Those Who Voted for Bush May be In for a Big Surprise

[Javier]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chait5nov05,0,6348177.column
JONATHAN CHAIT
Those Who Voted for Bush May Be In for a Big Surprise
Concerns closer to his heart could trump all that talk about values.
Jonathan Chait

November 5, 2004

Dear rural/exurban Christian conservative voters: Congratulations on your election victory. By going to the polls in unprecedented numbers Tuesday, you overwhelmed an enormous Democratic turnout and returned President Bush to office, along with a number of very conservative senators. Now Bush is preparing to repay your efforts by moving immediately on your highest priorities: a flat tax and privatizing Social Security.

Oh, wait. You didn't particularly hanker for those things, did you? The election is so far in the past now that it has receded into a hazy memory. But as I recall, you voted for Bush because of his position on one issue — he opposes gay marriage — and on the general principle that he is a godly man who shares your values. Now Bush has decided, conveniently enough, that those values are identical to those of his wealthy financiers. (Go to any meeting of the Club for Growth, a group of affluent, libertarian-leaning Bush backers who mostly live in Washington and New York City. I'm sure you'll find them, like victorious Okla-homophobe Sen. Tom Coburn, deeply concerned about rampant high school lesbianism in the Sooner State.)

Bush is claiming the election as a mandate. There are, however, a couple of ways to interpret that. The conventional meaning is that a candidate gained office by promising to do a certain thing. Ronald Reagan in 1980 had a mandate to cut taxes and bolster the military. Bill Clinton in 1992 had a mandate to raise taxes on the rich, expand healthcare, reform welfare. Those were the central promises of the two campaigns.

Bush uses the word somewhat differently. As he told reporters Thursday, "I earned capital in the campaign — political capital — and now I intend to spend it."

What that means is that all you small-town folk voted for him not to pursue an agenda but just because he embodies family values. That gives him political power that he can use for purposes utterly unrelated to the source of his popularity. Sure, Bush mentioned some of these purposes in the campaign. But the references tended to be perfunctory and in code. Start with taxes.

Though Bush talks about tax "simplification," he doesn't seriously believe it. He has littered the tax code with complicated new provisions, including a ludicrous corporate tax bill stuffed with special provisions for sausage producers, foreign dog-race gamblers and the like. Simplification really means making the tax code flatter — i.e. less progressive. He doesn't care about making taxes simpler; he just wants rich people to pay a smaller share of them. There's little evidence to suggest small-town Ohioans flocked to the polls so they could have a portion of George Soros' tax burden shifted onto themselves.

On Social Security, Bush was just as evasive. Here, again, the tiny minority of people who closely follow this understood his code words. He wants to divert Social Security taxes into private accounts. Because those taxes pay for the benefits of current retirees, his plan would require cutting benefits or driving the national debt even higher.

Bush, of course, went to great pains to distance himself from these unpleasant facts. In 2001, he appointed a commission that proposed three plans to partly privatize Social Security, but he declined to embrace the panel's findings. A few weeks before the election, a New York Times Magazine story reported that Bush told GOP donors he planned to push privatization after the election. John Kerry's campaign circulated a nonpartisan study showing what the benefit cuts in one of the commission's plans would entail. Bush's spokesman dismissed the charge that he favored privatization or benefit-cutting as a "false, baseless attack."

Here's what Bush said Thursday: "I had asked [Daniel Patrick Moynihan], prior to his passing, to chair a committee of notable Americans to come up with some ideas on Social Security, and they did so. And it's a good place for members of Congress to start."

Got that? Last week, if you had described Bush as advocating the commission's plans, he would have denounced you for promoting a hysterical lie. Now they are at the top of the list of things he's saying he was elected specifically to enact.

Meanwhile, what about opposing gay marriage, the one mandate Bush might legitimately claim? Earlier this year, Bush barely lifted a finger in support of a constitutional amendment banning it. (Compare this to the furious arm-twisting he performs to get moderates to back his tax cuts.) If he has a mandate to do anything, it's to bring up the amendment again. However, he's said nothing about doing so, and nobody expects him to.

No surprise there — it's hardly in the Republican Party's interest. If gay marriage is banned everywhere, what's going to bring all those heartland conservatives to the polls next time?

[7even]

It aches in my heart that a president like Bush is reelected because he opposes gay marriage and abortion. The irony is so damn overwhelming.

[Ant]

He was not just elected for those reasons.  He was elected because of a republican desire to consolidate power at all costs.  In a few years that will be clear. 

[Don Rizzle]

all costs = smear campaigns against democrats remember what they did to clinton were they screaming about the threats of terrorism then? no they made stuff up about clinton and they did the same to kerry

[Ant]

Agreed.  The republicans place party power before american prosperity.  That should have been clear in the 90s.  They attempted to destroy the most successful American president in recent history because he cheated on his wife.  They willingly put the country at risk and  continue to do so. It is clear from their methods in the 2004.  they took advantage of the poor fanatics, i.e. Trauma, to continue to consolidate power.  Does the average republican really care about faith?  Does Cheney, Rumself, Gillespie, Rasciot, Rove?  Karl Rove played the religious folk, and they fell for it. 

[Trauma-san]

Flat Tax and private Social Security? BRING IT THE FUCK ON. 

[Ant]

Yeah that is really going to help you a lot... seeing as you make what?  20-25 k a year?  I bet your looking forward to the death tax being abolished too. 

These are all things that really help the poorer people in america.  My family is in the top tax bracket.  I will save thousands if GWB continues to cut taxes.  But I'm glad your happy for me.  I'll prolly save more than you make in a year.

[Trauma-san]

^ Yeah, I am happy for you.  It's not fair that you pay a higher percentage tax than I do. 

Your raging liberalism makes sense now.  By siding with the democrats, you abolish yourself of any guilt you feel for being born with a silver spoon in your mouth. 

[Ant]

Yes its amazing.  My whole family and my entire executive staff voted for Kerry too.  Imagine 1st generation, self-made americans, and 200k a year executives sticking up for your well-being.  Its crazy.

Yes i'm a raging liberal.  Especially considering I voted Bush in 2000, and most of my executives are republicans.

Why don't you try making sense for once.

You make at best 25k a year.  The tax cuts save you what? A few hundred bucks.  Congratulations.  You can buy an xbox and rent some video games with your tax cut.  Enjoy.  Just don't complain about the rich having more luxuries, better educations, better social life, prettier women, and higher quality of life.  After all you want the rich to prosper and the poor to well... who cares as long as they go to church every sunday. 

There is a simple reason why I'm smarter than you.  I can afford a better education.  Thats why I am a better conservative than even you are.  I've read friendman, adam smith, robert kagan, alexander hamilton.  You don't even know who half those people are.  Thats why you never make any sense.  I can afford travel too.  Thats why I understand the european perspective.  Unfortunately it costs too much for you to go to Europe and see another way of life.  Unfortunately it costs to much for you to settle down and have a nice family life.  Unfortunately you won't be able to send your children to a good school.  Unfortunately they will grow up to be as ignorant as you.  Unfortunately your children are more likely to abuse theif wives, to be alcholic, and to have divorces.  But just remember.  It was your choice to live life that way.  You choose to widen the gap between the rich and poor. 

You choose to give more power to the wealthy, and to give the poor church as a consolation prize.  Its the life you wanted, and its the life you deserve.  Thats why your pushing 30 and screwing around being the village idiot on dubcc.  Thats why you have a shit job, if any, and a poor education at best.  It was your choice.  Stand by it. 

[Thirteen]

hey ant, since you're rich....do you have an opening for an ex sat and telecom worker that is currently in school for computer science and is learning to kill people in his spare time?

[Ant]

we dont really have a big IT department.  are you in school for comp. sci.?

[Thirteen]

sure am. it's boring as hell... i'm surrounded by nerds and fat ugly bitches....i should have went into nursing or some shit

[Ant]

Yeah honestly I took one comp sci. class and didn't really have the patience to go in that direction.  I'm somewhat of a technology junkie though.  You might wanna check this site below.  Its pretty cool if ur a comp. sci. guy, or if you just like software stuff in general.

http://sourceforge.net/

Maybe you already know of it though.  If not, its the meeting place for open source software projects.  I use a good amount of open-source stuff, and really find it an interseting way of developing software and doing business. Worth checking out. 

[Sikotic™]

Flat Tax and private Social Security? BRING IT THE FUCK ON.