Home | About | Donate

The Republican Party’s Sickness of the Soul


The Republican Party’s Sickness of the Soul

Richard Eskow

There’s a sickness on the land. You know the facts: Millions of Americans lives in poverty. The number of Americans in the workforce remains low. Wages are stagnating and inequality is growing. “Deaths of despair” from alcoholism, opioid overdose, and suicide are on the rise.

But it’s not just the inequality, or the poverty, or the despair, that wounds us. It’s the fact that so many Republican leaders and voters find ways to justify living with these injustices, and are now making them worse.

There’s no polite way to say it: they suffer from a sickness of the soul.


Republican positions are:
a) evil
b) stupid
c) combo platter


All too often, I wish I could strip these republicans of everything they have and dump them in the 'hood in the middle of winter just to see if they even survive the night. I'll take them on their bet. Let's see how quickly they start looking for a homeless shelter or beg on the side of the street for handouts.


All-encompassing belief in the free market is the one true American religion.

Our meritocracy rewards the rich, it punishes the poor. Social Darwinism deems it all righteous.

And while the Republican's faith is deep and blind, the Democrats helped deregulate and bail out the casino gamblers on Wall St...end welfare as we know it...fill our prisons to capacity and beyond...keep the MIC fat, happy, and busy....offshore jobs...and subsidize big insurance and pharma through RomneyCare.

When Keith Ellison didn't meet with the satisfaction of Haim Saban, the Ds biggest donor (because Ellison was too Muslim), they installed corporate lackey, Tom Perez, instead. Perez, we're assured, is just as liberal, which begs the question: if he's just as liberal as Ellison, why not stick with Ellison?

Which brings us back to the religion called the free market. The big money donors in the D-Party EARNED the right to call the shots. DFHs earned the right to sit in the corner and STFU.


The president is mentally ill, as is the Republican Party. The president has dismantled the State Department that is the interface of our government with the rest of the world. The Democratic Party is supine. When will sanity prevail, or will it ever?


Of course, the Democratic Party helped create this debacle. Obama presided over the greatest transfer of wealth to the 1% in history. Hillary offered more of the same. Trump now gets to put the final touches on a full blown corporatocracy that the Democrats helped create.


Richard Eskow deserves a standing ovation for this article! Assuming that the Republicans even have a soul, it is indeed very, very sick.

If anyone is inclined to think that elections don't matter, and that the two choices were equally bad at the tops of the tickets all the way down, just wait a year or so and ask the millions who will be worse
off in every way you can think of, while at the same time wealth accelerates upward to the top.


There is a skill that liars, con artists and corrupt politicians all know. It is the self deceptive use of language to justify your doing something everyone knows is morally wrong (but you intend to do it anyway) and you don't want people to give you grief about what you are doing. A liar will lie. A con artist will trick you but a politician's skill is in convincing you that their doing harm to you so as to benefit themselves is actually them helping you so as to benefit themselves.

In an earlier age people would criticize a politician's cynicism as a negative. Nowadays it is assumed that cynicism is generally part and parcel of being a politician. We have grown so used to them being liars that we hardly even comment about their doing it. They in turn have developed a psychopathic lack of real empathy (unless the press cameras are there to catch an emotive performance of concern or rectitude etc.) towards people. They use language calculated to put themselves in the best light and which will convince the voters yet again that the politician will do the same things as they always do but this time the result will be different.

This article relates the psychopathic euphemistic language that will explain how cutting budgets for social programs will help the people who will suffer most from those cuts. Moreover, a notoriously favored euphemism of politicians is their explanation of how giving tax cuts to the wealthy and cutting social program budgets will benefit the poor.

The all time winner among euphemistic speech >>> If you give more money to the rich, it will benefit the poor!

Ya gotta love it!


The sickness is in the diet, the societal fabric, the prevailing media message and the ideology professed by those that have the ability to reach a large audience.


You think the democratic party is weak, but what is strong? I believe democrats still remember George McGovern's calamitous loss, and see it as caution against a too progressive, too pacifistic platform. What to think when the republican party keeps moving rightward and they keep winning?


I don't know if " Obama presided over the greatest transfer of wealth to the 1% in history." I do know that the Great Recession allowed the wealthy to pick up a lot undervalued assets at fire sale prices. As I see it, that had NOTHING to do with Obama. Now we can blame Bill Clinton for signing the republican legislation that ended Glass-Steagall, but that had nothing to do with Obama or Hillary. Also, having some DINOs in the Senate for Obama's first 2 years meant that there was limited ability to do a great deal of good.



"If the presidency of Barack Obama teaches us anything, it should be that presidents are nothing but tools of the elite to concentrate wealth and power. It should teach us that the words Democrat and Republican are absolutely meaningless."


The common assumption appears to be that all problems are the responsibility of the federal government. There are agencies, some governmental, that are responsible for rendering assistance to the less fortunate but the Constitution of my country left many things like that to the states. If I say I have a right to something, I mean that I have a right to go and get it. If a DIMocrat says the same thing, they mean that resources should be taken from someone by force or threat of force and given to them.
If one is incapable of providing for itself then I would recommend state programs or charities. We should never call these things "entitlements". That lends to the illusion that one man has the right to the property of another, enforceable by the fed. The whole notion is as repugnant as corporate welfare or foreign aid to countries that hate us. The only real exception is the Social Security money that the should, in some fashion, be refunded to those that were defrauded out of it.


I've lost all hopes of working within the rigged system. Perhaps Artificial Intelligence can save us.

Direct Democracy


"In 2013, Obama allowed previous tax cuts for the wealthy to expire. In doing so, he allowed the top income tax rate to rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Taxes on dividends and capital gains also rose. And a tax on investment income, included in the Affordable Care Act, took effect that year. Altogether, it was the largest tax increase on the wealthy since the 1950s, Saez said. Americans earning less than $250,000 were unaffected."

Anyway, go ahead and pretend there is no difference in the republican tax-cut-for-the-wealthy endless mantra and a democrat who made a real difference in the business of taxation.


Not to be outdone, Trump wants to give an even bigger transfer of wealth to the 1%er's with bigger tax breaks and deregulation and of course, the hugest, biggest, wheelbarrows ever to cart away their money in.


Facts will get you nowhere here!


It's way more than the system, it's a dog eat dog world: predators and prey. All animals live by stealing or killing. Plants make food from the sun, animals eat them.
It always was and always will be this way; possibly a society can make rules to make things more "fair", but it isn't happening now, and likely only happens when people feel relatively comfortable.


In our system, the sociopath rises to the top because all they care about is themselves.


You do understand that this isn't 1787, right? Then the population of the country was about 3 million, the vast majority of which lived along the eastern seaboard in the 13 original states. Now, 200+ years later, we are 300 million in 50 states spread over an almost incomprehensively large land mass plus the physically removed states of Alaska and Hawaii. You simply cannot, in this day an age, expect a country as large and diverse as ours to run itself by 50 separate plans, not if you want a more equal and just society that really does seek liberty and justice for all.

The most important paragraph in the Constitution is the Preamble. That is the mission statement for the Government of these United States. Everything after that, including the Bill of Rights, is what in 1787 was thought to provide the best means and the best guarantees of a democratic republic. I'm guessing you are a strict constructionist. It's a popular position for conservatives, especially libertarians, but that view makes the means more important than the ends. The social consciousness of Americans has expanded since the early years of the republic when, for example slavery was acceptable. Even some Quakers accepted it. Most of us know better now. Most, but as daily events show, not all.