Civil Discourse Now

Where the far left and far right overlap for fun and enlightenment

Repugnant: candidacy of Spartz (part 4) Slavery, more than free enterprise, was at the foundation of this country

Cookie jars must be very big in Ukraine. Victoria Spartz socked away enough money to buy a seat in Congress via the June 2 GOP primary for INCD5. Her issue stands are ill-founded and make little sense, like her views on “Business Regulations.”

From Ms. Spartz’s website: “Free enterprise is the foundation of our country. We must limit regulation powers of the executive branch and maintain a vibrant business environment, so entrepreneurs and small businesses can strive and compete with large corporations.”

First, the foundation of this country was built from things other than free enterprise. The issue that dominated the 1787 Constitutional Convention, but was not mentioned, by name, in the final product was slavery - the most evil of institutions.

“Even greater consequences flowed from the delegates’ compromises over slavery. ... Concessions on slavery had to be made to hold the Union together.” Stewart, “The Summer of 1787,” 2007, pp. 261-63.

Second, if by “free enterprise” Ms. Spartz means unfettered capitalism, the GOP was central to creation of limits on monopolistic practices. In 1997 Indiana abandoned its single-class high school basketball tournament.

Capitalism works like a single-elimination tournament. Corporations use whatever means are at their disposal to beat the competition. Unfortunately, when the dust settles and a handful of corporations (usually with interlocking directorates) are left, there is no re-do.

Unfettered capitalism gave us women and children working 12-hour days in factories with little pay and profits going into the pockets of a few. It gave us toxic waste in the air and water. It gave us poisoned meats.

Third, she says we should “regulate the powers of the executive branch.” Yet she supports, in trump, a would-be dictator who has condoned by inaction the bounties his pal Putin has placed on U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan.

So would she limit the executive or extend powers to the trump she praises? Less filling or tastes great? GOP administrations oversaw controls over trusts (big corporations), creation of the EPA, and affirmative action.

Finally there is no drug so hallucinogenic to create an illusion that “entrepreneurs and small businesses can strive and compete with large corporations.” Example: patents. A small business develops a product and patents it.

The only way to try and make the playing field even is to - you guessed it: place limits on those large corporations. Before AT & T was busted up in the early 1980s, its customer service was customer torture & 40 years later it’s about the same.

Ms. Spartz did not clear her statement “limit regulation powers of the executive branch” with trump, whom she supports. He recognizes no limits on what he sees as his powers.

Ms. Spartz is not qualified to hold the office she seeks. She follows and blindly supports trump. I am a pro-choice, pro-environment, anti-trump GOP precinct committee person. Any candidate - including Ms. Spartz - for political office who supports trump is unfit.

Views: 33

Comment

You need to be a member of Civil Discourse Now to add comments!

Join Civil Discourse Now

Comment by pogden297 on June 29, 2020 at 5:42pm

You're against a single class basketball tournament?  What are you some kind of communist?  I suppose you think all the kids in a soccer game should get "participation trophies" and that the score shouldn't be kept.

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2020   Created by Mark Small.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

My Great Web page