Anti-liberal screeds

* Susan Lynn's anti-liberal screed in The Tennessean Sunday, Jan 3, seems excessively haughty and self righteous. Our founding documents are indeed noble and probably gave rise to "the freest country in the world"--considering other governments at the time.
* But those documents were crafted by and for white, land-owning, slave-holding, ethnic-cleansing males. Justice for everyone else had to be won by liberals or by liberals collaborating with excluded, oppressed or exploited groups. In each case, injustice was considered the natural order, and liberal questioning of it resembled tilting at windmills. Some beneficiaries of liberal-won justice think the justice project should be closed down when they get theirs. Ms Lynn is that sort of beneficiary.
* Our economic system has been rigged (by Reagan & Bush) to protect and increase wealth of the already rich. A hedge-fund manager, receiving several million annually to transfer wealth from 99% of investors to the richest 1%, has an income tax rate lower than that of a successful plumber whose trade serves all citizens.
* If it was OK to rig the system that way, then rigging it to provide dignified health care to the average worker and the less fortunate seems OK, ethical, civilized, just. As a practical matter, the cost of health insurance is out of the average family's reach and is overwhelming our economy.
* If too many citizens don't have a stake in our economic system, we could experience social unrest, possibly a million-poor-people's march on Greenwich Connecticut, where most of the hedge-fund bankster bonuses are sequestered.
* Ms Lynn might someday wish we had treated our less fortunate citizens better. Professor Richard Grant (whose anti-tax, anti-government, anti-liberal treatise appeared in the same issue) might also. Either could someday be less fortunate.