Bankruptcy

Okay, so the argument goes like this: The only real chance the Democrats had to defeat the credit card company coddling bill was with filibuster, and the only vote that really counted was the vote against cloture -- not the vote on the bill itself.

It's kind of neat reasoning, the kind that worked well with the Vichy French. "You can't do anything, so why try?"

And so now we're being admonished to cheer the heroes at the Maginot Line and give a pass to those who choose Vichy. And, of course, vice versa:

Lieberman of course voted for cloture, which was when opposition would have mattered.

Please excuse me while I rant a bit:

Opposition matters because it happens, not because it's opportunistic. To me, Joe Lieberman is right down there at the bottom of the barrell of politicians who call themselves Democrats right now; it's not like I'm being some ingorant pollyanna in expressing some surprise at his "no" vote. But where does this idea that opposition only matters if it can win come from?

Are we Americans so fucking obsessed with winning that we can't even consider opposing a dominant force -- no matter how immoral -- unless there's a chance that we can win????

I'm sorry, but to me opposition is not about winning a goddam fucking vote on a bill eight years in the making via heavy bribes campaign finance and lobbying by MBNA, it's about making a case, taking a stand, saying what's right and standing by your words. It's not about turning tail and scooping up some jacks because striking the pose won't pay off this time.

That's why I am pretty fairly disgusted with Senator Ried, the man who talked the talk but didn't walk the walk -- not when there were chips to collect. No, I'm sure the casinos were quite satisfied to have his vote. And who can blame him, right? After all, he needs to get paid to run, too.

Meanwhile the people, the citizens -- we peasants -- are left twisting in the wind once again, and it sure as hell isn't reassuring that the big talk you hear of fighting the good fight turns out to be so much gas.

"Oh, we couldn't win this one, so I thought I'd vote for it, score some points with my patrons."

The hard truth in life is that sometimes you have to lose the battle to win the war. A well-won loss can inspire support next time. You don't win the war by surrendering.

But even more fucked up than the strange sort of acceptance and rationalizing in the blogotropic is the blindness to the moral aspects of this bill in the mainstream media. Even on the News Hour, it's glossed. (And I'm not talking about the smarmy contortions of pseudo-logic and flawed assumptions that spew out of David Brooks' mouth, either.)

Tonight, on Washington Week, which is just about the only real news source on television, let's face it, we got the history -- MBNA and other credit card companies have lobbied hard for this bill for some eight years, and actually got it passed by the Senate four times, and once got it all the way to the President's desk, where Clinton vetoed it -- but then it was all framed in the assumption that if you're in debt, you're not a good person and you deserve to suffer. No, it wasn't explicit, it was just the assumption upon which the entire discussion took place.

How the hell did we get to this kind of strange thinking? Are we becoming more like Rome, or Pharoah's Egypt? This certainly seems strange in what everybody seems so eager to call "a Christian nation."

Meanwhile, back at the ranch it's like this:

Anyway, progressives, if one is looking for reasons why middle and lower middle class Christians voted for Bush and cronies despite how he’s raping them, in the financial department at least the church is telling them business is good, the personal debtor is bad and responsible for his or her debt regardless, there being a moral linkage between the individual and their debt, which doesn’t leave much room for compassion toward the debtor. Over and over one hears that, regardless one’s circumstances, one is obligated to pay one’s debt. What’s more, tithing is your get out of debt card as god will reward his faithful so they have everything to meet their needs. One website even said that there’s no cause to complain if you lose everything you have as a debtor, in lieu of going into bankruptcy (at least before this Bill that removes any protections) because as a Christian you will be taken in by another Christian household, and you’ll have a roof over your head and meals. No tears allowed.

My limited searches (a few hours) showed a few stories on the web (scattered on Christian forums mainly) that point out tithing is legalistic and not to feel bad about bankruptcy, that it doesn’t make one less a Christian. But the predominate message is one steals if one goes bankrupt. Why is the church so afraid of personal bankruptcy? I wonder if it has to do with psychology of power over and power under. Does dissociating stigma from declaring bankruptcy increase the threat that individuals might rethink moral mandates to pay up regardless, and be more willing to give up tithing if unable to afford it. A number of people tithe based on gross income. A number of people are encouraged by their churches to immerse themselves in “prosperity thinking�, not permit discouraging thoughts or fears, and regardless of their need even increase their giving to the church, called a “sacrificial offering�, so that god will then have an open avenue to return financial blessings to them, the message being that if you are having a rough time it’s because the lord can’t help you as you’re not giving enough.

I’m not going to go into tithing itself. A person can give whatever they want to the church.

But I do wonder if there’s likely an acceptance of stricter bankruptcy laws in America at large because of church instruction. Which reaches outside the church and over everyone’s heads because of this belief of there being no moral bankruptcy, whatever one’s circumstances. Financial institutions and business reap big. The little guy crumbles. Doesn’t matter. One could put all the corporate facts before people who carry these beliefs and it wouldn’t matter to them.

Business is good and right. But the individual–if they’re in bad straits it’s their fault, god has turned his back on them due to their wickedness (even though they’re still paying and thus still “good� according to their bible law). The way to buck up those morals is to make bankruptcy harder and to afford no charity.

Seems there are a lot of middle and lower middle class people who have perhaps lost enough to be frightened, but haven’t lost all yet. Kind of like being under the delusion you have absolute control over your life, and thus it’s your good decisions and right living that have resulted in you having a roof over your head and health. If you have absolute control over your life and have done fairly well then it’s easy to be in control of god and reap divinity’s blessings. You are proof that it works as you are surrounded by them. If you’ve less than you used to have, or have troubles, or friends and relatives have troubles, as long as your head is above water then you’re still somewhat in control and thus somewhat in control of god and his blessings (retroactively).

All down the same lane as might equals right.

Now here's the real kicker: About half the bankruptcies come due to medical bills. That's right, get sick and you're in debt for life. Think of it as negative insurance. You don't have to pay up front, you just pay until you die, and then they take it out of your estate. (See, that way they don't even have to keep you healthy.) So you die, the banks take your estate. That way your children can go into hock to make ends meet and the cycle continues.

But that doesn't matter. You see, in this country, being poor and in ill health is bad. If you don't have health insurance, well shit, you must be some kind of fucking loser! We don't like losers in America! We like winners like Donald Trump! (Where would he be without bankruptcy, though?)

roseeriter says it from personal experience:

I cannot get any lower on the food chain- I live in a trailer, on disability, go without most of my meds that I need for scleroderma so I can pay my bills to keep a roof over my head. I could live better with relatives, or my daughter, but I don't want to be a burden. But I am considered a burden to my country. And so are you. You are a burden on America.

I say this as a business owner. I say this as someone who has lived by the entrepreneurial dream. I say this as someone who is not about state-run economy.

But dammit, are we good people or not? Are we Americans as decent as we like to think of ourselves, or not?

We are a country that, just in the past few years, has given huge tax breaks to the rich, cut programs to help the poor, disregarded international standards of human decency, let loose more pollutants for our grandchildren to clean up, waged the wrong war in the most incompetent way imaginable, rationalizing all the death and destruction with happy talk and outright lies, and is seemingly racing to establish an evangelical theocracy to oppress everyone else.

Where, I ask, is the good in that?

Nobody likes class warfare -- especially when it's the corporate class against the lesser "people" (aka "citizens") recognized by our government.

The dissent across party lines and political philosophies has been growing in the past several hours. Now tunesmith has posted Bankruptcy Protest: A Coalition:

The opposition against the bankruptcy bill crosses party lines, among the grassroots.

The support for the bankruptcy bill crosses party lines among Congress.

This is clearly an example where the interests of Congress are divorced from the interests of the public. This bill is about politicians and lobbyists, not the American public.

So we should call them - a lot. Let your congresscritters know that you do not support the bill, that it does nothing for American citizens, and that if the politicians let the credit card companies dictate their vote, we will hold them responsible.

There's appetite for a blogosphere-wide effort against the bankruptcy bill. I will be including a list of conservative and liberal weblogs that are signed on to this effort. All you need to do is leave a comment, preferably a trackback (now enabled), or drop an email, and endorse the effort on your own weblog.

The final Senate vote is expected for today, March 10th. Call your Senator's office today. The House battle is coming soon. For more details, click "Continue Reading".

Updates:

BuzzMachine will be discussing the emerging opposition.

Read this weblog for future updates on the same subject. Bookmark, rss feed...

Instapundit links to the effort.

JustOneMinute has good ideas:

Folks who plan to fight on (don't rush me) ought to check something - where is Rush Limbaugh positioned on this bill? Could he be re-positioned? (...) Last point - I am not going to instruct activists in how to boil water for coffee, but - is there a House committee this bill needs to clear? Are there Congressman who might be swayed by phone calls, e-mail, and a letter campaign to their home-town newspapers? Who are the targets?

Tacitus and Redstate have front-page action alerts on the bill:

The bankruptcy bill before the Congress is bad law, bad practice, and an example of bad faith with the common people whom elected officials presumably serve.

Other sites linking up:
PowerPundit
Think Progress
Heretical Ideas
Centerfield
Insane Troll Logic
Pinko Feminist Hellcat (heh)
(links taken from Technorati)

Here is some of what conservative bloggers are saying about the bankruptcy bill:

Instapundit says:

I'm deeply skeptical of the bankruptcy bill in front of Congress now, and this report on credit-card industry practices goes a long way toward explaining why. Credit extended to people who can't handle it, absurd hidden fees, high interest rates, etc.: There's a lot of scamming here. The argument, of course, is that people who sign up for credit card accounts ought to know what they're getting into. But shouldn't the companies that extend credit to people who obviously can't handle it be held to the same standard?

bizzyblog has a rundown of cross-blogosphere opposition.

RedState has a discussion that shows a lot of conservative opposition to the bill.

Free Republic has opposition to the bill.

Here are the top ten states in terms of bankruptcies - meaning, the states that will be hit hardest by this bill:

1 Utah
2 Tennessee
3 Georgia
4 Nevada
5 Indiana
6 Alabama

7 Arkansas
8 Ohio
9 Mississippi
10 Idaho

Leave comments for more examples of bipartisan grassroots opposition to this turkey, and suggestions for a unified action we could take. Right now the best suggestion is a branded "call-in" day.

Among the trackbacks:

» Everybody Hates the Bankruptcy Bill from Simianbrain
Except the Credit Card companies. Glenn Reynolds thinks it sucks. Any chance that left and right could declare a truce in 2006 to take down the architects of this tripe? Nah, didn't think so, but if we were worth anything... [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 11:53 AM

» Join the Bipartisan Blogosphere Bankruptcy Bill P from Nobran
Tunesmith over at dKos is spearheading an effort that is so far doing a great job bringing internet activists from both parties together. Pretty cool stuff... [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 12:15 PM

» Bi-Partisan Opposition to Loan Shark Prtotection Act from Licking County PAC
The grass roots on both sides of the political isle are unifying against the Loan Shark Protection Act, which we mentioned here yesterday at Licopac. While DC politicians may like the cha-ching of big money from the Credit Card Industry, [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 12:35 PM

» Bipartisan Anti-Bankruptcy Coalition from nick davis
I hereby would like to offer usage of the CongressTrack.org tool for this cause, reagrdless of who would like to run it. This bill is bad for all the people of America, and people from both sides of the line can see that.
The coalition is locate [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 01:14 PM

» Crazy Train from Centerfield
All aboard! Politology is trying to amp up the volume against the bankruptcy bill. Instapundit, Buzzmachine, Tacitus, and others are on board. I say we go off the rails! This has a flavor of getting rammed through, and I don't... [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 01:18 PM

» Bankruptcy Protest: A Coalition from OweBoat
Politology is putting together a coalition to oppose the bankruptcy bill. As stated in their post:

This is clearly an example where the interests of Congress are divorced from the interests of the public. This bill is about politicians and lobbyist... [Read More]

Tracked on March 10, 2005 01:39 PM

And that doesn't count the dozens of commenters.

I fear it's too little too late. But then we still have the spectre of possible FEC "regulation" of political bloggers, where again I think we can expect "the people" to object to decisions made of the rulers, by the rulers and for the rulers.

It seems like you can't get through the day anymore without the conservatives' taking another whack at the American people. Pinko Feminist Hellcat reports this latest outrage:

While our common view of someone who's filed for bankruptcy is of a credit-card loving spendthrift, the reality is different:

Families with children, single mothers, divorcing spouses, displaced workers, the poor and people with expensive medical problems, particularly seniors, comprise the bulk of bankruptcy filers. The law's impact will likely be greatest in states with the highest bankruptcy filing rates: Utah, Tennessee, Georgia, Nevada, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Mississippi and Idaho, in that order, according to the American Bankruptcy Institute.

Anyone who's not taking a six- or seven-figure bonus on top of a comparable salary is should not get sick or injured if they want to avoid bankruptcy.

Since 2000, Harvard associate medical professors Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein, along with Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren and Ohio University sociology and anthropology professor Deborah Thorne, have been compiling data on bankruptcies in the United States. Their study, published on February 2 by the medical policy journal Health Affairs, found that between 1981 and 2001, medical-related bankruptcies increased by 2,200 percent, an astonishing explosion in a relatively short period of time. This spike far outpaced the 360 percent growth in all personal bankruptcies during roughly the same period.

In addition, the study uncovered surprising information about the affected population. While poor, uninsured Americans have long been the most obvious victims of a defective healthcare system, it's the middle class that suffers most in this case, accounting for about 90 percent of all medical bankruptcies, says Warren.

So, we can exhort folks to forgo their cup of coffee from Dunkin' Donuts in the morning because that will accumulate to a good two grand in the bank at ten percent a year (even though we're lucky if we get two percent right now).

Just don't get sick in those couple of years. Because that two grand won't pay for the bedpans at the hospital if you get sick and you don't have health insurance, or your insurance won't cover the majority of your medical bills.

While you're at it, don't get divorced, don't have a kid (or have a kid with medical problems), don't get old, don't lose your job, and don't spend more than half your net pay on housing--even if that's the cheapest you can get.

Who won't be held to more stringent standards?

The very rich, for starters.

[L]egal experts say the proposed law leaves open an increasingly popular loophole that lets wealthy people protect substantial assets from creditors even after filing for bankruptcy.. The loophole involves the use of so-called asset protection trusts..For years, wealthy people looking to keep their money out of the reach of domestic creditors have set up these trusts offshore. But since 1997, lawmakers in five states - Alaska, Delaware, Nevada, Rhode Island and Utah - have passed legislation exempting assets held domestically in such trusts from the federal bankruptcy code. People who want to establish one of these trusts do not have to reside in any of the five states; they need only set it up through an institution located there.

Anti-abortion protestors who harass, intimidate, and assault clinic workers and patients. They can still hide behind bankruptcy to avoid paying fines.

The Senate voted 53-46 to defeat an amendment that would have prevented anti-abortion protesters from using bankruptcy to avoid paying fines or civil judgments for blocking entrances to abortion clinics. The provision's inclusion in a Senate-passed bill two years ago led to the bankruptcy bill's downfall in the House of Representatives.

Now all you folks who voted GOP this last election, aren't you glad that the growing profits of the Fortune 500 banks, credit card companies and insurance conglomerates are being guaranteed and protected by federal legislation? Aren't you glad poor families can be driven to destitute homelessness should one of them (gasp) dare to get sick?

Is this what "red state voters" meant when they talked about moral values???

Most of you know that the Republicans are about to pass a bankruptcy "reform" bill that will protect credit card companies and health insurance companies and international banking conglomerates from you. Yes, that's right: You are the biggest problem for Fortune500 companies. How nice that the Republicans are stepping in to protect them.

And here you thought the Republicans were for the common citizen?

For the past few years, conservatives have been crying "class warfare" whenever someone tried to point out what they were up to. It was an ingenious move, because, as it turns out, they are the ones who've been waging class warfare.

Not convinced?

Being short on time, I thought I'd offer up some recommended reading I've come across over the past couple of days.

IETP Policy Briefs offers a series of articles that provide a quick introduction to basic tax policy ideas that are important to understanding current debates at the state and federal level.

Peter G. Gosselin's investigative LA Times series of reports, "If America Is Richer, Why Are Its Families So Much Less Secure?. This is the kind of news that the television networks don't like to tell.

Citizens for Tax Justice is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research and advocacy organization. They have several interesting articles analyzing tax policies. Of particular note (all in pdf format): Bush's Double-Barrelled Attack on Social Security, Bush Budget Calls for Giant New Tax Cuts, Huge Reductions in Most Federal Programs, Bush's $10 Trillion Borrowing Binge: An Update and Do Fat Cats Pay Lower Tax Rates than Workers?.

Molly Ivins' "Now That's Class Warfare" is a Texan's point of view on the tax policies of conservatives.

Bush Erasing FDR's Legacy While Waging Class Warfare is Floyd J. McKay's Seattle Times piece on how a wide variety of Bush's domestic policies put the burden on the poor.

David Bacon's end-of-2003 article about Arnold Schwarzenegger's efforts to wipe out the University of California's Institute for Labor and Employment.

Spinsanity's rhetorical analysis of Republicans' crying "class warfare" to deflect reasoned analysis of their policies.

And from Daily Kos:

• ddonnelly: Gaping loophole for wealthy in bankruptcy bill; DeLay poised to fast-track it.
• LeftofArizona: How Bankruptcy Saved My Life.
• rspear: Robbing Peter to Pay Enron?.
• ram8647: Outrageous! Don't shop at Wal-Mart or eat at McDonalds or ....
• Mike Stark: Man, I just don't understand.
• Maryscott O'Connor: Maryscott's Outrage du Jour [Warning: LONG Profanity-Strewn Rant].

Turning back to Molly on current events....

Molly Ivins on the Republicans' bankruptcy-is-for-rich-people-only bill.

In a classic example of moral accounting, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the bill's chief sponsor, said, "People who have the ability to repay some or all of their debt should not be able to use bankruptcy as a financial planning tool so they get out of paying their debt scot-free, while honest Americans who play by the rules have to foot the bill."

That's a startling example of the "straw-man" school of argument. The study by the Harvard profs shows that in the two years before filing for bankruptcy, 19 percent of families went without food, 40 percent had their phone service shut off, 43 percent could not fill a doctor's prescription and 53 percent went without important medical care.

So, who are these feckless, irresponsible moochers using bankruptcy to avoid paying legitimate debts? Why, look at this: The New York Times reports "legal specialists say the proposed law leaves open an increasingly popular loophole that lets wealthy people protect substantial assets from creditors even after filing for bankruptcy."

What, our Republican Congress passing a bill that favors rich people at the expense of "honest Americans who play by the rules and have to foot the bill"? If you have a lot of money (most people filing for bankruptcy don't have this problem), you just put it in an asset protection trust and walk away. You don't even have to set up the trust offshore anymore -- five states have made it legal to set them up in their borders, and you don't even have to live in any of the five to do it.

If you don't like that feature of the bankruptcy bill, try this one: You may have read of the hardship on the families of those who have been called to fight in Iraq, including, of course, severe financial stress leading to many bankruptcies. Democrats in the Senate tried to put an amendment on this bill exempting military personnel, and the Republicans voted it down.

...and that leads us to:

This AP report on the 500,000 veterans who will become homeless this year. Yes, that's right. That is not a typo. A half a million of our bravest will end up homeless. How's that for supporting our troops?

And just to get your ire up (or get a good chuckle), conservative Larry Kudlow tries to argue that it's the Democrats who are waging class warfare, and that it's a losing strategy. His evidence? Middle-class voters didn't vote for John Kerry. And he calls himself an expert. Tsk tsk.

Finally....

Public Campaign Action Fund asks "Is your Senator in debt to big banks and credit card companies?" -- a very pertinent question given the corporate welfare being given to the Fortune500 credit card companies by Republicans in Congress at this very moment. On this page is a form to contact your Senators.

If you're not angry, you're not paying attention.

People in this country don't like to think about class. The myth we tell ourselves is that this is a class-free society. (Europeans would be first to chuckle over Americans' lack of class, but this isn't about manners, it's about entrenched socio-economic class barriers -- something Europeans know something about.)

Yet class barriers in America are real. It's not an aristocracy in the old feudal sense. For instance, unlike in old feudal societies, today, in theory, anyone can make it big and become wealthy. This is because there are no laws that explicitly make anyone an "untouchable" or certifiable serf.

Yet there are all the myriad little barriers that make it more and more difficult.

If you've been both poor and middle class, you know first-hand some of the little systemic benefits that come from being a bit more well off. One of the nice things when you're making more money is that everything starts to cost less -- especially when it comes to finances. Your credit card interest rates go down. Your checking account is suddenly free. If you have money, it's easier to borrow money to make more money.

When you're flat broke, you're flat, shit outta luck, and unless you have an education or the rare lucky break that affords you an opportunity to work for more than five bucks an hour (which equates to $10,000/year for full-time work), you're not going anywhere fast.

But hey, this is America! Nobody is guaranteed success! This is the litany of conservatives, offered as if it were a rebuttal to liberalism (thus implicity making the erroneous assertion that liberalism is about making everybody rich through government programs, which is just silly). And I agree: America is not about equal results, but rather about equal opportunity.

There are many ways in which our society denies equal opportunity to entire demographic racial and socio-economic classes of Americans, from unequal and inadequate education to a for-profit healthcare system that provides anything for people who can pay, but chooses shareholder dividends over basic services for some 40 million Americans.

But the topic du jour is bankruptcy.

One of the basic rights that the Founding Fathers wanted to establish in their new society in the New World was the right to declare bankruptcy if one was buried in debt. In England, the debtors' prisons were packed full. If you defaulted on a loan, you faced being pilloried. Some of our mean-spirited compatriots may relish the idea of pollorying fellow Americans, but back in the time of our Founders, it was considered an inappropriate punishment for debt.

The Founders -- especially (I believe) Benjamin Franklin and our first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton -- saw the establishment of bankruptcy protections as necessary to encourage the risk-taking that is necessary for a free-enterprise economy to thrive. It was the simple recognition that if you face dire consequences of imprisonment if you fail, you're not very likely to take any risks in entrepreneurial enterprise.

Thus, bankruptcy was one of the founding principles of this Republic.

Feudalism and "The Ownership Society"

Now we are hearing claims that the dreams of our country's founding are outdated. Individual freedom is embraced in the conservatives' rhetoric, but not in their ambitions.

They are about to pass a "bankruptcy reform" bill that takes away many bankrutpcy protections -- but only for the poor. The wealthy will still be able to enjoy all the protections -- to a fault. (Consider how serial bankruptcy declarer Donald Trump is revered in our culture.)

What this bill really is is a step backwards towards the debtors' prisons of the Old World. Oh, they won't be locking anybody up just yet. But is it any different to have your meagre wages garnished for 20 years to pay off that emergency appendectomy you needed?

Yes, that's right. One of the most inhuman, evil parts of this "bankruptcy reform" that the Republicans are racing through Congress is that you will not be able to declare bankruptcy from medical bills.

So let's sum up the situation:

1. The Bush Administration argues that the healthcare system must remain in the private sector.
2. They defend and protect the practice of HMO, pharmaceutical and health insurance executives to make tens and hundreds of millions of dollars each year (each).
3. They defend and protect the practice of these companies to chase after ever-increasing profits (which come at the expense of denying healthcare to premium-paying Americans).
4. They defend and protect the practice of these companies to raise premiums so they can continue to have banner profit years.
5. Meanwhile, some 40 million Americans cannot afford health insurance, and many who can do so at the expense of things they might do to improve the lives of their children.
6. That means if you are working for minimum wage, your best healthcare policy is "Don't get sick."
7. Because if you get ill or injured, you will have to pay for your healthcare cash on the barrel.
8. Of course, the hospitals aren't cruel, so they are willing to provide emergency care to you at their premium prices (where, for example, you pay $12 for one aspirin) -- as long as you promise to pay them back. (What are you going to do, when you're bleeding to death? Haggle? Go hospital shopping?)
9. Thus, because the system is rigged to favor wealthy profiteers over the health of the poor, you cannot pay for health insurance and have to go into steep debt to cover any emergencies.
10. Now the Republicans don't think you've suffered enough, so now, even if you can barely feed your children, even if you're hardly making ends meet, they are making sure you can never ever declare bankruptcy because of medical bills.
11. Oh, and if the hospital did something like amputate the wrong leg, well, Bush and the Republicans are working to prevent you from suing them.
12. In other words, your misfortune is their opportunity, and they'll be damned if you try to get out of it and reclaim your own life.

Why pick on the poor? Maybe it's because the poor cannot fight back. Maybe it's because somehow they think that the poor don't deserve to live. Maybe it's just because they don't give a fuck about anybody but their own. Why should your heart bypass take priority over a healthcare executive's $200 million bonus? You goddam freeloader you!

Bush gets all self-righteous and indignant about any opposition to his plans to coddle the wealthy financiers of his political campaigns. He says, "Democrats are waging class warfare."

Here's the news break: It's the Republicans who are waging class warfare. And guess what, David -- they're taking away your sling. Goliath never had it so good.

More recommended reading: Maryscott O'Connor's eloquent and profane rant on bankruptcy.