Common misconception. Even I believed it at one time. At some point I had to ask myself, How did I come to think that?
Read the following:
Democrats now control the majority of the nation’s wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
This new political demography holds true in the House of Representatives, where the leadership of each party hails from different worlds. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, represents one of America’s wealthiest regions. Her San Francisco district has more than 43,700 high-end households. Fewer than 7,000 households in the western Ohio district of House Republican leader John Boehner enjoy this level of affluence.
The next rung of House leadership shows the same pattern. Democratic majority leader Steny Hoyer’s district is home to the booming suburban communities between Washington, DC, and Annapolis. It boasts almost 19,000 wealthy households and a median income topping $62,000. Mr Hoyer’s counterpart, minority whip Roy Blunt, hails from a rural Missouri district that has only 5,200 wealthy households and whose median income is only $33,000.
Income disparity – to use the class warrior’s favourite term – is greatest among the districts of lawmakers that lead each party’s campaign arm. Maryland senator Chris Van Hollen chairs the Democratic congressional campaign committee. With more than 36,000 prosperous households and a median income of nearly $70,000, his suburban Washington district even out-sparkles Ms Pelosi’s. In contrast, fewer than 5,000 such wealthy households are found in the largely rural district of his Republican counterpart, Tom Cole from Oklahoma. The median income there is only $35,500.
Read Entire Article
Allow me to go off on a little tangent here:
I wrote a while back about the misconception that “conservatives oppose higher taxes because they are rich“. My reason for writing that article was because I actually used to believe that too. As I came to understand the true reason why conservatives opposed high taxation, I actually found myself agreeing. I think that this would be the case with many more issues, except that people are not given a fair chance at understanding conservative positions because the media, and especially Hollywood, are overtly one sided. The media doesn’t try to understand anything – so it remains mostly useless. Hollywood, however, overtly goes about pushing a fairly far left agenda. Just try and think of the last time you saw a major motion picture (or a TV show even) that fairly portrayed conservatives position? Would you even recognize it if they did?
This is the reason that I take on conservative issues on What the Crap. The point is not to insult (and I apologize if I have done so in the past) but rather to clarify what conservatism is all about. Believe me – you will not get a fair idea about it watching TV and movies. This is because TV and movies do not attempt to understand anything. They exist only to make points. Points, however, are useless without understanding.
Allow me to give you a key example:
My wife and I thoroughly enjoy Battlestar Galactica. (I know – we’re nerds…). However, I cannot tell you how many times I have shaken my fist at the writers and producers of that show. The reason is because half the episodes are blatantly one sided politically. Now, I would have absolutely no problem if the show simply portrayed Liberal ideas. It’s patently false portrayal of conservative ideas, is what make me angry. It shows me just how ignorant the writers are to so flagrantly misrepresent conservative positions.
You may be thinking – “man, you are making a big deal about this…” The problem is that this dishonesty acts as brainwashing to people who are uninterested in politics. I know because at one time I was in the same position. There was a time when I would have walked out of a movie like Syriana and actually thought that I had been given a fair picture of the oil industry. What happens is that people hear only one side of the story enough that they start to believe and develop stereotypes. I think that this is very dangerous for serious political discussion. More than anything, political issues require true understanding of both sides of an issue. What we don’t need are more stereotypes and misrepresentations.
So back to the issue of “Party of the Rich” misconception. What led you to believe that Republicans are all wealthy?