Star Parker, the author of Uncle Sam's Plantation, is a frequent contributor to Town Hall and an "advisory committee member" to Cato Institute (do those guys have an incredible scouting and recruiting program or what?). And pretty much no matter what issue she's writing about, Parker uses the same paradigm: master/owner-slave-plantation. But it's okay: Star Parker is black. She's allowed. In fact, I suspect that she's strongly encouraged to do so.
In her current contribution to Town Hall, "Social Security Reform Threatened by Elitist Liberals," Parker claims much, substantiates little, and, like any well-paid conservative hack, generally ignores the inconvenient.
President Bush's Social Security initiative has gotten off to a shaky start. However, polls indicate that voters are warming up to the idea of personal retirement accounts. It's time for the Bush administration to start making crystal clear the core principles that distinguish its approach on Social Security reform from that of Democrats.So the first paragraph = one truth (shaky start), one lie (warmed up voters), and one set up ("distinguish its approach") for a joke about Republicans wanting to destroy Social Security and Democrats wanting to save it. Not an auspicious start.
Here's the answer to the lie. According to a TIME web exclusive, several polls suggest that Bush is in trouble over Social Security.
A TIME survey last week found Bush had 37 percent approval rating on Social Security issues, while 54 percent of respondents disapproved. The numbers were 33 percent approval, 59 percent disapproval in a Newsweek poll conducted at the same time, and the Washington Post placed it at 35 percent to 56 percent.That seems like a pretty chilly voter response to me.
And having blown out the fact-o-meter in just the first paragraph, Parker now starts the race baiting. (I've highlighted the slavery rhetoric for emphasis.)
Whereas Bush is selling his reform under the theme of an "ownership society," I would call the Democratic alternative the "plantation society." The "plantation society" is characterized by a wealthy class of owners who want to limit the choices, opportunities and freedom of working-class Americans.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California, worth $16.3 million, is an appropriate spokesperson for the plantation caucus.
When America's political class debated emancipating slaves, an issue that dampened enthusiasm for the idea was the thought that these slaves could simply walk off the plantation and integrate into the nation and live as free people.Do you think you can take some more? Okay then.
The owner/masters of today's Democratic plantation reject all attempts to roll back government and give working Americans more choice and freedom.
[W]elfare-state liberals have educated a whole generation of blacks that they can't take care of themselves. Skills in areas such as money management may be in deficit today. But they are in deficit because they weren't learned, and they weren't learned because of hanging on the government plantation. When do we let these folks off this plantation so they can finally start learning the essential skills for improving their lives?And now for the final call to action.
Now didn't that answer every fundamental question you had about the privatization of Social Security? The who and the when. The how and the why. The how much and for how long. What a major contribution to the ongoing debate over Social Security reform. Well done, Ms. Parker -- you are the North Star shining over the government plantation.
[E]litist Democratic liberals . . . preside over a government plantation over which they do not want to relinquish control. It's time to let the slaves free. Transforming taxes into ownership is an important way to do it.
No comments:
Post a Comment