Republicans Think The Only Good Americans Are The Rich

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing — as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.” 

Those are the words of Republican Senator Chuck Grassley (pictured) in an interview with the Des Moines Register. His words are vile, but they ring true for him and his GOP congressional cohorts. For them, the only real Americans worth thinking about are the rich -- those who have at least $11 million. And it explains why the tax plan they are trying to pass ignores the plight of ordinary Americans to reward the rich.

Respected journalist Dan Rather has written the perfect response to Grassley's ridiculous statement. I'm posting Rather's response below, because I think it deserves to be read by as many Americans as possible (and I agree with every word he has written. Rather writes:

When the time comes, and I hope it comes soon, to bury this era of moral rot and the defiling of our communal, social, and democratic norms, the perfect epitaph for the gravestone of this age of unreason should be Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley's already infamous quote:

"I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing... as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

Grassley's vision of America, quite frankly, is one I do not recognize. I thought the heart of this great nation was not limited to the ranks of the plutocrats who are whisked through life in chauffeured cars and private jets, whose often inherited riches are passed along to children, many of whom no sacrifice or service is asked. I do not begrudge wealth, but it must come with a humility that money never is completely free of luck. And more importantly, wealth can never be a measure of worth.

I have seen the waitress working the overnight shift at a diner to give her children a better life, and yes maybe even take them to a movie once in awhile - and in her, I see America.

I have seen the public school teachers spending extra time with students who need help and who get no extra pay for their efforts, and in them I see America.

I have seen parents sitting around kitchen tables with stacks of pressing bills and wondering if they can afford a Christmas gift for their children, and in them I see America.

I have seen the young diplomat in a distant foreign capital and the young soldier in a battlefield foxhole, and in them I see America.

I have seen the brilliant graduates of the best law schools who forgo the riches of a corporate firm for the often thankless slog of a district attorney or public defender's office, and in them I see America.

I have seen the librarian reshelving books, the firefighter, police officer, and paramedic in service in trying times, the social worker helping the elderly and infirm, the youth sports coaches, the PTA presidents, and in them I see America.

I have seen the immigrants working a cash register at a gas station or trimming hedges in the frost of an early fall morning, or driving a cab through rush hour traffic to make better lives for their families, and in them I see America.

I have seen the science students unlocking the mysteries of life late at night in university laboratories for little or no pay, and in them I see America.

I have seen the families struggling with a cancer diagnosis, or dementia in a parent or spouse. Amid the struggles of mortality and dignity, in them I see America.

These, and so many other Americans, have every bit as much claim to a government working for them as the lobbyists and moneyed classes. And yet, the power brokers in Washington today seem deaf to these voices. It is a national disgrace of historic proportions.

And finally, what is so wrong about those who must worry about the cost of a drink with friends, or a date, or a little entertainment, to rephrase Senator Grassley's demeaning phrasings? Those who can't afford not to worry about food, shelter, healthcare, education for their children, and all the other costs of modern life, surely they too deserve to be able to spend some of their “darn pennies” on the simple joys of life.

Never mind that almost every reputable economist has called this tax bill a sham of handouts for the rich at the expense of the vast majority of Americans and the future economic health of this nation. Never mind that it is filled with loopholes written by lobbyists. Never mind that the wealthiest already speak with the loudest voices in Washington, and always have. Grassley’s comments open a window to the soul of the current national Republican Party and it it is not pretty. This is not a view of America that i think President Ronald Reagan let alone President Dwight Eisenhower or Teddy Roosevelt would have recognized. This is unadulterated cynicism and a version of top-down class warfare run amok.

Sen. Grassley - Liar Or Idiot ?

It seems like every week, the Republican lies get worse and more ridiculous in the health care debate. A few days ago, Sen. Chuck Grassley went on an Iowa City radio station to pass along the latest Republican fear tactic -- that the Democratic health care plan would ration health care according to age, resulting in the unnecessary deaths of older people.

Grassley even had the absolute gall to use fellow senator Ted Kennedy as an example. He said, " In countries that have government-run health care, just to give you an example, I’ve been told that the brain tumor that Sen. Kennedy has — because he’s 77 years old — would not be treated the way it’s treated in the United States. In other words, he would not get the care he gets here because of his age. In other words, they’d say ‘well he doesn’t have long to live even if he lived another four to five years.’ They’d say ‘well, we gotta spend money on people who can contribute more to economy.’ It’s a little like people saying when somebody gets to be 85 their life is worth less than when they were 35 and you pull the tubes on them."

If someone really told him that, then he's a fool for believing it. If not, then he's just a liar. There are so many things wrong with this argument that it's hard to know where to start.

First, the countries with single-payer government health insurance do not ration according to age. If an elderly person did not get treatment, it would be because he/she is not strong enough to survive the treatment, or because the said treatment would not provide a cure or extend their life.

Second, the United States health care system involves the most unfair rationing of health care of any system in the industrialized world. In the United States, the more money you have, the more (and better) health care you get. It's easy to see why the Republicans support the status quo, because their corporate masters and rich colleagues get the best care available (and don't have to share that access with less affluent citizens).

Third, none of the Democratic plans offered so far would change Medicare significantly. That means the elderly would basically receive the same care they receive right now. The debate is on whether younger and poorer people will receive insurance and adequate health care, which they are denied under the current system.

Fourth, Sen. Kennedy did not receive first-rate treatment because our current system is so great. He got it because he's famous and rich. No private company is going to deny paying for a senator's health care, and if they did, he has enough money to pay for it himself. If Kennedy was not rich and famous, he would already be dead under our current system (and he'd be the first to tell us that).

Grassley, like the other Republicans, doesn't want to fix our health care system. That's why they have no solution except to funnel more money into the private insurance companies (which even they know is not a real solution). So the only option they have is lying and fearmongering. Don't believe them!