MyPyramid...My arse
If you find yourself concerned that those dangerous tax cuts are threatening to starve our needy government let me give you some food for encouragement. Despite all the missing funds, our government is still able to tell us how to eat. Where would you or I be without our benevolent government and its geometric simplicities? My great fear is that all this budgetary bludgeoning may lead to the canceling of the much needed How-to-Coordinate-your-Clothing Octagon or the Channel-Changing-is-Easy Mobius strip. I tremble at the thought of a citizenry untethered to the daily guidance of Washington wise men, left to fend for themselves in this cold and complicated world like so many pilgrims. But apparently, even after such drastic and horrifying cuts, there is still enough cash in the coffers to devise ever more colorful ways to treat each and every American like a complete idiot.
Posts
6 comments:
I agreee with Mr. Malone. I keep waiting for my Congressman to call at night to make sure I brush my teeth. But I do have a question. This is the largest, most bloated, and invasive Govnerment in our history, and THIS is what sets you off? Oh well, if this is the spark that gets things moving so be it.
Implicit in my post is the belief that not only have the Bush tax cuts not been damaging, they have not gone far enough. Until the government is forced to throw frivolity over the side it is clear that there is too much money ending up in Washington. The only remedy is cutting taxes and starving the beast.
I need some help here. How can you "starve the beast" if the current GOP leadership, and I believe Mr. Malone as well, feel that "deficits don't matter?"
I can't recall anyone making the claim that deficits don't matter. I do maintain that their negative effect is exaggerated by all who invoke them as a specter of doom. However, your point is a good one. How do you hold someone's feet to the fire if you allow them to bend their knees?
The democratic process works sufficiently in this regard, when deficits got "out of control" in the 80's and 90's the people got mad and politicians took action. There is a limit to how much deficit spending Americans will tolerate. Therefore, I maintain that cutting taxes can still "starve the beast". In the short term the government will borrow, but in the long term it will cut. I am more than happy to carry a short term deficit for the long term possiblity of a smaller government.
Which leads to the more pragmatic question...who can be counted on to shrink the government? The Democrats want the opposite and the Republicans are as reliable as French infantrymen. The only hope are Libertarians. But their foreign policy is as sophisticated as a gender studies course which makes it tough to root for their national ascendance. We may need to start a new party...should I dust off my Bull Moose platform speeches?
Cheney to Treasury: "Deficits don't matter"
Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill was told "deficits don't matter" when he warned of a looming fiscal crisis.
O'Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush's economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from "the corporate crowd," a key constituency.
O'Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. "You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter," he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: "We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due." A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired.
I think there are actually two political parties in America, only they are not "Democrat" and "Republican" they are "In power" and "not in power." The GOP is spending and growing government just as much, if not more, than the Dems did. I think whatever party is in power simply abuses it, and whichever party is not in power, just acts to constrain and thwart the party in power (making them appear to be about less govt. Them Dems are now the ones concerned about fiscal responsiblity.) I think its for the same reasons that the GOP used to be for the same thing. Its a powerful tool to impede the party in power.
I'm all for the Libertarians, but can't get behind the party for the same reasons that Mr. Malone can't. However, I like that the Libertarian tent is big enough for both our egos.
If the Bull Moose party came back, I would be a charter member.
Chrome Dome, you raise some powerful points. For example, it IS outrageous to expect people to understand that ice cream and cookies are not "health foods". Without those helpful labels I'd most likely be 300 pounds and getting fan mail from Jerry Nadler's constituents. Because, like the rest of America, I don't understand anything. And those shampoo warnings, "Do not get in eyes" have saved me a hundred times. Why just look at the word "shampoo" with those two little eyeballs at the end...clearly it implies this is some sort of lathery eye wash. But no...and thanks to the warning my eyes are no longer thick, luxuriant and bloodshot.
I say killing the Pyramid IS defense. When is the last time you saw a fat terrorist? Those burlap sacks with eyeholes are always resting on top of thin, wirey frames. Everyone knows fat people are dumb, lazy and have an odor that makes them easy to track. If we fund the Pyramid, the terrorists win.
Let me just finish by saying I'm certain that I speak for most decent Americans when I say nothing satisfies your man hunger like a Bob Evans pork product. Mmmmmm Bob Evans - not just a man...a meal.*
*Bob Evans did not endourse, support or assist in the creatng of this blog. Bob Evans is more interested in things like slaughtering hogs, slaughtering cows and preparing their flesh for consumption. More disclaimers can be found in Bob Evans' tell all autobiography Eat My Meat.
Post a Comment