Need help? Turn to the feds, of course
The Mpls. Star-Tribune editorials continue their advocacy of turning to the federal government to solve problems besetting Americans. One of their more recent editorials attacks the Bush administration for alleged indifference or even petulance in response to the increase in the poverty rate last year (they have to get the "mean, heard-hearted Republicans" thing in there, of course).
One of the points raised concerns those who have lost private health insurance in the last couple of years; the editorial notes, "More than 1 million Americans have lost their private health insurance during the last two years, yet the administration's answer is to propose shifting the responsibility for subsidized health insurance, through Medicaid, from Washington to the states."
Boy, how about that mean-spiritedness of the President, huh? He must really hate the poor, down, and out, right? After all, it's not possible that he thinks that local governments and communities should be the first line of defense in problems their constituents face, is it? Subsidiarity can't possibly be the principle behind this decision, can it? Nah. Bush is too dumb to think of such things!
I love the last two sentences: "When the U.S. economy is strong, as it was during the 1990s, it reinforces a fine set of American virtues, including hard work and self-reliance. When the economy is weak, as it is today, it should remind us why Americans created programs to assist each other in the first place."
Tell me, why couldn't the editors use the 80's an example of a strong economy? Could it possibly be that the hated Reagan was President then, and not the beloved Clinton? There wouldn't be the implied opposition between economies & presidents that way (90's/strong economy/Clinton vs. 00-03/weak economy/Bush 41).