So the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal is harping on that old Ronald Reagan chestnut, "Are you better off than you were four years ago," and averring that it's "looming" over 2012.
We cats have always disliked that question, and not just because Reagan asked it. It implies that the only thing Americans care about is financial self-interest, when we know there are people in this country who concerned about non-greedy issues like voting rights, reproductive freedom, the environment, etc.
And of course the other thing that annoys us is that this year, the answer is yes, we are better off. When the Worst Person Who's Ever Lived was in charge, the economy was cratering — and as imperfect as the 2009 stimulus turned out to be (thanks to Republicans, we might add), we were yanked back from the abyss.
Sure, things could be better — but not by returning to the policies that drove us to the brink of disaster in the first place. And speaking of Republican policies, let's turn this question around a bit, and ask if we'll be better off four years from now if:
- Women have to have shaming wands shoved up their you-know-whats, just for seeking a Constitutionally protected medical procedure?
- Indigent women are forced to give birth to unwanted or unplanned children who are then left to fend for themselves with no state health, housing or education resources to ensure even a minimal quality of life?
- Physicians who perform mother-saving abortions are clapped in jail for murder?
- The Supreme Court has another two or three Clarence Thomases?
- Our public schools have stopped teaching science?
- Our local governments can no longer pay for police or fire protection?
- The Koch brothers are torching the entire western U.S.?
- The United States is at war in Syria, Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?
- Our taxes go up 100 percent so Willard Mitt Romney's can go down 50 percent?
- Medicare ceases to exist?
No comments:
Post a Comment