This page was last updated on December 7, 2012.
Equality elusive; Jerry Miskulin; Beaver County Times; December 5, 2012.
I encourage you to review Mr. Miskulin’s body of work in the archives. Mr. Miskulin has written at least 86 letters since 2004 (I didn’t critique all of them.). Most (all?) are illogical and full of falsehoods (not just wrong).
Mr. Miskulin expressed displeasure with the tea parties (here and here), proclaimed
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“A lot of people think liberty and equality are the same, and they are not.”
[RWC] Wow, Mr. Miskulin got something right! You will soon see it’s not a trend, however.
“In America, we can go just about anywhere and do anything as long as it’s not against the law. Since the social revolution that followed the American Revolution, equality has been elusive.
“Christ said the poor always will be with us, so with each day the middle class sinks more into the lower class. Perhaps the big chance [sic] occurred with Reaganomics and trickle-down economics. It institutionalized the differences between the upper and lower classes. They used socialism, but for the rich, not for the middle and lower classes.”
[RWC] As I’ve noted before, Mr. Miskulin has had a burr under his saddle about what he calls “Reaganomics and trickle-down economics” since at least 2004 (here, here, here, here, and here). During these eight years, however, Mr. Miskulin never told us the programs he believes make up what he calls “Reaganomics and trickle-down economics.” That’s so Mr. Miskulin doesn’t have to defend his assertions.
“What is deficit spending but socialism, government money buying the rich? The rich all think we owe them a big debt, but all they got us was tremendously in debt.”
[RWC] How does deficit spending “buy the rich?” How did “the rich [get us] tremendously in debt” and on what does Mr. Miskulin base his assertion they “all think we owe them a big debt?” I know a few of “the rich” (all self-made) and I’ve yet to hear any of them claim anyone owes them anything.
“In the last 32 years, who has benefited the most by the mostly Republican deficit spending? The people who have benefited have been the 1 percent.”
[RWC] How do “the rich,” “the 1 percent,” etc. benefit from deficit spending? FYI, of the top 10 richest members of Congress, seven are Democrats. Of the top 50, 32 are Republicans.
Both parties have their fingerprints on deficit spending, but how does Mr. Miskulin get to “mostly Republican deficit spending?” In its own documents, the Obama administration estimates the debt incurred in its first four fiscal years (2010-2013) will be $5.7 trillion, 32.3% of the total since our country’s founding. During “the last 32 years,” Republicans held the White House and a majority in both houses of Congress for less than four-and-a-half years (early 2001 and 2003-2006). We had Democrat rule for four years (1993-1994 and 2009-2010), including a period during late-2009 with a filibuster-proof Senate. The remainder of the time it was a mix. During this time, Republicans never had anything close to a filibuster-proof Senate. (Factoid: Since the Senate introduced cloture in 1917, Republicans haven’t had a single filibuster-proof Senate. The closest Republicans got was five seats short. Democrats, on the other hand, have enjoyed a filibuster-proof Senate for 14+ years. During these 14+ years, Democrats also held the House and the presidency.) Had Democrats wanted to halt deficit spending, they could have filibustered. What you’ll find, however, is Democrats complained about insufficient spending.
© 2004-2012 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.