Ignoring poverty crosses international boundaries.

But perhaps more to the point, is the speech Sister Simone Campbell have at the DNC last night. It was very engaging to watch. Reading it is the next best thing. See link below for full transcipt.

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/09/05/transcript-sister-simone-campbell-of-the-roman-catholic-social-justice-organization-network/

She defiantly speaks about poverty and references Catholic Social teaching on the issue.

"Paul Ryan claims his budget reflects the principles of our shared Catholic faith. But the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that the Ryan budget failed a basic moral test, because it would harm families living in poverty."
(--Sr. Campbell)

No political party in Canada would be brave enough to try and pull this kind of overt
religious address at a political convention.

Predictable no doubt, posters attack her commitment to Catholicism because of her spirited stance defending Catholic Social teaching.

Here is the video of Sr. Simone.

Dear Rev. Wallis: PREACH it, Brother!!!!

Kevin McGrane

I would also like to be a fly on the wall of the room where Sam Potaro (see "Loving Politics") and Jim Wallis meet to discuss an ordinary citizen's ability to infuence "our" government. :)

Kevin McGrane

It's true that both parties neglect to mention poverty in the country, but for Jim Wallis to suggest an equivalency in the policies of Democrats and Republicans stretches his credibility beyond the limit. The dog-eat-dog Darwinian philosophy of the present Republican Party is shocking and scandalous.

The corporate culture will run the country no matter which party is in charge in the office of the president and the legislature, but let's not pretend that the coming election will affect the poor in the same way. Even marginal attention to the plight of the poor will make a difference, and which party is more likely to address the problem? Note that Sr Simone Campbell mentioned the Ryan/Romney budget at the beginning of her speech.

The disappearing middle class is a crisis that if not addressed will put is in the class of a banana republic, with a society that consists of the very rich and the very poor and quite a small middle class. Although I'm disappointed that the Democrats do not highlight the problem of poverty in the country as often as I would like, I believe this election will make a difference, so spare me the equivalency.

June Butler

I agree that we'll probably get a better deal from the Dems that the GOP. That said, the facts still state that, since 1970, the rich have gotten richer and the rest of us poorer, no matter who has been in the White House.

Source: Pew Research, Aug. 8, 2012 report.: In 1970, middle class Americans took home 62% of the country’s income; that proportion has fallen to 45% in 2006 and remained at 45% in 2010. Upper income adults now receive a large slice of the annual income pie: 46% in 2010 compared with 29% in 1970.

That has been over 8 presidential administrations, both Dem and GOP from Nixon to Obama. If we look at the graphs, there is virtually zero difference in the trends no matter who was in the White House.

I don’t think Rev. Wallis is far off the mark, and we need to ask all the politiccati "Why?"

Kevin McGrane

"we need to ask all the politiccati "Why?""

I don't think we need to scratch our heads too hard over this. Look at the socio-economic status of the political class: they are the rich. Some are richer than others, but even those who started off life in somewhat modest circumstances are rolling in it now.

I'm not saying that the rich never care about the poor and never take action to better their lot. I'm saying that advancing policies that favor one's own class is natural behavior. Which makes it all the more remarkable - and rare - for them not to do that.

It was interesting to read the quotes from the Bible, then read it was all the politicians in the White House's fault. Perhaps the church, the ones the N.T. was written to, should "step up". I noticed, too, that Sr. Simone Campbell spoke to the Dems and not to the GOP. Wonder why that was?

Lan Green

Lan: I suppose she spoke at the Dem's rally for the same reason Dolan spoke at the GOP rally. They were invited and they agreed. :)

And yes, the Executive Branch of our govt (aka The White House) bears much responsiblity in the transfer of wealth from all of us to the few of us. Let's start with repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, the branch banking laws that protected the consumers. If the White House had fought the repeal of these laws, we would not be in the banking mess we are today. The laws were repealed in the name of "de-regulation", and The 1% pillaged the banking industry like Genghis Kahn pillaged China.

That was the job of the Executive Branch, and it failed us.

Kevin McGrane

Kevin, Dolan also gave a benediction for the Dems.