years...give yer Missus a kiss fer me, Suss
..:::bows, hand over fist:::..
Excelsior!
15 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
POTUS? SCOTUS? Boy, what you guys are doing to the titles of the "august" institutions of your country. It's as bad as what Israelis do to the titles of our own institutions. The High Court of Justice is called Bagá"tz - members of parliament are called Hhá"kim - when you say it it sounds like phlegm you spit in the garbage. Rather fitting, in my opinion.
Of course POTUS and SCOTUS sound like the fluids coming from a perv's oprgasm...
But I digress.
What I WAS going to mention to you fine folks across The Pond is that it would be nice if governments loaded all of their faults upon a real scapegoat - the goat that carries all of our sins into the wilderness. That is what the high priest (abbreviated to Ka"tz, by the way) used to do back in the ancient days when we actually HAD a Temple here.
Unfortunately, we appear to be the goats in this picture...
Awright! Where's a can I can lick the salt off of and a troll on a bridge to kill?.....
[and Ruvy stalks off to the bank in anger - fade to black.....]
16 - Bliffle
If a guy seeks a lot of power and pursues it aggressively, then he must be held responsible for the effects of his administration.
17 - Dave Nalle
If a guy seeks a lot of power and pursues it aggressively, then he must be held responsible for the effects of his administration.
Not to mention for every imagined crime, made-up policy impact and natural disaster that happens while he's in office.
Dave
18 - gonzo marx
Nalle sez...
*Not to mention for every imagined crime, made-up policy impact and natural disaster that happens while he's in office.*
and here we are...more distract,distort,deny and destroy
how about we just hold our elected Representatives Accountable for the things they are Responsible for?
fair enough?
now, i am very glad that Ruvy brings up the Fact that the term/Concept of a "scapegoat" comes from Jewish Tradition...he correctly points out that it stems from the ancient Jewish practice of blood Sacrifice...the Priest would claim to place the weight of Sins into the animal and Ritually kill it as an Offering to God in order to cleanse said Sin form the Faithful
this same Concept is utilized by christian Dogma when it comes to the "Sacrifice of the Lamb", meaning the Crucifixion, to cleanse the sins from Mankind
it has since been used quite extensively by political Leaders in western History since then
they place all the "blame" for whatever ails their People on some minority segment of their population, or whatever Foe they want removed(for whatever reasons) and then proceed to convince the People that if they just remove/kill off those "scapegoats" then all will be well
my take on what gypsyman was pointing out in the original Post is just this behavior, that many times political Leaders use this tactic to justify and push their Agenda, some of which often has nothing to do with the original stated Intent
and THAT is something we, as a free Society, shoudl always be alert for...it is also one of the things that our Constitution is designed to PREVENT...by clearly delineating the Power of Government, establishing "checks and balances" and by being constituted in the Rule of Law rather than the whim of the "Majority" or the desires of our elected Representatives alone
way...too...heavy, for this early in the day
mebbe i am the Crazy one here in that i WANT that System to work as intended, that i despise and abhor those that would try and circumvent that System "in the Name of (insert scapegoat here)"
me, i don't want to give the terrorist bastards the kind of Power that would allow U.S. to forget the Principles of our Constitution and the Rule of Law just to make it more "convenient" to fight against our real Foe
but what the fuck do i know, eh?
Excelsior!
19 - Dave Nalle
and here we are...more distract,distort,deny and destroy
how about we just hold our elected Representatives Accountable for the things they are Responsible for?
That would be fine, gonzo. Convince people out there not to blame Bush for the Tsunami, global warming, the Clinton recession, 'tax cuts for the rich' and Katrina and I'll be right there with you.
Dave
20 - gonzo marx
Bush fascinating...i don't know of anyone blaming for many of those things...his Response to them, and policies concerning them...THOSE he should be held Accountable for...
don't you Agree?
Excelsior!
21 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo wrote,
"now, i am very glad that Ruvy brings up the Fact that the term/Concept of a 'scapegoat' comes from Jewish Tradition...he correctly points out that it stems from the ancient Jewish practice of blood Sacrifice...the Priest would claim to place the weight of Sins into the animal and Ritually kill it as an Offering to God in order to cleanse said Sin form the Faithful
this same Concept is utilized by christian Dogma when it comes to the 'Sacrifice of the Lamb', meaning the Crucifixion, to cleanse the sins from Mankind."
That is not quite what I said. Maybe you needed ANOTHER a cup of coffee before trying to do the interfaith stuff here.
THIS is what I wrote. "it would be nice if governments loaded all of their faults upon a real scapegoat - the goat that carries all of our sins into the wilderness. That is what the high priest (abbreviated to Ka"tz, by the way) used to...."
There were (and will be in the future) TWO goats at the Yom Kippur service. One is sacrificed to gain forgiveness for the people. The other, the scapegoat, is presumed to carry all the sins of the people off to the wilderness.
22 - gonzo marx
thanks for the clarification Ruvy..much appreciated
sometimes stream of consciousness ain't as accurate as i would like...but i am always willing to stand corrected and learn stuff
and yer right about the coffee
Excelsior!
23 - Bliffle
Dave: "If a guy seeks a lot of power and pursues it aggressively, then he must be held responsible for the effects of his administration.
Not to mention for every imagined crime, made-up policy impact and natural disaster that happens while he's in office."
When a guy siezes too much power he stifles the autonomy of his underlings and lieutenants and so he is stuck with some responsibility for THEIR inattentoins and mistakes.
Conversely, a good leader nurtures his peoples independence and autonomy and secures their position so they CAN assume responsibility, even for failures.
But if his only purpose is to dominate, then he is just a control-freak who will castigate his underlings and end their initiative and he'll just use his power to defend his power. He'll fail, eventually, but may hurt a lot of people first.
Since the feds couldn't act in NOLA until GWB got personally involved, it suggests the second case to me: he looks like a control freak.
24 - Dave Nalle
Most people who study the administration seem not to think that Bush is a control freak - rather the opposite. He depends enormously on advisers, and that's a lot of the problem as many see it.
Dave
25 - Bliffle
We all hear different things.