Wednesday, July 14, 2010


There was a small bit of consternation the other day when Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl mused on how extending unemployment benefits was an affront to God because it added a minuscule amount to the debt and was not "paid for" by spending cuts or tax increases. He then went on to note, unironically, that of course there was no need to offset $678 billion that would be added to the deficit because of extending the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy, because... mumble mumble rich people free market trickle down Reagan freedom pony.

Nakedly stating that there would be no pennies for the peasants unless it was paid for (and even then his party would almost unanimously oppose) while stating at the exact same time that he'd willingly OK nearly 200 times the deficit addition as long as it went to rich white guys, seemed particularly galling to some. Surely this isn't what the GOP really believes or, at least, this isn't what they'd publicly admit to believing while cameras were rolling, right? Wrong.
"That's been the majority Republican view for some time," Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told TPMDC this afternoon after the weekly GOP press conference. "That there's no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject."
Really? No evidence? Not one egghead with a protractor and slide rule that says otherwise? No greatly respected nonpartisan think tank that deals with tax issues and budgetary matters that has done a study and come to the opposite conclusion and maybe even put it into chart form so as to make it more easily understandable?

What? It's almost like the reality of a situation is the diametric opposite of what Republicans are saying it is. This has never happened before. Surely we must mark this event on our calendars for it is as rare as a unicorn and as precious as a child's love.

So we're clear: adding $5 bucks to the deficit so all the people who are suffering in this economy, largely because of your economic policies and blocking of any measures to change the status quo, can have just enough money to survive makes you taste vomit in your mouth, but adding near a trillion dollars to the deficit with tax cuts that helped damage the economy in the first place so some guy with a monocle can get the ivory package on his new Maybach makes the angels in heaven sing.

That sounds about right. Besides, those unemployed people might be rich someday through the magic of trickle down economics, so they want their unemployment benefits cut to pay for the tax cuts they'll get when they're rich, right? Right.

No comments: