“Panic! Run for the hills! This is the end…”
Yeah, you’ve heard it before from me too, and now apparently, progressives and Democrats all over the country are panicking in reaction to the debt ceiling bill.
“Oh no! Obama caved again! He’s a secret conservative! What’ll we do?!”
WHOA! Hold on just a second Ma Barker—don’t run for the hills just yet. Let’s put this thing in perspective here.
First off, Obama is a conservative—Democrat. But wouldn't you rather have that than a gun-slinger who throws the ball all over the field, often into the hands of the opposition? Never mind, we'll get to that later.
Look, we may not agree with all of Obama's policies, but at least he’s a rational human being, which cannot be said of anyone on the other side. Also, the compromises that he’s signed didn’t come as a result of normal politics, where people with different positions sit down at a table together and figure out a compromise. He sat across the table from a spoiled brat and a bunch of terrorists.
And though the unbelievably irresponsible mainstream media failed to point out that it was Republicans, not Democrats, who were threatening the nation’s economy, the American people saw everything: they saw a rational man trying his best to go forward with reasonable ideas, like revoking tax breaks and subsidies for multi-billion dollar corporations, raising tax rates on those who measure their incomes in hundreds of thousands or millions, and making some tough choices about which government programs to scale back. On the other side, they saw a party holding a gun to the nations economy, cocking it when they didn't get their way.
Let’s get back to what makes Democrats and progressives different from the other side. Follow through—what are the consequences of the deal? Well, let’s point out right now, that with no deal, we’d currently be in default, which would have raised everyone’s interest rates, devalued the dollar, and tanked the economy.
However, the deal itself isn’t as bad as everyone thinks. Remember, the cuts don’t go into effect this year, but over a ten year period—they’re back loaded. So, in effect, if we elect a majority in both houses in 2012, they can just go back and change the deal.
Also, the trigger mechanism that was set up to cut 1.5 billion (half Medicare, half Defense) is genius, because there is no way the bi-partisan commission will be able to come up, honestly, with an alternative plan that does not increase revenue, in which case as we’ve seen, there is no chance of it ever passing the House since Republicans are dead set against any increases in revenue. And, if the commission somehow did come up with an alternative plan that didn’t include revenue, there is no way it would pass the Senate, which is held by Democrats.
What does this mean? It means that the trigger mechanism will almost certainly go into effect, and that is actually a very good thing. Medicare needs to be reformed in order to survive, and our defense budget is outlandish. And who gets to decide how those cuts take place? Obama does. Who has veto power? Obama does. And this time, there’s no gun to his head—it’s either automatic cuts that he controls, or a bill that he endorses.
Are we starting to understand? He pulled a fast one on the Republicans—we won, and in the process, a lot of Americans who don’t normally pay attention saw exactly how irrational the Republican party has become, including their corporate and Wall street donors.
Now look forward. Obama has a huge political warchest and is likely going to face a Republican candidate who has been forced to run so far right in order to win the primary that they’ll never be able to convince rational Republicans, moderates, and independents to vote for them. Sure, Obama hasn’t been able to enact what the economy needs—a massive stimulus package aimed primarily at education and infrastructure—but he hasn’t had the means either.
Here’s the football analogy. In the first two years, we scored on them, first with the stimulus package, and then with the health care bill. Dems 10 (I’ll give the stimulus an FG and the health care bill a TD), Reps 0. Then in 2010, the Republicans won office back—a natural kneejerk reaction for a country that found itself in a recession, when the opposition party was promising jobs (where are those jobs, by the way—they seem to be like Bush’s WMD’s—non-existent), not to mention the fact that our voters fumbled by not showing up to the polls. Dems 10, Reps 7.
Now, the Republicans scored a FG by getting Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts, but Obama scored a FG by getting them to extend unemployment benefits. Dems 13, Reps 10. During the first part of this year, the Republicans had the ball and were driving, but during the debt ceiling talks, Boehner threw a long bomb downfield and Eric Cantor and his Tea Party extremists pulled a T.O. and decided not to catch the ball, which we then intercepted (never good to have dissention on the bench).
Now, we may have had to punt the ball with this deal, but we’ve got them pinned down deep in their own territory. Democratic leaders have called for a renewed focus on jobs when Congress returns from its August recess. And the Republicans have been calling some horrible plays.
For example, before the recess, House Republicans were foolish enough to force a silly fight with the TSA because it allows unions, costing the government over a billion dollars in lost revenue and endangering lives. Rest assured, the mainstream media will pick up on this if they haven't already.
Additionally, they promised jobs in 2010, but they’ve done nothing to create them. In the states, where there are Republican governors and legislatures, they’re cutting teachers, firemen, police, and other public employees, all while putting the full court press on to deny women, especially vulnerable ones with children, health care services.
Finally, Republicans have now been put on record several times as holding a position that is deeply at odds with the American public, over 80% of whom believe we should raise taxes on the rich and close corporate loopholes and tax breaks. They can’t pass (legislation that is), and it’s pretty easy to stop the run when you know they’re going right every time.
Unfortunately, I don’t think we’re going to be able to score in the next year either because of staunch goal-line defense in the House, but we can drive the ball deep by putting forth legislation that would create jobs, and because President Obama, though stymied by a tough Republican defense, is a great quarterback. What we need to do at half time (2012) is to not lose faith, to put him back in under center, and get him more playmakers.
Let’s face it, we hoped we’d be winning 35-0 right now, and by all rights, we should be, but let’s remember, we’re playing on a neutral field, and the refs (supreme court) have made some extremely bad calls. Still, if we stick to our guns and support our guys, we’re going to win this game, and its possible we can blow them out in the second half.
It’s 13 to 10. We’re up 3 against our bitter rivals. Are we really going to give up because we’re not winning by enough?
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Default. Default? Default!
Well dear reader, I guess it looks like we’re going to default. I’d get out of the stock market now, and if you can, lock in your mortgage and credit card interest rates, or pay them off all together. Of course, most Americans can’t afford to do that, so the rosiest thing I can say is: this will be interesting.
Now, there are three ways the Ring (the debt ceiling, which the Cants are currently wielding like Sauron on a drunken power binge) can be destroyed here:
1) Obama can, citing Article 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment, basically just say, “guys, the fuckwads in Congress can’t get it done—the Republican party has journeyed to the edge of the conservative abyss, and seeing nothing there, went insane. Like the Reevers in “Firefly,” they have become soulless, cannibalistic monsters who stink of scotch and prostitutes—dirty, dirty whores. So, I’m just going to raise the debt ceiling, because what they are currently doing, though their mangled minds can’t comprehend this, is unconstitutional. God bless you, and God bless America.”
2) The Federal Reserve could basically just start printing money, although, they wouldn’t actually print it—they’d just say it was a loan.
3) Congress could get its shit together and raise the debt limit. Harry Reid’s plan is incredibly smart, and fits the Republican’s originally stated criteria for raising the debt limit. If they reject this, Reid and Pelosi should basically just put forth a simple bill that says, “we’re going to raise the debt limit by 2 trillion.” Then force Republicans to vote against that and take responsibility for their almost unfathomable irresponsibility.
Hopefully, one of these things will happen, although, in my own mangled mind, there’s a small, evil voice shouting, “default, default! DEFAULT!” And instead of holding up a large “D” and a white picket fence, he’s burning a large fake dollar.
I know, it sounds awful, but he’s on our side, and here’s why a default could actually be good: the Republicans are going to take the responsibility for default like a rocket up the ass. Sure, the usual liars like Limbaugh, Fox, and the supposedly serious George Will, will try to find some way to blame it on Obama, but in the end, these are the facts, and they are undisputed:
A) Congress has raised the debt ceiling something like 70 or 80 times without default.
B) Republicans had no problem doing it during Bush’s presidency, in which the deficit exploded.
C) More than 50% of Americans already know that the Republican party is evil and hates the U.S.
D) The other 20-30% of people that don’t really pay attention will wake up pissed when they see the economy crash.
E) Corporate donors to the Republican Party, which are substantial, will back out and support Democrats in the next election.
So, if we default, you’re going to see the Republican Party and the spinsters try to pull off a little magic act, they’re gonna try a little misdirection. They’re going to astonish you with stories of spending and dazzle you with official sounding terms like “Financial Responsibility.” They might even cut into a few of their own for you. They’ll have no evidence, mind you, none. But it’s gonna be entertaining. And when we get to the end, all the magic in the world will not have been able to divert your attention from the fact that the U.S. economy is dead, and the Republican Party killed it. These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.
OK, I’m done plagiarizing captain Ross there, but I hope the Republican party gets it: lies only work for so long, and they don’t work at all when people are begging in the streets. Americans have had the privilege of being pretty whimsical of late, but people have a way of sobering up pretty fucking quick when you steal money from them, or when you endanger their family’s well-being. Sure, they’ll always have the 20% of morons on their side, because they’re about as intelligent and loyal as golden retrievers. But rest assured that most Americans, when they find their financial future under attack, will care enough to find out just what the fuck has been going on.
See, every time the Cants pull this bullshit parade—every time they force their conservative policies on our nation, which are terrible for the economy—they lose people. And there are a lot of Republican voters out there with mortgages and investments that are going to be furious if we default, and at the end of the day, most of them aren’t going to blame Obama or the Democrats, who’ve offered several incredibly good deals in order to raise the debt limit—to which the Republicans said, “no.”
So, look, I hope that like in Lord of the Rings, some force in government bites the Ring off of the Republican hand and falls into the fires of Mount Doom, but I also know that when evil rears its ugly head, dwarves, elves, and men make unlikely alliances. If we default, few will dispute what I’ve been saying all along: the Republican Party is evil. Purely, and wholly, evil.
Now, there are three ways the Ring (the debt ceiling, which the Cants are currently wielding like Sauron on a drunken power binge) can be destroyed here:
1) Obama can, citing Article 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment, basically just say, “guys, the fuckwads in Congress can’t get it done—the Republican party has journeyed to the edge of the conservative abyss, and seeing nothing there, went insane. Like the Reevers in “Firefly,” they have become soulless, cannibalistic monsters who stink of scotch and prostitutes—dirty, dirty whores. So, I’m just going to raise the debt ceiling, because what they are currently doing, though their mangled minds can’t comprehend this, is unconstitutional. God bless you, and God bless America.”
2) The Federal Reserve could basically just start printing money, although, they wouldn’t actually print it—they’d just say it was a loan.
3) Congress could get its shit together and raise the debt limit. Harry Reid’s plan is incredibly smart, and fits the Republican’s originally stated criteria for raising the debt limit. If they reject this, Reid and Pelosi should basically just put forth a simple bill that says, “we’re going to raise the debt limit by 2 trillion.” Then force Republicans to vote against that and take responsibility for their almost unfathomable irresponsibility.
Hopefully, one of these things will happen, although, in my own mangled mind, there’s a small, evil voice shouting, “default, default! DEFAULT!” And instead of holding up a large “D” and a white picket fence, he’s burning a large fake dollar.
I know, it sounds awful, but he’s on our side, and here’s why a default could actually be good: the Republicans are going to take the responsibility for default like a rocket up the ass. Sure, the usual liars like Limbaugh, Fox, and the supposedly serious George Will, will try to find some way to blame it on Obama, but in the end, these are the facts, and they are undisputed:
A) Congress has raised the debt ceiling something like 70 or 80 times without default.
B) Republicans had no problem doing it during Bush’s presidency, in which the deficit exploded.
C) More than 50% of Americans already know that the Republican party is evil and hates the U.S.
D) The other 20-30% of people that don’t really pay attention will wake up pissed when they see the economy crash.
E) Corporate donors to the Republican Party, which are substantial, will back out and support Democrats in the next election.
So, if we default, you’re going to see the Republican Party and the spinsters try to pull off a little magic act, they’re gonna try a little misdirection. They’re going to astonish you with stories of spending and dazzle you with official sounding terms like “Financial Responsibility.” They might even cut into a few of their own for you. They’ll have no evidence, mind you, none. But it’s gonna be entertaining. And when we get to the end, all the magic in the world will not have been able to divert your attention from the fact that the U.S. economy is dead, and the Republican Party killed it. These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.
OK, I’m done plagiarizing captain Ross there, but I hope the Republican party gets it: lies only work for so long, and they don’t work at all when people are begging in the streets. Americans have had the privilege of being pretty whimsical of late, but people have a way of sobering up pretty fucking quick when you steal money from them, or when you endanger their family’s well-being. Sure, they’ll always have the 20% of morons on their side, because they’re about as intelligent and loyal as golden retrievers. But rest assured that most Americans, when they find their financial future under attack, will care enough to find out just what the fuck has been going on.
See, every time the Cants pull this bullshit parade—every time they force their conservative policies on our nation, which are terrible for the economy—they lose people. And there are a lot of Republican voters out there with mortgages and investments that are going to be furious if we default, and at the end of the day, most of them aren’t going to blame Obama or the Democrats, who’ve offered several incredibly good deals in order to raise the debt limit—to which the Republicans said, “no.”
So, look, I hope that like in Lord of the Rings, some force in government bites the Ring off of the Republican hand and falls into the fires of Mount Doom, but I also know that when evil rears its ugly head, dwarves, elves, and men make unlikely alliances. If we default, few will dispute what I’ve been saying all along: the Republican Party is evil. Purely, and wholly, evil.
Friday, July 22, 2011
A...sigh...Brilliant Maneuver
OK, so I don’t know if I’ll have time to make this super humorous, but I have a few thoughts on this “deal” that Obama is agreeing to with the Republicans. Supposedly, thought the deal has yet to be announced, it contains some pretty decent cuts in Social Security as well as Medicare.
1. If this in fact is true, Obama has completely betrayed his Democratic base. He betrayed us when he took the “public option” off the table for health care reform. He betrayed us when he refused to end the Bush tax cuts (which, by the way, would have gone a long way toward solving this deficit problem). He completely blew it when he allowed most of his stimulus package (which was too small in the first place) to come in the form of tax cuts. And finally, if he cuts the Social Security and Medicare benefits, he’s ignoring 80% of the American people, who don’t want any cuts in these programs.
2. It might also be one of the most brilliant political moves in recent history. Because where, progressives, are we going to go? The Republican party basically wants to bring about a society where there are too classes: slaves and masters. They are the manifestation of pure evil. They would sell their own daughters into prostitution if it meant they could gain power. Right now, deep in the bowels of Dick Cheney’s compound, they have necromancers working around pentagram shaped clocks to resurrect Dracula, Voldemort, Sauron, Emperor Palpatine, and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. They think Dennis Miller is funny. So, if we’re choosing the lesser of two evils, Obama’s our guy.
Moreover, this political maneuver leaves Republicans no place to go in terms of message and platform. They can’t say we have a debt problem, because Obama will have dealt with it. They can’t say they want to reform Medicare and Social Security—it’ll already have been done. They can’t say Obama’s spending too much money right after a much publicized debt deal to cut our deficit by 4 trillion in the next 10 years. Where are they going to go? More tax cuts? That’s not going to fly. Abortion? That will lose them votes. The same with anti-gay messaging. Now jobs…
Well, they may crow about the state of the economy, but they don’t have any remedies for it. Tax cuts don’t work, and the public is starting to understand that. Cut regulations? No, that led to the Wall Street crisis. Get rid of Obama Care? That is also a losing proposition—most Americans want health care reform, especially as they see insurance companies continue to ratchet up their rates. See? If this deal gets done the Republicans don’t have a leg to stand on, and if they try to manufacture another crisis like this one, that’ll surely spell disaster for them in 2012—public opinion is already turning against them this time.
And that is why what Obama has done is so brilliant. Progressives have no choice but to vote for him, because they won’t vote for a Republican, and they know what happens if they stay home: 2010. On the other hand, the Republican base has no reason to be motivated at this point, debt crisis well in hand, and their evil candidates have nothing to run on that is going to motivate independents to vote for them.
3. This is still only brilliant for one person: Obama. It’s not good for the country, because on the whole, our domestic policies continue to move right, which is the wrong direction—the further we head down that road the worse our economy will be. So, here is what progressives need to do:
A) Unless some awesome progressive challenger comes forward, like Bernie Sanders, we have to re-elect Obama in 2012. He is way better than anyone on the Republican side (can you imagine what would happen to a liberal state like Oregon when Michelle Bachmann got one of her headaches as commander in chief?), and in the end, he’s proven that he’ll sign bills and do the business of the people, thus…
B) WE HAVE TO ELECT DEMOCRATIC MAJORITIES IN BOTH HOUSES! If we can get good progressive politicians in office in 2012, we’ll be able to get legislation that might actually be able to address some of the huge issues we face as a nation, and my guess is, Obama will aid them and sign their bills.
C) We need to start looking for an ACTUAL progressive presidential candidate for 2016, one who will actually CHANGE the way D.C. works, instead of lying about it to win an election. I would even tend to say that it would be better if this person were an Independent, because that could deal a potential death blow to the Republican party, which, if you oppose evil you’ll agree, should be eradicated as soon as possible. This happens in America’s history every so often—one party become irrelevant, another party changes its position, and a new party springs into life. In this case, the Republican party may well become irrelevant, the Democrats will be the new conservatives (as they’re proving every damn day), and the Independent party, or some other party, will be the new liberals.
D) Don’t lose hope! We’re so much smarter than the cons, we have the truth on our side, and ingenious solutions to the problems we face as a nation. Keep working, keep electing progressives, stay active, and eventually, we’ll see the changes we need to make this nation great again. Keep the faith!
1. If this in fact is true, Obama has completely betrayed his Democratic base. He betrayed us when he took the “public option” off the table for health care reform. He betrayed us when he refused to end the Bush tax cuts (which, by the way, would have gone a long way toward solving this deficit problem). He completely blew it when he allowed most of his stimulus package (which was too small in the first place) to come in the form of tax cuts. And finally, if he cuts the Social Security and Medicare benefits, he’s ignoring 80% of the American people, who don’t want any cuts in these programs.
2. It might also be one of the most brilliant political moves in recent history. Because where, progressives, are we going to go? The Republican party basically wants to bring about a society where there are too classes: slaves and masters. They are the manifestation of pure evil. They would sell their own daughters into prostitution if it meant they could gain power. Right now, deep in the bowels of Dick Cheney’s compound, they have necromancers working around pentagram shaped clocks to resurrect Dracula, Voldemort, Sauron, Emperor Palpatine, and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. They think Dennis Miller is funny. So, if we’re choosing the lesser of two evils, Obama’s our guy.
Moreover, this political maneuver leaves Republicans no place to go in terms of message and platform. They can’t say we have a debt problem, because Obama will have dealt with it. They can’t say they want to reform Medicare and Social Security—it’ll already have been done. They can’t say Obama’s spending too much money right after a much publicized debt deal to cut our deficit by 4 trillion in the next 10 years. Where are they going to go? More tax cuts? That’s not going to fly. Abortion? That will lose them votes. The same with anti-gay messaging. Now jobs…
Well, they may crow about the state of the economy, but they don’t have any remedies for it. Tax cuts don’t work, and the public is starting to understand that. Cut regulations? No, that led to the Wall Street crisis. Get rid of Obama Care? That is also a losing proposition—most Americans want health care reform, especially as they see insurance companies continue to ratchet up their rates. See? If this deal gets done the Republicans don’t have a leg to stand on, and if they try to manufacture another crisis like this one, that’ll surely spell disaster for them in 2012—public opinion is already turning against them this time.
And that is why what Obama has done is so brilliant. Progressives have no choice but to vote for him, because they won’t vote for a Republican, and they know what happens if they stay home: 2010. On the other hand, the Republican base has no reason to be motivated at this point, debt crisis well in hand, and their evil candidates have nothing to run on that is going to motivate independents to vote for them.
3. This is still only brilliant for one person: Obama. It’s not good for the country, because on the whole, our domestic policies continue to move right, which is the wrong direction—the further we head down that road the worse our economy will be. So, here is what progressives need to do:
A) Unless some awesome progressive challenger comes forward, like Bernie Sanders, we have to re-elect Obama in 2012. He is way better than anyone on the Republican side (can you imagine what would happen to a liberal state like Oregon when Michelle Bachmann got one of her headaches as commander in chief?), and in the end, he’s proven that he’ll sign bills and do the business of the people, thus…
B) WE HAVE TO ELECT DEMOCRATIC MAJORITIES IN BOTH HOUSES! If we can get good progressive politicians in office in 2012, we’ll be able to get legislation that might actually be able to address some of the huge issues we face as a nation, and my guess is, Obama will aid them and sign their bills.
C) We need to start looking for an ACTUAL progressive presidential candidate for 2016, one who will actually CHANGE the way D.C. works, instead of lying about it to win an election. I would even tend to say that it would be better if this person were an Independent, because that could deal a potential death blow to the Republican party, which, if you oppose evil you’ll agree, should be eradicated as soon as possible. This happens in America’s history every so often—one party become irrelevant, another party changes its position, and a new party springs into life. In this case, the Republican party may well become irrelevant, the Democrats will be the new conservatives (as they’re proving every damn day), and the Independent party, or some other party, will be the new liberals.
D) Don’t lose hope! We’re so much smarter than the cons, we have the truth on our side, and ingenious solutions to the problems we face as a nation. Keep working, keep electing progressives, stay active, and eventually, we’ll see the changes we need to make this nation great again. Keep the faith!
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Too Greedily...Too Deep...Brooks' and U.S. Women Epic Fails
Alice: “Sometimes I believe in as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
The Mad Hatter: “That is an excellent practice.”
Rush Limbaugh: “Hoorh, humph, hoo, rawh, gobbledegook.”
David Brooks: “Dumb, da-da-da dumb dumb dumb, dumb da-da-da, dumb dumb....smart.”
Not sure how many of you read David Brooks’ latest column in the New York Times—I’ll attach the URL at the bottom—but even as he is hailed the last supposedly serious, reasonable conservative by the main stream media, I’d like to point out that the very concept of a “serious, reasonable conservative” is itself, an oxymoron…emphasis on moron.
See, what has become clear through the budget debate is that there are two types of Republicans: 1) Brooks’ ilk, who seem to believe that conservatism has rational and laudible goals, and 2) bat shit crazy fuckwads that end up voting or working for the elephants because they have a religious-like belief (often combined with their actual religion, Christinsanity—or as I like to call it, creepyism) in some sort of basic conservative principal, like racism, or hypocrisy. And while I much prefer Brooks to Bachmann, the fact remains that they are both wrong, and continue to be wrong about so many things that if they were enrolled in school they’d be riding the short bus and failing classes.
If you read Brooks’ column, you’ll notice that he breaks down group 2 (although, I believe far less eloquently than I’ve done here) and castigates them as the reason for the recent Republicant failure on debt ceiling and budget talks. That’s why he get’s one smart above.
But the rest of what he said is deeply dumb. You see, conservatives, like the dwarves in Moria, delved too greedily, and too deep. They were both in search of riches (for Cons, in the form of loopholes and tax cuts), and unfortunately their lecherous and unbridled greed led them to a very dark and awful place. And neither the dwarves, nor the cants, did what every thinking and rational person must do before they undertake an endeavor: what are the consequences if I succeed?
For instance, Brooks talks in his article giddily about the prospects of a Republicant sweep of the 2012 election, suggesting that then, “controlling the White House and Congress, perhaps they will have the guts to cut Medicare unilaterally, reform the welfare state and herald in an era of Conservative greatness.” I’m actually a little embarrassed for him after writing that quote down, I mean, “the era of Conservative greatness?” What the hell does that even mean? I thought this guy was a “serious, rational, respectable person,” not some child hoping desperately that Santa brings him a pretty new pony and special new dresses for his doll collection.
Well, let’s go with what he says. For one, we know that this “era” includes cutting Medicare “unilaterally.” What fucking insurance do you suppose you’re going to have Brooks? Face it, you’re old, and you can’t keep writing nonsense forever and expecting that its going to continue to get published. What happens when you retire, you ass clown?
See, this is what the Republicants don’t ever seem to do—follow through with what would happen were they to accomplish their goals. They talk about axing Medicare, cutting Social Security, and repealing Obama care (they actually read this as “Evil Care.” For the record, I’m against Evil Care as well, but since Congress never passed a bill called Obamacare, or Evil Care, but instead passed the Affordable Care Act, it remains a moot point), but then they fail to say what they would do to replace these programs. They seem to forget, conveniently, that the health insurance industry, which is NOT a free market (the industry as a whole has anti-trust exemption, along with other special prizes), was and is continuing to rape our economy with all the subtlety of Silverback gorilla in heat.
Remember, when the CBO analyzed the effect the Affordable Care Act would have on the economy, they said that it would actually save the federal government around $128 billion by 2019 (conservative reader, I just read the CBO budget, so don’t try to lie to me like you always do and tell me I’m wrong. Go back to playing with your train set…) Granted, that isn’t a ton of savings, but it isn’t going to cost us more either. And nearly all Americans will have health insurance.
By the way, Evil Care, aka the Bush Tax Cuts, costs us $700 billion in revenue every two years—most of which goes to pay the salaries of Satan’s first captain, Grover Norquist, and his children, D.C. corporate lobbyists.
The other thing is that it seems Republicants believe that somehow if we balance the budget, the skies are going to open up and gold is going to come raining down out of the heavens. They don’t know why they believe it—they just do, with all the zeal of a drunken Scotsman in field of helpless sheep. The reality of balancing the budget during a recession and this supposed “era of Conservative greatness” to follow is that for most Americans, it means eating tuna fish sandwiches three times a day and living in your parent’s basement, because Grandma got the guest room.
The even stranger irony is that even while Brooks is pining for this “era of Conservative greatness,” along with the Republicant victories in the next election, he is excoriating the people in control of the party as foolish, self-serving, and incapable of governance. In short, he basically says that when it comes to this debt ceiling debacle, they fucked up monumentally. In a previous column, he basically labels the entire party’s leadership as irrational. Why then, would he want them in control of the government?!
Well, he may, but my guess is, most American’s by now don’t. The simple fact about the Republicant party is this: they can’t govern the country. They don’t confirm judges. They filibuster legislation Americans broadly support. They vote for legislation that Americans don’t support. They’re willing to put the country at risk of international and financial crises in order to protect tax cuts for the very rich. And, as even the delusional Brooks’ points out, they won’t even compromise on a budget deal in which they’re getting 90% of what they want. They’re so dysfunctional at this point that they simply can’t govern the country, and as much as I get frustrated with Obama and the Democrats on certain issues, they’ve made at least one thing clear to the American people: they’ll make sure the country continues to function. They’ll do the people’s business and administer government.
Oh, on a side note, I just want to congratulate the U.S. women’s soccer team on one of the biggest choke-jobs I’ve ever seen in my life. Allowing Japan to come back and score goals twice when all you had to do was keep the ball away from them for 10 minutes and then missing your first three PK’s is just terrible. And I for one, am not going to sit back like the lazy media and congratulate Japan for hanging in there, or excuse our girls for the huge egg they laid just because they’re female. For the U.S. team: that was an epic fucking fail—you lost to a team of boy-midgets with troll hair (like the dolls). They may indeed have been Japanese women, but it sure didn’t look like it to me.
For the Japanese: you won the lottery—congratulations—but I wouldn’t trade places with you. I’m sorry for the tragedy that befell you this spring, but you live on a small island with about a hundred nuclear plants in an area of the world that is prone to earthquakes. That’s the truth, and winning a women’s soccer game isn’t going to change it.
Here’s the link to Brooks’ column:
(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/opinion/19brooks.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB)
The Mad Hatter: “That is an excellent practice.”
Rush Limbaugh: “Hoorh, humph, hoo, rawh, gobbledegook.”
David Brooks: “Dumb, da-da-da dumb dumb dumb, dumb da-da-da, dumb dumb....smart.”
Not sure how many of you read David Brooks’ latest column in the New York Times—I’ll attach the URL at the bottom—but even as he is hailed the last supposedly serious, reasonable conservative by the main stream media, I’d like to point out that the very concept of a “serious, reasonable conservative” is itself, an oxymoron…emphasis on moron.
See, what has become clear through the budget debate is that there are two types of Republicans: 1) Brooks’ ilk, who seem to believe that conservatism has rational and laudible goals, and 2) bat shit crazy fuckwads that end up voting or working for the elephants because they have a religious-like belief (often combined with their actual religion, Christinsanity—or as I like to call it, creepyism) in some sort of basic conservative principal, like racism, or hypocrisy. And while I much prefer Brooks to Bachmann, the fact remains that they are both wrong, and continue to be wrong about so many things that if they were enrolled in school they’d be riding the short bus and failing classes.
If you read Brooks’ column, you’ll notice that he breaks down group 2 (although, I believe far less eloquently than I’ve done here) and castigates them as the reason for the recent Republicant failure on debt ceiling and budget talks. That’s why he get’s one smart above.
But the rest of what he said is deeply dumb. You see, conservatives, like the dwarves in Moria, delved too greedily, and too deep. They were both in search of riches (for Cons, in the form of loopholes and tax cuts), and unfortunately their lecherous and unbridled greed led them to a very dark and awful place. And neither the dwarves, nor the cants, did what every thinking and rational person must do before they undertake an endeavor: what are the consequences if I succeed?
For instance, Brooks talks in his article giddily about the prospects of a Republicant sweep of the 2012 election, suggesting that then, “controlling the White House and Congress, perhaps they will have the guts to cut Medicare unilaterally, reform the welfare state and herald in an era of Conservative greatness.” I’m actually a little embarrassed for him after writing that quote down, I mean, “the era of Conservative greatness?” What the hell does that even mean? I thought this guy was a “serious, rational, respectable person,” not some child hoping desperately that Santa brings him a pretty new pony and special new dresses for his doll collection.
Well, let’s go with what he says. For one, we know that this “era” includes cutting Medicare “unilaterally.” What fucking insurance do you suppose you’re going to have Brooks? Face it, you’re old, and you can’t keep writing nonsense forever and expecting that its going to continue to get published. What happens when you retire, you ass clown?
See, this is what the Republicants don’t ever seem to do—follow through with what would happen were they to accomplish their goals. They talk about axing Medicare, cutting Social Security, and repealing Obama care (they actually read this as “Evil Care.” For the record, I’m against Evil Care as well, but since Congress never passed a bill called Obamacare, or Evil Care, but instead passed the Affordable Care Act, it remains a moot point), but then they fail to say what they would do to replace these programs. They seem to forget, conveniently, that the health insurance industry, which is NOT a free market (the industry as a whole has anti-trust exemption, along with other special prizes), was and is continuing to rape our economy with all the subtlety of Silverback gorilla in heat.
Remember, when the CBO analyzed the effect the Affordable Care Act would have on the economy, they said that it would actually save the federal government around $128 billion by 2019 (conservative reader, I just read the CBO budget, so don’t try to lie to me like you always do and tell me I’m wrong. Go back to playing with your train set…) Granted, that isn’t a ton of savings, but it isn’t going to cost us more either. And nearly all Americans will have health insurance.
By the way, Evil Care, aka the Bush Tax Cuts, costs us $700 billion in revenue every two years—most of which goes to pay the salaries of Satan’s first captain, Grover Norquist, and his children, D.C. corporate lobbyists.
The other thing is that it seems Republicants believe that somehow if we balance the budget, the skies are going to open up and gold is going to come raining down out of the heavens. They don’t know why they believe it—they just do, with all the zeal of a drunken Scotsman in field of helpless sheep. The reality of balancing the budget during a recession and this supposed “era of Conservative greatness” to follow is that for most Americans, it means eating tuna fish sandwiches three times a day and living in your parent’s basement, because Grandma got the guest room.
The even stranger irony is that even while Brooks is pining for this “era of Conservative greatness,” along with the Republicant victories in the next election, he is excoriating the people in control of the party as foolish, self-serving, and incapable of governance. In short, he basically says that when it comes to this debt ceiling debacle, they fucked up monumentally. In a previous column, he basically labels the entire party’s leadership as irrational. Why then, would he want them in control of the government?!
Well, he may, but my guess is, most American’s by now don’t. The simple fact about the Republicant party is this: they can’t govern the country. They don’t confirm judges. They filibuster legislation Americans broadly support. They vote for legislation that Americans don’t support. They’re willing to put the country at risk of international and financial crises in order to protect tax cuts for the very rich. And, as even the delusional Brooks’ points out, they won’t even compromise on a budget deal in which they’re getting 90% of what they want. They’re so dysfunctional at this point that they simply can’t govern the country, and as much as I get frustrated with Obama and the Democrats on certain issues, they’ve made at least one thing clear to the American people: they’ll make sure the country continues to function. They’ll do the people’s business and administer government.
Oh, on a side note, I just want to congratulate the U.S. women’s soccer team on one of the biggest choke-jobs I’ve ever seen in my life. Allowing Japan to come back and score goals twice when all you had to do was keep the ball away from them for 10 minutes and then missing your first three PK’s is just terrible. And I for one, am not going to sit back like the lazy media and congratulate Japan for hanging in there, or excuse our girls for the huge egg they laid just because they’re female. For the U.S. team: that was an epic fucking fail—you lost to a team of boy-midgets with troll hair (like the dolls). They may indeed have been Japanese women, but it sure didn’t look like it to me.
For the Japanese: you won the lottery—congratulations—but I wouldn’t trade places with you. I’m sorry for the tragedy that befell you this spring, but you live on a small island with about a hundred nuclear plants in an area of the world that is prone to earthquakes. That’s the truth, and winning a women’s soccer game isn’t going to change it.
Here’s the link to Brooks’ column:
(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/opinion/19brooks.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB)
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Sith Absolutes and Random Thoughts on why Katy Perry is a Whore
Only the Sith deal in absolutes. And apparently, Republicans. That’s what it has basically come down to. No tax raises, even if they’re only applied on dollar 1,000,001 and above. No closing tax loopholes, even on corporations whose profits number in billions. No cuts in subsidies for oil companies, corporate jet owners, or industries that have moved their jobs to China. No raise in the estate tax, even on the estates of billionaires. No shared sacrifice. No revenue. No God.
In other words, when it comes to the deficit, which is just of the UTMOST FUCKING IMPORTANCE now that there’s a Democrat in the oval office, they are unwilling to do anything to help fill the coffers of the U.S. treasury, which they purposefully bankrupted during the Bush administration. In fact, on top of being willing to do absolutely nothing in the arena of raising revenue, they are also loath to cede any cuts in the military—by far the largest portion of government spending. Rationality equivalent: a serial rapist in a communal sorority shower.
It’s day two here in Mac, and I’ve seen some things. A shirtless fat man in jean shorts arguing with an obese woman wearing a sweatshirt. They were both smoking, and though I don’t read lips, their English looked underdeveloped. Also smoking was a woman riding a bicycle, dressed as if she was really out for a good ride…except that she was smoking. Of course, then she got pulled over by the local police. I don’t know why this matters, but there are a lot of very fat people out there, and that scares me. Mind you, I’m a tad overweight myself.
Seriously though, if we default on our debt, things are going to get real bad, real fast—you’d think the corporate masters would call in the Republicans and tell them to make a fucking deal, but it’s possible they’re so blind to the consequences they just don’t care.
But that leads me to my next realization: it doesn’t seem that our leaders, in general, are very smart or good. I talk to friends, co-workers, family, and it seems that everyone is living a real life version of “Horrible Bosses.” We don’t have an Albus Dumbledore, or a Good King Richard to come save the day. No FDR or Abe Lincoln. Instead it seems we’ve got a bunch of very effective people who are either evil (assuming they’re smart enough to know what they’re doing) or as stupid as their faces would lead you to believe. Have you seen Mitch McConnell? John Boehner? I hate their stupid fucking faces. And on the other side of the aisle, we’ve got a bunch of very ineffective people who generally want to do good, but are unable to do so, because as Norman Goldman says, “they don’t have the spine to tell their brain or their heart what to do.”
We’re stuck with a party who has two bad ideas—tax cuts and NO—and a party with all kinds of good ideas, but appears to the public as a pimply faced geek whose voice cracks every time he gets nervous. On top of that, we’ve got judges, leaders, CEOs, principals, mayors, and governors, that are basically idiots who’ve somehow managed to know someone rich in their life and got lucky enough to glad hand their way to power. We live in a society today that tells us it is more important to be loyal to your fuck-up brother than to choose the right human for the job.
OK, admittedly that was pretty random. Here are some other random thoughts and then I’ll be done:
1. Why do really fat people always smoke too? And then I wonder, do they also have small bowl shaped aquariums by their couches with frogs in them for snacks like Jabba the Hut? Or just hot wings and blue cheese? Tommy want wingy!
2. Why hasn’t someone killed Rush Limbaugh by now? God, this is one of the greatest mysteries of life: I get why bad things happen to good people (variety is the spice of life, after all), but why don’t bad things happen to bad people too? Why does it seem that every time I meet someone and the “Evil” meter goes off, they’re incredibly rich, having sex with someone pretty, and know a doctor who will prescribe them pain meds without question?
3. Who goes to those Kevin James movies, like “Mall Cop” and “Zookeeper?” And who goes to see the Chihuahua movies with talking dogs? And “Yogi Bear?” Can’t we use that as a litmus test to prevent those people from breeding anymore? I propose that every time a truly bad movie premiers, we get every vasectomy surgeon and OB Gyn doc in the country to round up their scissors and IUD’s, go to the nearest theatre, gas it, and then operate on every human over 12. We’ll call it, Unplanned Parenthood—since you’re still a child, you don’t get to have them.
4. I think we should call Katy Perry what she really is—she isn’t a singer—she’s a teacher. Her courses: How to be a Huge Slut 101, Sluttery 410, How to be Pretty and a Whore GR602, and Using Your Vagina to Get Ahead DR703. She’s now officially taking applications from your daughter between the ages of 8 and 18.
5. After this, am I going to be considered a bad enough person to be immune from bad things happening to me?
In other words, when it comes to the deficit, which is just of the UTMOST FUCKING IMPORTANCE now that there’s a Democrat in the oval office, they are unwilling to do anything to help fill the coffers of the U.S. treasury, which they purposefully bankrupted during the Bush administration. In fact, on top of being willing to do absolutely nothing in the arena of raising revenue, they are also loath to cede any cuts in the military—by far the largest portion of government spending. Rationality equivalent: a serial rapist in a communal sorority shower.
It’s day two here in Mac, and I’ve seen some things. A shirtless fat man in jean shorts arguing with an obese woman wearing a sweatshirt. They were both smoking, and though I don’t read lips, their English looked underdeveloped. Also smoking was a woman riding a bicycle, dressed as if she was really out for a good ride…except that she was smoking. Of course, then she got pulled over by the local police. I don’t know why this matters, but there are a lot of very fat people out there, and that scares me. Mind you, I’m a tad overweight myself.
Seriously though, if we default on our debt, things are going to get real bad, real fast—you’d think the corporate masters would call in the Republicans and tell them to make a fucking deal, but it’s possible they’re so blind to the consequences they just don’t care.
But that leads me to my next realization: it doesn’t seem that our leaders, in general, are very smart or good. I talk to friends, co-workers, family, and it seems that everyone is living a real life version of “Horrible Bosses.” We don’t have an Albus Dumbledore, or a Good King Richard to come save the day. No FDR or Abe Lincoln. Instead it seems we’ve got a bunch of very effective people who are either evil (assuming they’re smart enough to know what they’re doing) or as stupid as their faces would lead you to believe. Have you seen Mitch McConnell? John Boehner? I hate their stupid fucking faces. And on the other side of the aisle, we’ve got a bunch of very ineffective people who generally want to do good, but are unable to do so, because as Norman Goldman says, “they don’t have the spine to tell their brain or their heart what to do.”
We’re stuck with a party who has two bad ideas—tax cuts and NO—and a party with all kinds of good ideas, but appears to the public as a pimply faced geek whose voice cracks every time he gets nervous. On top of that, we’ve got judges, leaders, CEOs, principals, mayors, and governors, that are basically idiots who’ve somehow managed to know someone rich in their life and got lucky enough to glad hand their way to power. We live in a society today that tells us it is more important to be loyal to your fuck-up brother than to choose the right human for the job.
OK, admittedly that was pretty random. Here are some other random thoughts and then I’ll be done:
1. Why do really fat people always smoke too? And then I wonder, do they also have small bowl shaped aquariums by their couches with frogs in them for snacks like Jabba the Hut? Or just hot wings and blue cheese? Tommy want wingy!
2. Why hasn’t someone killed Rush Limbaugh by now? God, this is one of the greatest mysteries of life: I get why bad things happen to good people (variety is the spice of life, after all), but why don’t bad things happen to bad people too? Why does it seem that every time I meet someone and the “Evil” meter goes off, they’re incredibly rich, having sex with someone pretty, and know a doctor who will prescribe them pain meds without question?
3. Who goes to those Kevin James movies, like “Mall Cop” and “Zookeeper?” And who goes to see the Chihuahua movies with talking dogs? And “Yogi Bear?” Can’t we use that as a litmus test to prevent those people from breeding anymore? I propose that every time a truly bad movie premiers, we get every vasectomy surgeon and OB Gyn doc in the country to round up their scissors and IUD’s, go to the nearest theatre, gas it, and then operate on every human over 12. We’ll call it, Unplanned Parenthood—since you’re still a child, you don’t get to have them.
4. I think we should call Katy Perry what she really is—she isn’t a singer—she’s a teacher. Her courses: How to be a Huge Slut 101, Sluttery 410, How to be Pretty and a Whore GR602, and Using Your Vagina to Get Ahead DR703. She’s now officially taking applications from your daughter between the ages of 8 and 18.
5. After this, am I going to be considered a bad enough person to be immune from bad things happening to me?
Friday, July 8, 2011
Slippery Slopes and Rationality
So a little review here of the political happenings of the two major parties. Currently, there are three huge problems that we as a country are facing: 1) high unemployment/a slow economy, 2) the deficit, and 3) health care.
The Republicant strategy to address problem 1 is…well, it doesn’t really exist. What most Republicants would tell you is that they would cut taxes and regulations to allow private businesses to hire more people. Unfortunately there are some glaring gaps in this strategy: A) cutting taxes leads to problem 2, which everyone on the right wants to yell and scream about, B) taxes are the lowest they’ve been since 1950 (as a percentage of the GDP, we pay only 14% in taxes—that is a phenomenally low rate), and so far whatever factor they play in job growth is being dwarfed by other economic conditions, for example: C) the horrifying housing bubble propagated by Wall Street, mortgage lenders, and dumb fucking idiots who thought they could buy a $300,000 house on a $50,000 salary—none of which could have happened had there been government REGULATIONS to prevent such foolish financial speculation. So while cutting taxes and regulations sounds like a really good idea, it is actually very, very dumb. Not only that, it is proven not to work.
HOLD ON A SECOND SLIPPERY SLOPE STEVE—no one is saying that we should tax businesses more, or that we can tax our way out of this recession…the point is that cutting taxes more at this point would simply exacerbate our current problems. The whole slippery slope argument, by the way, is only used by people that don’t have a firm grasp on logic or reality. If they did, they wouldn’t find themselves on slope quite so fucking slick.
On the other hand, Democrats have proposed economic stimulus packages that would pay for people to build and repair things like road, railroads, bridges, dams, the electrical grid, etc. While this would cost some money, it is actually proven to work. It worked recently when Obama was first re-elected (notice that the states are just now running out of money—that’s cause they had stimulus money, which meant they could pay teachers, fire fighters, and other state employees to continue their fine work), and it also worked when FDR got us out of the Great Depression. And even if, batshit crazy conservative, you want to argue that WWII got us out of the Depression, guess who paid for all of those bombs, tanks, guns, etc? That’s right! The government, you stupid fuckwad. So either way, the government spending money during a recession is exactly the right thing to do, especially if it is invested in infrastructure (after all, we all need roads—in fact, if there are roads, you don’t have to walk on a slippery slope, right?).
This brings us to topic #2: the deficit. Republicans are just howling about the deficit, how it is so awful, and why it needs to be fixed immediately, or they won’t extend the debt limit. Their plan? Cut the government. Cut Medicare, Social Security, student loans, the national weather service, planned parenthood, public broadcasting, heating oil assistance to the poor, education—notice a trend here? The happen to be all of the programs the Republicants don’t like. Want to know how much those programs have grown in the past 10 years as a factor of our GDP? Zero percent. Want to know why we have a deficit? Afghanistan, Iraq, Medicare plus, tax cuts for the rich, tax loopholes for oil companies, I can go on, but I think you get the point. We have a deficit primarily because of Republican policies put in place during the W. Bush administration, during which, not one Republican ever said anything about the debt, and the debt limit was extended every time it was necessary.
Still, Democrats are willing to put the past behind them; they simply ask that along with cuts to certain programs, revenue is raised by ending unnecessary tax cuts, subsidies, and write offs for extremely successful industries (read: oil) and extremely successful individuals. Seems pretty fair and reasonable. Unless you want the economy to fail, in which case you go hell bent for everything you want to get out of the Democrats and if you don’t get it, you force the U.S. to default on its debt for the first time in history.
As for problem number 3, it is very simple. The Democrats recognized that something needed to be done about health care, and they did something. Meanwhile, the idiots, oops, I mean Republicants, bitched constantly, loudly, and vehemently about continuing to have the same lousy fucking system that has led U.S. health care to consume around 18% of our GDP (that’s really bad—Canada’s system is around 10%).
So, if you are an irrational person who dislike facts, wants to make things worse for the county, and is comfortable voting for a bunch of liars who might well tank our economy on purpose, vote Republican.
If you’re a rational person who wants to vote for people that are reasonable, and that have good ideas that are proven to work to solve our problems, vote Democrat.
Nothing that I've said here is untrue...if you think the Republicans are right--you're wrong. And dumb.
The Republicant strategy to address problem 1 is…well, it doesn’t really exist. What most Republicants would tell you is that they would cut taxes and regulations to allow private businesses to hire more people. Unfortunately there are some glaring gaps in this strategy: A) cutting taxes leads to problem 2, which everyone on the right wants to yell and scream about, B) taxes are the lowest they’ve been since 1950 (as a percentage of the GDP, we pay only 14% in taxes—that is a phenomenally low rate), and so far whatever factor they play in job growth is being dwarfed by other economic conditions, for example: C) the horrifying housing bubble propagated by Wall Street, mortgage lenders, and dumb fucking idiots who thought they could buy a $300,000 house on a $50,000 salary—none of which could have happened had there been government REGULATIONS to prevent such foolish financial speculation. So while cutting taxes and regulations sounds like a really good idea, it is actually very, very dumb. Not only that, it is proven not to work.
HOLD ON A SECOND SLIPPERY SLOPE STEVE—no one is saying that we should tax businesses more, or that we can tax our way out of this recession…the point is that cutting taxes more at this point would simply exacerbate our current problems. The whole slippery slope argument, by the way, is only used by people that don’t have a firm grasp on logic or reality. If they did, they wouldn’t find themselves on slope quite so fucking slick.
On the other hand, Democrats have proposed economic stimulus packages that would pay for people to build and repair things like road, railroads, bridges, dams, the electrical grid, etc. While this would cost some money, it is actually proven to work. It worked recently when Obama was first re-elected (notice that the states are just now running out of money—that’s cause they had stimulus money, which meant they could pay teachers, fire fighters, and other state employees to continue their fine work), and it also worked when FDR got us out of the Great Depression. And even if, batshit crazy conservative, you want to argue that WWII got us out of the Depression, guess who paid for all of those bombs, tanks, guns, etc? That’s right! The government, you stupid fuckwad. So either way, the government spending money during a recession is exactly the right thing to do, especially if it is invested in infrastructure (after all, we all need roads—in fact, if there are roads, you don’t have to walk on a slippery slope, right?).
This brings us to topic #2: the deficit. Republicans are just howling about the deficit, how it is so awful, and why it needs to be fixed immediately, or they won’t extend the debt limit. Their plan? Cut the government. Cut Medicare, Social Security, student loans, the national weather service, planned parenthood, public broadcasting, heating oil assistance to the poor, education—notice a trend here? The happen to be all of the programs the Republicants don’t like. Want to know how much those programs have grown in the past 10 years as a factor of our GDP? Zero percent. Want to know why we have a deficit? Afghanistan, Iraq, Medicare plus, tax cuts for the rich, tax loopholes for oil companies, I can go on, but I think you get the point. We have a deficit primarily because of Republican policies put in place during the W. Bush administration, during which, not one Republican ever said anything about the debt, and the debt limit was extended every time it was necessary.
Still, Democrats are willing to put the past behind them; they simply ask that along with cuts to certain programs, revenue is raised by ending unnecessary tax cuts, subsidies, and write offs for extremely successful industries (read: oil) and extremely successful individuals. Seems pretty fair and reasonable. Unless you want the economy to fail, in which case you go hell bent for everything you want to get out of the Democrats and if you don’t get it, you force the U.S. to default on its debt for the first time in history.
As for problem number 3, it is very simple. The Democrats recognized that something needed to be done about health care, and they did something. Meanwhile, the idiots, oops, I mean Republicants, bitched constantly, loudly, and vehemently about continuing to have the same lousy fucking system that has led U.S. health care to consume around 18% of our GDP (that’s really bad—Canada’s system is around 10%).
So, if you are an irrational person who dislike facts, wants to make things worse for the county, and is comfortable voting for a bunch of liars who might well tank our economy on purpose, vote Republican.
If you’re a rational person who wants to vote for people that are reasonable, and that have good ideas that are proven to work to solve our problems, vote Democrat.
Nothing that I've said here is untrue...if you think the Republicans are right--you're wrong. And dumb.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Politics Without Principle
In our political debate, we like to use terms like “liberal” and “conservative” to describe the views of individuals, groups, legislation, judicial decisions, etc. Our two parties, Democratic and Republican, are thought to stand for certain ideas, values, and beliefs, rooted in some kind of principle—a foundational philosophy that serves as the wellspring for all other ideas.
For example, people would probably say that this blog is liberal. The writer is a Democrat. Rachel Maddow is liberal. She is a Democrat. Rush Limbaugh is conservative. He is a Republican. For most of America, this labeling makes sense, and in our country, there has always been a place for both conservatives and liberals, for Republicans and Democrats…and their principles.
As a person who follows politics fairly closely, I’ve noticed something recently—especially given my zeal in eviscerating Republican talking points. First, consider these recent Republican positions on specific issues: adamant that the federal debt needs to be dramatically reduced, voted for privatizing Medicare into a voucher system, voted for the Paul Ryan budget that contained massive tax cuts, refused to approve a nuclear treaty or extend unemployment until Obama agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts, refused to allow a tax increase on millionaires, refused to end billions in subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies, virulently opposed to the Affordable Care Act which is projected to reduce the federal deficit, opposed to the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, refused to approve a war powers resolution to allow action against Libya to go forward.
What is so strange about this list? Well, for one thing, just about every position is 180 degrees from that of President Obama. But it is only context that tells us that. However, if an alien were to read this list of Republican positions 3,000 years from now, the very simple truth they would conclude is that there is almost nothing tying these positions together—there is no simple, underlying philosophy that can explain these positions.
In this sense, the modern Republican Party has committed one of the great human sins: politics without principle. Conservatives simply do not adhere to any real set of political values anymore; instead, they choose the route that is most politically expedient, and run with it.
Even consider their most championed cause: tax cuts. What is their position, as we all know? Cut taxes no matter what. But wait, what about the deficit? That issue has been foisted upon us with about as much grace as a 16 year old boy begging his girlfriend for sex. The deficit is an urgent, terrifying problem, we’re told. If we don’t fix it, we’ll become Greece, we’ll become Spain, we’ll become Japan! And because the deficit is such an awful problem, we should…cut taxes?
Surprisingly, that is exactly their answer. Paul Ryan’s budget, voted for by every Republican in the House, contained huge tax cuts. And look at every presidential candidate—they all want to cut taxes! So on the one hand, we are told that we have a very serious deficit problem, and on the other, we are told that the answer is to cut the primary source of revenue, or credit, for the government.
Now, some of you might be saying, “well, they always do believe in cutting taxes—they do that no matter what. Isn’t that principled?” No, it is not principled. A principle is a belief in a higher purpose, a balanced position based on reason and logic. The dictionary defines a principle as: “a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.”
In this sense, a principle involves more than just a directional policy, such as cutting taxes. A person could say they believe in very low taxes, but if we are to take the Republicans seriously, they seem to believe in having no taxes, which amounts to believing in anarchy, since any government must have some source of revenue to operate. Moreover, it is absurd to argue for both cutting the deficit and taxes—these are mutually exclusive ideas. A principled position would either say that it is more important to cut taxes, or that it is more important to pay down the deficit, depending on that person’s beliefs about the role of government. Thus, the Republican position of believing in tax cuts in perpetuity is absent of principle. Instead, it is something they put out as a major plank in their platform because tax cuts are popular.
Worse is their most hallowed position: opposition to abortion, or pro life. We are told, by Republicans, that abortion is murder, that the fetus is a human being and has the right to live, regardless of the mother’s, or family’s wishes. One would assume then, that Republicans care deeply about human beings, that they would be stalwart supporters of schools, health care, and programs like WIC, that provide support for women and their children. But this is not the case. Republicans recently have fought to make huge cuts to schools, have aggressively opposed health care reform, have made deals and are currently attempting to make more that would cut funding for WIC and other programs. At every turn, Republicans oppose having a social safety net that helps people survive, whether it is unemployment insurance, Social Security, Medicare, etc. So while they want the government to be involved in deciding whether or not abortions can take place, they don’t want the government to be involved in helping at-risk people survive—a clear lack of principle.
It is precisely this lack of principle that is going to kill them in the 2012 election. How is Romney going to attack Obama for his health care plan when he passed its predecessor while he was governor in Massachusetts? How are Republicans going to argue for more tax cuts when they’ve spent every second between 2010 and 2012 howling about the deficit? How are they going to argue they value education when Republican governors everywhere have been busting unions and forcing massive cuts to teacher salaries and education budgets? How are they going to say on the one hand that they are opposed to ousting Gaddafi, and on the other, argue that it is important to keep troops in Afghanistan?
The only way they get away from these issues is if this concept is absent from the debate. From now on the Democrats need only one message: Republicans are a party without principle. As such, they are unfit to govern a country built on one: We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
For example, people would probably say that this blog is liberal. The writer is a Democrat. Rachel Maddow is liberal. She is a Democrat. Rush Limbaugh is conservative. He is a Republican. For most of America, this labeling makes sense, and in our country, there has always been a place for both conservatives and liberals, for Republicans and Democrats…and their principles.
As a person who follows politics fairly closely, I’ve noticed something recently—especially given my zeal in eviscerating Republican talking points. First, consider these recent Republican positions on specific issues: adamant that the federal debt needs to be dramatically reduced, voted for privatizing Medicare into a voucher system, voted for the Paul Ryan budget that contained massive tax cuts, refused to approve a nuclear treaty or extend unemployment until Obama agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts, refused to allow a tax increase on millionaires, refused to end billions in subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies, virulently opposed to the Affordable Care Act which is projected to reduce the federal deficit, opposed to the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, refused to approve a war powers resolution to allow action against Libya to go forward.
What is so strange about this list? Well, for one thing, just about every position is 180 degrees from that of President Obama. But it is only context that tells us that. However, if an alien were to read this list of Republican positions 3,000 years from now, the very simple truth they would conclude is that there is almost nothing tying these positions together—there is no simple, underlying philosophy that can explain these positions.
In this sense, the modern Republican Party has committed one of the great human sins: politics without principle. Conservatives simply do not adhere to any real set of political values anymore; instead, they choose the route that is most politically expedient, and run with it.
Even consider their most championed cause: tax cuts. What is their position, as we all know? Cut taxes no matter what. But wait, what about the deficit? That issue has been foisted upon us with about as much grace as a 16 year old boy begging his girlfriend for sex. The deficit is an urgent, terrifying problem, we’re told. If we don’t fix it, we’ll become Greece, we’ll become Spain, we’ll become Japan! And because the deficit is such an awful problem, we should…cut taxes?
Surprisingly, that is exactly their answer. Paul Ryan’s budget, voted for by every Republican in the House, contained huge tax cuts. And look at every presidential candidate—they all want to cut taxes! So on the one hand, we are told that we have a very serious deficit problem, and on the other, we are told that the answer is to cut the primary source of revenue, or credit, for the government.
Now, some of you might be saying, “well, they always do believe in cutting taxes—they do that no matter what. Isn’t that principled?” No, it is not principled. A principle is a belief in a higher purpose, a balanced position based on reason and logic. The dictionary defines a principle as: “a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.”
In this sense, a principle involves more than just a directional policy, such as cutting taxes. A person could say they believe in very low taxes, but if we are to take the Republicans seriously, they seem to believe in having no taxes, which amounts to believing in anarchy, since any government must have some source of revenue to operate. Moreover, it is absurd to argue for both cutting the deficit and taxes—these are mutually exclusive ideas. A principled position would either say that it is more important to cut taxes, or that it is more important to pay down the deficit, depending on that person’s beliefs about the role of government. Thus, the Republican position of believing in tax cuts in perpetuity is absent of principle. Instead, it is something they put out as a major plank in their platform because tax cuts are popular.
Worse is their most hallowed position: opposition to abortion, or pro life. We are told, by Republicans, that abortion is murder, that the fetus is a human being and has the right to live, regardless of the mother’s, or family’s wishes. One would assume then, that Republicans care deeply about human beings, that they would be stalwart supporters of schools, health care, and programs like WIC, that provide support for women and their children. But this is not the case. Republicans recently have fought to make huge cuts to schools, have aggressively opposed health care reform, have made deals and are currently attempting to make more that would cut funding for WIC and other programs. At every turn, Republicans oppose having a social safety net that helps people survive, whether it is unemployment insurance, Social Security, Medicare, etc. So while they want the government to be involved in deciding whether or not abortions can take place, they don’t want the government to be involved in helping at-risk people survive—a clear lack of principle.
It is precisely this lack of principle that is going to kill them in the 2012 election. How is Romney going to attack Obama for his health care plan when he passed its predecessor while he was governor in Massachusetts? How are Republicans going to argue for more tax cuts when they’ve spent every second between 2010 and 2012 howling about the deficit? How are they going to argue they value education when Republican governors everywhere have been busting unions and forcing massive cuts to teacher salaries and education budgets? How are they going to say on the one hand that they are opposed to ousting Gaddafi, and on the other, argue that it is important to keep troops in Afghanistan?
The only way they get away from these issues is if this concept is absent from the debate. From now on the Democrats need only one message: Republicans are a party without principle. As such, they are unfit to govern a country built on one: We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)