This Christmas Day is the worst in memory for more living Americans than heretofore. Here’s why, and here’s how we can make next Christmas a better one.
Naturally, Bush made it worse. Here’s hoping the righteous Americans who voted for Reagan, Bush or McCain will take pause in the Yuletide season, and put down the “individual responsibility” bullshit and try getting some Jesus.
#1 by Richard Warnick on December 25, 2009 - 10:24 am
I looked up Thom Hartmann, and found out he’s the tenth most important radio talk show host in America (the top nine are all right-wingers).
Michael Moore took a whole movie to make the same point. The way workers are treated by U.S. corporations is antithetical to both democracy and Christianity.
#2 by Uncle Rico on December 25, 2009 - 12:19 pm
Screw labor. Capital is where its at!
#3 by Larry Bergan on December 25, 2009 - 8:23 pm
Thom Hartmann is a very good radio host with a great understanding of history and the constitution. Can’t disagree with anything he said here.
#4 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on December 27, 2009 - 9:42 pm
Rest assured, Richard; capitalist Christians, on the average, deplore this treatment as well. Well, except for those who use pictures of dirt-floored mudshacks in Africa to remind the half-starved, insurance-deprived American laborer how lucky he is to have a job. Those who do deplore it don’t seem to believe that the collective will of society (formalized in government and codified in law) has any business imposing standards upon it. This despite the radical differences between labor conditions in newly-industrialized America and modern America–which we take for granted but for which government can take much of the credit.
What I can’t quite understand is why they don’t mind stopping the moral degradation of society (anti-pornography laws) and the destruction of the fetus (pro-life position), which, apparently, don’t conflict with the Conservative Christian Prime Directive: “do nothing to stand in the way of free will.” Truth be told, I agree with the anti-pornography, pro-life stance. But why is it a violation of the above motto to take away a rich person’s freedom to overspend in order to provide care for those who can’t care for themselves? What of the freedom of being alive, healthy, and able to feed one’s self? Aren’t those worth protecting, too?
Besides, the western world has had state orphanages and other government-run “charities” (charities of necessity?) for a couple of centuries, at least. Should we dissolve those? If we do keep them, we should tax everyone for them equally, right? But if you tax the poorest equally with the richest, you’ll just have more people in the orphanages and workhouses to be cared for, because you’ll be taking money from those who just barely have enough. Talk about creating poverty.
I have to assume that they have a good reason (or what they consider to be a good reason, at least). I would love to know what it is. Do they simply not perceive the need? Do they honestly believe that everyone has an social network adequate to meet those needs which they can’t meet on their own? Do they believe that the evils of excessive stratification (i.e. the necessity of relative poverty) are regrettable but that, ultimately, government intervention would be inappropriately authoritarian? I would love to understand the perspective of this group. Can someone who holds the capitalist Christian perspective please explain it? Understand that I don’t believe that Christ was a socialist or a capitalist, so please don’t impose any preconceived notions on my perspective. Just please explain yours and feel free to ask any questions you wish of me. The invitation is open.
Dwight Sheldon Adams