BCT Editorial – 10/9/06

This page was last updated on October 15, 2006.

Voter discontent; Editorial; Beaver County Times; October 9, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“GOP may be losing touch with constituents by ignoring important issues.

“Republicans could be making a colossal mistake by using national security as their theme for the November election.”

[RWC] When the Times gives Republicans advice, you can assume it’s wrong. The Times knows the Democrat Party is becoming known as the “al-Qaida bill of rights” party. As a result, keeping national security in the forefront is good for Republicans and bad for Democrats. That’s why the editorial wants to divert attention away from national security issues.

“According to a survey released last month, Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated with the way Congress has dealt with (ignored would be more accurate) critical issues such as Social Security, Medicare, global warming and aging infrastructure.”

[RWC] Global warming? Are you kidding me?

“The survey found 81 percent of respondents were very or somewhat worried about Social Security, and just as many were very or somewhat worried about energy issues, The Associated Press reported.

“People also are worried about repairing roads and bridges and say that Congress is not paying a great deal of attention to Social Security and Medicare, the poll found.”

[RWC] Roads and bridges are primarily – or should be – local and state responsibilities.

“The findings were released by New York University’s John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress.

“‘I was very surprised at the amount of interest in looking for long-term answers,’ said NYU professor Paul Light, who wrote the study. ‘What we found is there is tremendous demand for answers. They may not know exactly what to do but they’re very, very worried.’

“Worried voters could prove to be a large problem for Republicans attempting to maintain a majority control of Congress.

“The GOP has turned a blind eye toward Medicare and Social Security this session, both of which are on the verge of collapse in the not-so-distant future if problems are not quickly resolved.”

[RWC] “The GOP has turned a blind eye toward Medicare and Social Security this session?” Did the Times miss the firestorm from the left last year when President Bush and supporters in Congress presented a plan to address Socialist Security problems?

It’s interesting – though completely predictable – the editorial fails to mention the Democrat role. You probably recall during his 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush said, “Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security, yet the rising cost of entitlements is a problem that is not going away. And every year we fail to act, the situation gets worse.” Democrats stood in unison, applauded, and cheered in the middle of Mr. Bush’s statement that Congress had done nothing regarding Socialist Security.

Lest we forget, Times editorials opposed President Bush’s Socialist Security plan as did columns by in-house opinion author Gino Piroli. If you recall, the “solution” lobbied for by editorials was to cut benefits and raise taxes. The Times opposed individual Socialist Security accounts.

“Republican leaders have also ignored the country’s aging infrastructure and global warming, concentrating instead on past hot-button issues such as national defense, Iraq, terrorism and illegal immigration.”

[RWC] “[N]ational defense, Iraq, terrorism and illegal immigration” are “past hot-button issues?” Did I pull a Rip Van Winkle and wake up years later to find all these challenges solved?

“While Republicans haggle over such issues as building a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border, the nation’s roads and bridges are falling apart and baby boomers are beginning to take large bites out of Social Security and Medicare.”

[RWC] “[B]aby boomers are beginning to take large bites out of Social Security and Medicare?” Perhaps the editorial author should check his math. Barring extenuating circumstances, you can’t begin receiving even reduced Socialist Security benefits until you’re 62 and you’re not eligible for Medicare until 65. The oldest “boomers” just turned 60 this year.

“It brings to mind an image of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

“Or perhaps the GOP fiddling while losing control of Congress.”

[RWC] If the GOP loses the majority in Congress, it won’t be because of the issues listed above. It will be because of not sticking to conservative principles and a lack of strong conservative leadership.