Town Square

Kicking cans, or kicking cans?

Original post made by Tom Cushing, Danville, on Nov 15, 2011

Observing political jargon is a fascinating business, as lawmakers struggle to find ways to frame issues their way, and appeal to their respective bases. Pithy terms like “job creators” to refer to The Rich, and “class warfare” to suggest that those creators should shoulder a greater share of the overall tax burden are shorthand phrases that can capture an essence of a position, and conform to the increasingly ephemeral attention spans of the voting public.

This story contains 498 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Like this comment
Posted by spcwt
a resident of Danville
on Nov 16, 2011 at 10:06 am

Your “real solution” that we vote out incumbents is a joke. What are the people of Danville supposed to do? Vote out Obama, Boxer, Feinstein, and McNerney? All are saintly Democrats, right?

One problem with American democracy is we have a say in electing only 3 of the 535 members of Congress. Thus, no matter how much you may dislike the radicals from other states and districts, you can’t vote them out.

The 532 people you do not elect are not accountable to you, but they wield tremendous power over you. They can take radical positions that appeal to their narrow base of supporters with little fear of repercussions from people who disagree. They have entrenched themselves in power through money and influence. No wonder 83% of Americans have unfavorable views of Congress, while most favor their own elected representatives.

One solution to this mess is to move power back to the states where elected officials tend to be more accountable to voters. States can further delegate power back to local elected officials, who tend to be even more responsive to voters. This might be done via block grants, similar to what Jerry Brown has proposed for many aspects of California government.

Unfortunately, people like you continue to peddle the myth of the beneficent Federal government, ignoring the corruption, cronyism, and unaccountability. The “solutions” you continue to offer call for the Federal government to take an even greater role in our lives, further expanding this mess.

Also unfortunate, the Tea Partisans have decided that the only way to “fix” the problem is by forcibly depriving the Federal government of revenue. This has lead to a dangerous game of chicken, where the creditworthiness of the nation has been called into question.

God help us.


Why do you attack the GOP only? Democrats are just as guilty of spinning political jargon:

• Saying the rich should pay their “fair share” of taxes, obscuring the fact that Fed. & State governments tax rich people’s wages at 50%. Isn’t 50% fair enough??

• Not all of the “1%” are “millionaires and billionaires.” To be in the 1%, one must earn $382,000 per year. Nice income, but hardly a Wall Street big shot, especially in the high cost Bay Area.

• Democrats no longer “raise taxes” of course. They “raise revenue.” Who could possibly be against raising “revenue?”

• Killing unborn potential humans is merely “Pro choice.” Who could possibly be against allowing people to make choices?

• Carbon dioxide (what we all exhale) is now “pollution.”

Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of Danville
on Nov 16, 2011 at 2:38 pm

The term "Super Committee" is a typo. The correct term is "Stupor Committee," as its useless members are in a partisan stupor, along with all the worthless do-nothings who occupy space in Washington.

Like this comment
Posted by Reaity
a resident of San Ramon
on Nov 22, 2011 at 12:18 am

spcw, your comment earning 1% is $382,000.. MOST of our local i.e. fire, and many state 'public union' members are in that league with their retirement packages, and retirements far exceeding most of us.
They are a bit schizo hogging in on occupiers, yet themselves being part of the 1%,....that takes gall.