Welcome to 201k.com - A Commonwealth Perspective.

Bob Herbert's recalling of FDR's vision of an expanded "Bill of Rights" for Americans brought the expected yeas and nays to the Times' letters page. One naysayer adopted the usual right-wing trick of arguing theory when faced with inconvenient facts:

To the Editor:

Re "A Radical in the White House," about Franklin D. Roosevelt:

Unlike F.D.R., George W. Bush - a conservative in the White House - espouses a bill of opportunities, not rights: the opportunity for a useful and remunerative job; the opportunity to earn enough for adequate food, clothing and recreation; and the opportunity for every farmer to grow and sell products at a return that provides a decent living.

The bill of opportunities also includes the opportunity for a decent home and adequate medical care; the opportunity for adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment; and the opportunity for a good education.

Most important, it includes the right of every person, according to his or her abilities, to convert these opportunities into reality.

Arun Khanna
Indianapolis, April 18, 2005

This of course is venerable right-wing theory: that the Constitution guarantees the right to the pursuit of happiness, not the right to happiness:

"...the opportunity for a useful and remunerative job; the opportunity to earn enough for adequate food, clothing and recreation; and the opportunity for every farmer to grow and sell products at a return that provides a decent living..."

The problem is that George Bush has done none of the these things. In fact he's made giant strides towards one goal only: the continued lowering of the cost of labor in the Unites States. The tax burden for the entire country has been moved from the highest earners to the lowest; nothing has been done to stem the flow of jobs to cheaper labor on the other side of the world, and nothing has been done to lower the frightening federal debt held by foreign nations.

And nothing will be done because George Bush and the Republican party aren't remotely interested in fixing those things; just the opposite.

Suggesting that President Bush and the GOP have espoused "a bill of opportunities" for Americans to achieve "a decent home and adequate medical care; the opportunity for adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment; and the opportunity for a good education" is like suggesting that an avalanche hitting your house is "an opportunity to go skiing".

There's an old lawyer's saying: when the facts are on your side, argue the facts; when the law is on your side, argue the law, and when neither are on your side pound the table. The right-wing political corollary should be" when the facts aren't good, argue the theory". So, for instance, if you're secretary of defense and someone asks why you suggested you "knew" where the WMD in Iraq were when you didn't, shake your head and talk about the "big picture" of "national security".

Get good enough at it and you could be president--able to stare straight-faced into the cameras and call a tax cut for the top 1% of earners "a jobs creation program" even though the current global labor market guarantees it won't create jobs in the U.S, and you know it.

You'll be able to tell that whopper with impunity because the right's true believers, like Arun Khanna, love to embrace market theory; it's their familiar and cozy truck stop on the bumpy road of economic reality.

They never fail not to notice that the political party they adore left real market theory bloodied and bruised along the side of the road some miles back.