The VOW to hire heroes Act of 2011, which was part 3 of President Obama’s jobs bill passed the Senate 94-1. Who was that one person voting against helping our veterans? The same person seen here in this clip, which he uploaded himself.
Talk about blatant hypocrisy!
More importantly are his comments for why he voted NO on the Vow to Hire Heroes Act.
“I cannot support this tax credit because I do not believe the Government should privilege one American over another when it comes to work”
So, what he is effectively saying (with the help of right-wing think tanks) is that poor, and middle-class veterans (ie, the out-group) are meant to fend for themselves, while he and other Republican legislators focus on protecting and privileging the ‘elite’ class (in-group) that makes up the top 0.1% in society.
This is evident in the rejection of two previous jobs bills by put forth by President Obama by EVERY Republican senator. The first dealt with putting hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters and police officers back to work, and the second bill focused on fixing our crumbling infrastructure.
Both of these bills would have been paid for by raising taxes on income over and above $1 million in annual income.
What class of people makes over $1 million per year? How many people are included in this ‘elite’ group? How much was the proposed tax increase on this group?
Would it surprise you to know that the amount of people in this ‘elite’ class, or in-group making over $1 million per year is less than 0.1% of Americans.
The amount being asked of this ‘elite’ group to help our economy recover, create hundreds of thousands of jobs to educate our children and keep us safe is less than 1% on every dollar above and beyond the first $1 million. Who is the group being privileged here?
Want more proof? As indicated in a recent PBS article, Democrats told the press that this veteran’s bill would cost $1 billion, and would be paid for by adding a fee for VA home loans. In essence, veterans themselves would pay for this bill, as opposed to asking those in the top .01% to spare some change. No wonder Republicans overwhelmingly supported it.
The burden is once again placed squarely on the out-group, while protecting those at the top by not raising taxes a single penny on the privileged in-group.
Since it is obviously unpopular to privilege the ‘elite’ class at the expense of everyone else, specific language must be created, via numerous right-wing think tanks to come up with appropriate Orwellian style frames, so it makes sense to the majority of people. This way, people are more likely to vote in favor of such a position.
For example, an oldie but goody is the “welfare recipient” frame, or the idea that Government is privileging those on welfare (ie, those who are characterized as sponging off the system). Makes sense right? Why should we support people that are lazy and who are intentionally living off of the system? This is what makes frames so attractive. What people do not realize is that the exact opposite is actually true, as indicated above.
The new twist on this old frame is that veterans are now included in this “welfare recipient” frame.
One thought on “The deeper meaning behind Jim Demint’s (R-SC) hypocritical vote against the veteran’s jobs bill. HINT: it involves a new twist on an old “frame”.”
The disposable American, is what we are and what we have been for far too long. The Republican party…why would they protect the veteran? They are no longer useful for what they need them for. Demint is just dumb enough to say what be believes the rest of the Republican party are cowards as they legislate and hide behind the lapel flag pin.