Who is most hurt by the prices at the pump? Some recent Rasmussen polls found on the Rasmussen web site and in a Washington Times article seem to indicate that it is the core of the Democratic Party rank and file.
The article in the Times states “…The Times poll showed that blacks, young adults and low-income workers were hardest hit by higher costs of fuel and food.
A whopping 70 percent of blacks said they dipped into savings to offset the rising prices, compared with 55 percent of whites. About 70 percent of Americans ages 18 to 29 had to hit their savings, as did 75 percent of workers earning less than $20,000 a year, the poll showed…”
The demographic base hardest hit by this rise in gas prices does closely mirror the demographics of the non-far left of the Party rank and file.
In a Rasmussen poll on taxes, “Fifty-six percent (56%) of black voters as opposed to 33% of whites say the government needs more tax income.” Yet “Fifty-six percent (56%) of unaffiliated voters say the government does not need more tax revenue, but 32% disagree…” This appears to be a microcosm of the Democratic Party position that government should take care of the people. Yet the position on gas prices and drilling by the Democratic Party seems diametrically opposed to this big government takes care of the populace position. Unless, as Barack Obama wants to do, the government will now give out money to those who need to buy gas.
Food prices are similarly hurting the Democratic Party non far left rank and file. “…61% of black respondents as opposed to 45% of whites said they had to cut back in other areas because of higher food costs. Seventy-three percent (73%) of those earning under $20,000 annually and 57% with a yearly income of $20,000 – 40,000 also say rising food prices forced them to cut other spending.”
In another Rasmussen Report, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that roughly 30% of corn grown in this nation is being diverted from food consumption to ethanol production. Government subsidies have encouraged this diversion of the food supply and it is having a lifestyle impact on many Americans—particularly lower-income Americans.
Thirty-five percent (35%) of Americans say that rising food prices have had a big impact on their lifestyle. That figure includes 63% of those who earn less than $20,000 annually.”
As ethanol is heavily a Democratic Party plan, with a few agriculture states Republicans thrown in for good measure, again Democratic Party rank and file are being hurt.
The far left of the Democratic Party, now in control of the Party, appears to be eating its own (pardon the gross metaphor). Yet these folks being hurt by their own Party continue to support and walk lockstep with the Party leaders. Go figure! This schizophrenic Party run by far left zealots is masquerading as the old Party of blue collar union workers, while pushing a far left agenda which excoriates their own rank and file.
At some point, this rank and file, upon waking up to the reality that the far left agenda is contrary to their best interests, will split and the Party will likely morph into two parties.
Okaaay, so we have a Republican administration that is keeping us in Iraq and destroying our economy, and you are now blaming this mess on the far left of the Democratic party? You blame the people who are demanding an end to the Iraq occupation and a more responsible government? You Repubs have been in in charge for 7 years, not the lefties. When Clinton was Prez, our economy prospered. Bush I, not so much. Bush II sunk us completely. Your boy Dubyu has bankrupted every company he’s been involved with, and now he’s bankrupting our country. But hey, at least he and his Saudi associates are all getting rich. Meanwhile the rest of us are falling out of the middle class because the dollar is crashing, the war costs too much, and our government is in Iraq instead of chasing the Taliban.
So quick, blame the crazy liberals. Maybe you can fool your followers one more time into voting against their own interests.
Newt, you may have missed the point of the post. The post was about the demographic groups in the Demographic Party and the impact of the Party’s policies on their own people, as it relates to oil, corn ethanol, and food.
The Democrats are against drilling which would alleviate pressure on the dollar, against lifting tariffs on Brazil’s efficient sugarcane ethanol, and want to continue subsidies to corn farmers for ethanol, which is diverting 30% of the corn crop to inefficient fuel. This loss of food corn has driven up food prices across the board.
George Bush and the Republican are another problem. Dubyu is not my boy, as you indicate. You need to work at not letting the Democrats distract from the core issues with their fine public relations and often stretched truth.
Agreed on the corn subsidies. But primarily because most of the corn farmers aren’t little people, they’re agribusiness and corporations that destroy the environment in their zeal for profit.
Regarding the occupation in Iraq, the attack was not simply a war for oil as is commonly claimed on the left. It is an occupation to prop up oil prices. In years past, when OPEC reduced oil production to artificially increase prices, Saddam Hussein increased Iraq’s production and undermined their efforts. Oil was only $10 a barrel in 1999, now it’s almost fourteen times that. Our military bombed Iraq’s oil facilities, then rebuilt them. The occupation stabilizes Iraq oil production at low levels, which allows OPEC to manipulate oil prices. Worse, the Iraqi government has no incentive to increase oil production. They would be expected to fund their own rebuilding if they were raking in huge profits. We’re duped into paying for an extended occupation that makes the Bush family and their Saudi friends ten times richer than they would be without the occupation. It’ll stay so until we demand a reasonable end to Iraq’s perpetual dependence on our military and financial support.
Chevron is showing record profits while Bush establishes new tax breaks. McCain will make those tax breaks permanent. Meanwhile, we’ll pay forever for the failed “stay the course” policy. McCain can’t clean this up, he’ll stay in Iraq. He’s the one we can put our faith in to win the war, but there is no way to win. Military solutions are McCain’s forte, but our military will never create peace in Iraq, nor can we wish away generations of cultural/tribal/religious strife that prevents a working democracy from being implemented without massive military backing. McCain, like Bush, has everything to gain by keeping the US in Iraq.
When we withdraw, the Iraq government will finally take responsibility. Watch how fast oil production takes off in Iraq when their new government can’t rely on our tax money anymore. The bottom line is the longer we stay there, the longer the occupation artificially props up oil prices.
Whether Obama or McCain believes in the war is less relevant to me than which of the two can get us out of Iraq, and prevent us from starting a new war in Iran. My vote goes to the Democrat because a Dem president and a Dem Congress will be susceptible to public pressure, and America is tired of our children dying and our money going down the drain.
Barak promises to continue the “war on terror”, to hunt “the real” perpetrators of September 11th in the caves of Afghanistan. Ha. I’m no science major, but, I can spot a fairy tale, such as a guy in a cave successfully defeated the US military to hit buildings (and drop them at nearly freefall speed into their own footprints), or, leave holes without telltale jumbo jet wreckage. Google: Loose Change, final edition.
Depleted uranium and its victims, in Iraq and Afghanistan, cares not what kinder, gentler face you put on the “war on terror”, Barak.
Give me a break.