You might have missed this – I almost did, since it rolled into my inbox late last night. But you know how Republicans are bizarrely building their entire convention around an out-of-context quote from a somewhat garbled line in a speech by President Obama, the “we built it” thing? Elizabeth Warren took it on in a campaign statement last night, and made the case brilliantly. Here’s the whole thing.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie gave a speech tonight at the Republican National Convention about the Greatest Generation.
Let’s talk about what really made the Greatest Generation so great.
Coming out of the Great Depression, America was at a crossroads. The future of our economy — and our democracy — was at stake.
We made a decision together as a country: To invest in ourselves, in our kids, and in our future. For nearly half a century, that’s just what we did.
And it worked. For nearly 50 years, as our country got richer, our families got richer — and as our families got richer, our country got richer.
And then about 30 years ago, our country moved in a different direction. New leadership attacked wages. They attacked pensions. They attacked health care. They attacked unions. And now we find ourselves in a very different world from the one our parents and grandparents built. We are now in a world in which the rich skim more off the top in taxes and special deals, and they leave less and less for our schools, for roads and bridges, for medical and scientific research — less to build a future.
Tonight, Chris Christie and the Republicans told the American people that we’re to blame for our broken economy. He told families to tighten their belts. He told seniors to live on less. He told teachers to stop fighting for fair pay.
He never, ever mentioned how much more the richest have taken, and he had no mention that those who broke our economy still haven’t been held accountable.
The Republicans believe in an America that is rigged for the big guys — giant corporations that can hire an army of lobbyists, ship jobs overseas, and take their profits to the Cayman Islands.
That’s not who we are as a people — and that’s not the kind of country we want to be.
We built America together, and that’s what makes America great.
Elizabeth
We did build it. All of us. That’s the whole point.
Discuss
15 Comments . Leave a comment below.… in holding their convention in a center that was funded by city municipal bonds, which are being paid back via a “special downtown property tax district.” The building they’re in was only able to be constructed because of a new tax.
And also tragic. It’s a bad situation when a major political party is almost entirely disconnected from reality, yet that appears to be exactly where things stand.
Luckily, the American people are getting it, and a lot of them. We are having a hard time growing the party but I’m still feeling confident. You have the advantage of getting the support of many people who are taking from the government and not paying into it. You have a huge swath of people who are addicted to government handouts so like coke dealers your politicians have a loyal, addicted, dependent group of people who only care about what they get out of government entitlements. It’s a great scenario for your party, unless the economy gets to a point where it just cannot support these dependents, then what? That’s hy you want the wealth from the rich, our wealth is finite and as the bottom sucks more out you need another supplier. I am hoping there still exists a large enough group of low/middle income voters who do want to make it on their own and not live on government handouts. Those Americans want the America we have all had in the past.
I have high hopes for Mitt in November and maybe the Senate. I’ve often said I don’t think it’s a good idea to have one party control all three legs of our government, but maybe we need for a term just top get the things we need to get back on track actually get passed. Any other combo will create more gridlock and 2013 could be a pivotal year since Europe will surely descend into a spiraling recession, far worse than a few years ago.
“…getting the support of many people who are taking from the government and not paying into it.”
This fact is obvious when you consider the overwhelming support Democrats get from places like Mississippi, West Virginia, Alabama,…oh wait.
Democrats get their support from the cities, where people getting more than they give will vote “lock/step”. Your map might be more meaningful if everyone made the same per capital income and spent the same government money. You also have states with huge payrolls of government employees which I would place non-prejudicially in the sucking out pile. Lastly, I’m not talking even close to absolute terms.
People who live in cities also live in states. Some states collect more in federal taxes than they receive in federal spending. People who live in those states pay more than they receive.
Other people live in states that collect less (in some cases FAR LESS) than they receive in federal spending. Those people are taking more — in the case of Mississippi, FAR MORE — from the government than they are paying into it.
The facts show that your bias and prejudice (against, for example, people who live in cities and government employees) is just that — bias and prejudice.
By the way, the payroll costs of the US military greatly exceed the civilian payroll. When health care and pension costs for military retirees are included, those costs skyrocket. Tell us, John, do you “non-prejudicially” include veterans and military retirees in that “sucking out pile”? How about air traffic controllers, or DEA inspectors, or — for that matter — the entire workforce of the US ICE, Department of Homeland Security, and TSA?
You and the GOP beat the drum so very loudly for increased border security and all that — yet you seem to want to avoid paying for it.
In short, your comment is again long on hot air and short on facts.
… the military does save a decent chunk of money in that they have socialist health care.
… but if it’s true that people in cities tend to get “more than they give,” then shouldn’t those states with the largest urban populations be the biggest net beneficiaries of federal spending? Let’s take a quick look at that.
According to data from the 2000 census, the top five states with the largest urban populations are (in order) CA, TX, NY, FL and IL. With the exception of FL, they all pay more in federal taxes than they get back in benefits.
On the other side of the equation, the bottom five states with the lowest urban populations are (from lowest to highest) VT, WY, ND, SD and AK. All are net federal dollar beneficiaries, with the average haul being over 110% of their respective GDPs.
So the facts would suggest that our theory about urban dwellers living off the gov’t teat isn’t a very good one. In fact, it appears we’re wildly off base.
Uh, John, which part of the comment you are replying to did you fail to read, not to mention the thread-starter?
The convention is being held in a city center funded by city municipal bonds, paid by a special property tax. The convention center itself is funded by new taxes. You enthusiastically support a candidate who made his money by forcing OTHER PEOPLE to take on crushing debt for his personal benefit.
Your party had all three legs of government from 2001 to 2007 — look at what you did with it! You turned Bill Clinton’s federal surplus into a deficit, started two wars, and created the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Now, having spent the last four years doing everything in your power to obstruct, defeat, and derail every initiative of President Obama — while simultaneously attempting to blame him for ineffectiveness — you propose to roll out the same failed policies again.
You are ranting about one false stereotype after another, while resolutely ignoring the plain facts in front of your face.
why isn’t she saying this where people can hear it? Not just her supporters.
She needs to get this out – her campaign has to move beyond the (too-small) circle of her supporters and into the bigger world where people don’t necessarily agree with her.
I think this is a really good statement, and I hope she hits the campaign trail and the airwaves with it. I suspect she will – after all, Christie only gave his speech last night, so give her a chance.
Well, except for the people watching the Giants-Cowboys game. That’d be a good time.
…that his father took advantage of the GI Bill, which I’m pretty sure is an example of the government lifting people up.
the GI bill is like smoking crack and the government is the dealer.
Do you have any comments from me against it?
« Blue Mass Group Front Page
Mon 20 May 4:37 AM