|
||||
|
 |
|
La Guerra de la Palabra
Bush doublespeak on Iraq
and taxes insults our intelligence
I wonder when we'll get straight talk from the president about the big
decisions he's making for our country. For instance, take his public stance
on Iraq and try to square it with his stance on North Korea. For months,
Bush has been telling the American public to prepare for war with Iraq
because of the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and
alleged sponsorship of al-Qaida. Yet, for months Bush had a special intelligence unit search for a link
between al-Qaida and Saddam, only to come up empty. Now UN inspectors can't
find a smoking gun and have asked for more time. In spite of the inability
to develop any evidence of a real Iraqi threat to the United States, Bush
remains bellicose, calling for ''regime change'' as the solution for the bad
man of Baghdad. Meanwhile, North Korea not only admits it has nuclear weapons, it has
broadcast its desire to export the technology. Intelligence reports verify
North Korean nuclear capability. A few weeks ago, the United States
intercepted a North Korean shipment of missiles to Yemen. Despite the seemingly more immediate danger North Korea poses, Bush is
offering a peaceful resolution with Pyongyang. To date, there's been no
cogent rationale offered for using diplomacy to defuse the real threat posed
by North Korea, and war for the thus-far imagined threat posed by Iraq, just
doublespeak. The president's penchant for misinformation doesn't end with foreign
affairs. Consider his economic stimulus and tax cut package. You know, the
one he doesn't want to hear ''class warfare'' arguments about. Whether or
not you call it class warfare, ignoring the effects of a tax change on
different income levels is, in economic terms, ignorant. Before you can make a tax change that will actually improve the economy,
you have to know who has really benefitted from the economy. Most Americans
haven't. From 1979 to 1999, on an inflation-adjusted basis, 60 percent of
the American work force worked longer, harder and more efficiently. They
also took home less money at the end of that 20-year span than they did at
the beginning. That's almost two-thirds of our country working harder for
less. The truth is, virtually all the growth in our economy during that
period went to just the wealthiest 5 percent of income earners. But wait, there's more. The largest sector of our economy by far is
consumer spending. Low- and middle-income working families are our best
consumers. Putting two and two together, you'd assume that when the
president claims his tax proposal is fair to all Americans, the relief would
be targeted to the vast majority of Americans. You'd also be wrong. According to the Brookings Institute, no matter how you slice the
president's recent proposal, whether it's the break on dividend taxes or
accelerating income tax rate reductions, the lion's share of this 10-year,
$674 billion boondoggle goes to the wealthiest 5 percent of income earners.
You know, the same folks who sucked up all the growth in our nation's
economy for two decades. Exactly how the president can keep a straight face
while claiming this proposal benefits most Americans isn't clear. Just the other day, when discussing the Iraq situation, the president
said he's tired of all the lies and deceit. I assume he means the ones
emanating from Baghdad, not the beltway. If he's tired of spin, how does he
think the American public feels about being fed a load of hooey to justify a
war? And if the president doesn't like the nomenclature of class warfare,
then he should stop engaging in it by pushing tax breaks that overwhelmingly
benefit one class--the wealthiest--while ignoring most working Americans.
(Chicago Sun-Times, 18/1/03) |
 |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Back to top