January 06, 2008


IMPEACH BUSH


IMPEACH CHENEY

IT'S THE ECONOMY AGAINThe old saying is that people who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. How many times do we have to see Republican economic policies at work and the destruction they cause to finally realize that Republican economics are a disaster? The most obvious example is the Great Depression under Herbert Hoover. But under Nixon we got "stagflation," a combination of high inflation and a stagnant economy. That continued under Ford. When Reagan came into office we had record high interest rates, designed to "squeeze" inflation out of the economy. Never mind all the jobs lost in the process. Then we had record deficits under Reagan and George H. W. Bush and only modest job growth. Under the current Bush we again have horrifying deficits, inflation of necessities like energy and food, and stagnant wages. Unemployment figures are also starting to tick up. Democrats in the presidential race need to emphasize economic issues more. Katrina Vanden Heuvel looks at the message from John Edwards in this article at www.thenation.com:

It was left to Edwards to speak personally and passionately about the desperate need for a new tax and trade policy. His was a more hopeful message Saturday night-with empathy for a struggling middle class, with talk about uniting and galvanizing the American people to take on entrenched interests and end "the stranglehold on our democracy." He modulated his full-throated attacks on corporations--tonight targeting "irresponsible" corporations and applauding those like Costco which do better by their workers. But he remained true to his fighting for change spirit. When challenged by the others about the limits of "fighting" as a way to get things done, Edwards shot back," you cannot nice these people to death; I am not in a fight *with* the American people but *for* the people." If Edwards does exit the field,and it's hard to see how there's room for two "change agents" coming out of NH, the economic facts on the ground -- housing crisis, job losses-- should move Obama and Clinton to adopt key elements, if not the style, of Edwards' populist message and program. They'd be smart to do so. There was one revealing moment which helps explain why fair, simple and sane progressive economic proposals get such a raw deal in our corporate- owned media. It also explains why pundits label Edwards' agenda "angry." When the majority-supported reform of rolling back tax cuts for the rich drew support from the Democrats, ABC moderator & Nightly News anchor Charles Gibson seemed clueless about middle class reality. Wouldn't such a reform, he demanded, hurt a couple made up of two professors at St. Anselm's who make $200,000 a year. $200,000!? The titter in St Anselm's hall spread quickly. Maybe Gibson could use a crash Econ 101 course: "The Strapped American Middle Class."