In the wake of Ann Coulter’s book-promotion publicity stunt, the controversy over the payments made to the families of 9/11 victims seems to be getting some play. With that, the accompanying pin-the-face-on-the-victim routine is making the rounds too.
Now, I find Ann Coulter to be a venomous person with a miserable perspective and an offensive and ugly character. My hope is that people like her are really just rabble-rousing mercenaries and will tone down their ugly rhetoric whenever the country shifts away from the current wave of Republican inspired, Biblical hatred. But I don’t want to write about this now….
I want to circle back to the issue of compensating relatives of victims. (Note: I proposed an issue on whereIstand regarding compensation for relatives of the victims of terrorist attacks.) I can’t find it on this site right now (just haven’t hit on the right search terms), but I recall having written about this.
I didn’t follow the links in Terp’s post; I have both respect for and concerns about people in uniform and I just can’t stomach the glorification of badges, guns, etc. But the point about which I’m writing is justified:
Personally, I never understood why the survivors of that tragic event had anything beyond the amount of their loved one’s life insurance policy coming to them.
This is a very good point. I’ve never understood this either. I have been phrasing it this way, "If you were killed in a car accident on the way into work at the World Trade Center on 9/11, your family got nothing." I think that’s a much more healthy perspective, since more people die in America in car accidents every month than died on 9/11. While it’s much more spectacular when airplanes fly into buildings and people jump from smoldering towers, 3,000 American deaths by dashboard ago was last month! Frankly, it’s really great when you’re able to get from NYC to Philadelphia by car in two hours, but if Americans really want to Arrive Alive, they ought to bring the speed limit down to 40 mph.
[I'm pretty sure that few besides the Amish are going to line up behind this proposal, but go ahead and try to make a legitimate argument that saving tens of thousands of American lives every year and dramatically reducing injuries and insurance costs is not in the best interests of the country].
Without the personal attacks on the widows, then, the point has merit. Now let’s place the blame where it belongs: Republicans and Religion.
Part of the whole faith-based BS is the culture of charity. It’s incredibly hilarious that conservatives are so against Welfare, when Christians en masse are the biggest proponents of it. They’re beef is with the delivery mechanism. They’re exceedingly in favor of welfare so long as it’s a vehicle for reliance of the church.
If the state gives money to the needy, it’s a drain on the taxpayers. If the state, by the many indirect mechanisms in place, gives money to churches (in addition to the moneys they exact by guilt and pressure on the stupid), who then give the money to the needy - well, that’s just Christian Charity! Putting together a collection for the families is a habit formed of religion. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing for that; I’m just giving credit where credit is due.
At any point in time, were it politically expedient to do so, Republicans could easily have killed the payouts to the widows. Sure Democrats lined up behind this, but can Republicans really defend themselves by saying this was bipartisan? No legislation passes without Republican support - hell, no legislation comes to the floor, in the current Congress, without Republican support. Saying that Democrats signed up for it is like saying that Sady Johnson in Kansas was in favor of it… i.e., "big deal!" Republicans could easily have killed this compensation measure in any of the branches of our government.
So, if you’re going to be angry about the money paid, be angry at the Republican leadership. Unfortunately, "trickle-down" is a theory that Republicans only apply to money. When they’re talking about responsibility, it’s "trickle-up". This is why they blame the trial lawyers when a doctor’s negligence results in a brain-dead kid; this is why they blame the families that received the money rather than the politicians that doled it out; this is why they blame the Mexican that comes here to mow lawns to feed his family rather than the American in the SUV that employs him illegally.
That’s my take, anyway. I don’t expect the Terps of the world to agree. However, I do welcome everybody signing up (regardless of political affiliation, race, religion, etc.) to the notion that the state should "never again" compensate the families of victims, unless the state is admitting responsibility, or is determined to have been responsible in court or in law.
That certainly isn’t the case with 9/11… so I think those Republicans that are going after the widows ought to file lawsuits instead to get the money returned to the treasury so it can be made available again for new tax cuts to the wealthy…er…well…
whereIstand Tags
Tags: Technology by nick
2 Comments »
