Language follies

Sunday, July 25th, 2010 @ 9:20 am | Politics

From the NYT:

In recent days, fiscal conservatives like Senators Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Evan Bayh of Indiana expressed support for extending the tax cuts at all income levels, at least temporarily.

“Fiscal conservatives,” were it to mean people who were actually fiscally conservative, would not support giving rich people more of the tax cut that already helped propel us into deficit spending.

The veil has been lifted on this sham. When it comes to the poor and middle class, every dollar in assistance is fought for tooth and nail, in the name of the deficit. But when it comes to the rich, no expense is too much. All reason flies out the window, because the rich is who Republicans and too many idiot Democrats serve. A billion to billionaires is money well spent, while a billion that would help thousands avoid devastation is fraudulent waste.

Yes, these clowns would perpetuate the tax cuts for the lower and middle class, but that’s just the lube to help the screwing, a trinket for the dirty masses that calms them down while the rich claim the real prize. Obama always said he only wanted to keep the tax cuts for most Americans, and that hasn’t calmed “fiscal conservatives” at all.

I wish the librul NYT would just stop making up these terms for Republicans and like-minded Democrats. Bill Clinton had the most fiscally conservative administration in decades and none of them cared.

Part of being fiscally conservative is being willing to pay your bills. The Bush tax cuts were a fantasy that yielded nothing and, along with the other Republican fantasy of deregulation, led us straight into our current quagmire.

But as we learned about the NYT, it always knows when to defer to power and instill Newspeak when necessary. Torture wasn’t torture when Bush did it, and now continuing the policies of the most fiscally irresponsible President in history (who else could we possibly say compared?) is “fiscally conservative.” They know who they serve.


3 Responses to “Language follies”

  1. Dana Says:

    So, just what would you do, Mr Winkler? The easiest path is for the Congress to do nothing at all, and let the tax cuts expire; that would be the greatest deficit reducer, in theory, though the Democrats would probably just turn right around and spend the increased revenues.

    The second easiest path is to simply extend all of the tax cuts; the legislation is simple, and it could actually get done before the election.

    The hardest path is to do what President Obama promised, but what the Democrats really don’t want to do: write completely new tax laws, changing the brackets, and continuing the cuts for the less productive people while penalizing the more productive ones. This is the path on which nothing gets done, and we revert back to the first option. The Democrats might like to do this, to make a show of working on extending the tax cuts, and then try to blame the Republicans if they don’t get done, and then happily accepting the higher rates on everybody when the cuts expire.

    You wrote:

    Part of being fiscally conservative is being willing to pay your bills.

    As I read that, it looks to me as though you want all of the tax cuts to expire. Just raising taxes on the most productive people won’t make that large a dent in the deficit. Try being more specific here.

    But the real part of being fiscally conservative is not running up more bills when you can’t pay the ones you have; President Obama and the Democrats are projecting trillion dollar deficits throughout what sensible people hope is his only term, and will, by his own projections, have far exceeded all of the Bush Administration deficits.

    President Bush and the Republicans spent way, way, way too much money, but when it comes to spending, they were bush leaguers — pun intended — compared to President Obama and the Democrats.

  2. jtl909 Says:

    Somebody’s gotta pay for your fancy wars.

  3. Henry Whistler Says:

    “…let the tax cuts expire; that would be the greatest deficit reducer, in theory…”

    Well, good thing we’ll have all those Tea Party people on board!

    As for Obama’s spending, I’m pretty sure we’ve been over this before. The deficit is being caused by Bush’s wars, Bush’s tax cuts, and the economy that Bush broke. Reverse all three and you’ve got a win.

    Good thing we’ll have all those Tea Party people on board! Only they can get the GOP to stop being so partisan and vote for what’s best for the country-

    -oh, sorry, I was dreaming whilst commenting again. Forgiveness…