Don't get me wrong, I think the "sequester" is a bad thing, the stupid result of brinksmanship by an awful bunch of morons who are abrogating their duty to serve their constituents. The goddamn sequester will result in job losses, furloughs, and diminished growth, but there may be a miniscule "silver lining" to this nasty, nasty cloud.
The sequester will necessitate cuts to the already bloated military budget. The United States spends a godawful amount of money on defense. Tragically, such money sinks as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will probably survive, mostly because parts for this white elephant of a plane are made in 45 states, with the attendent importance to the careers of congresscritters.
More importantly, the implementation of cuts mandated by the sequester will drive home the foolishness of Conservatives' condemnation of "Big Government". In his juvenile "rebuttal" to President Obama's State of the Union speech, Marco Rubio accused the president of being a "Big Government" advocate. Conservatives have long wanted to shrink government, with right-wing kingmaker Grover Norquist articulating this desire in particularly creepy fashion. The coming cuts due to the sequester are the fulfilment of this long-stated desire. The furloughs and layoffs, the drastic service cuts, and the resultant long lines at airports, the crumbling transportation infrastructure, and the decreased disaster aid are all the price to be paid for shrinking government. Perhaps the implementation of true conservative principles will finally convince the low-information voters that conservative policies are jejune. To this end, we really need to hammer home to conservatives that the sequester is the logical end of conservativism and that, franky, conservatism is terrible.
I want to reiterate that I think the sequester is pretty goddamn horrible, but it seems that American society has to hit rock bottom before any positive changes will be enacted. I'm not the only one who thought that the second Bush administration was pretty much rock-bottom, but the goddamn electorate showed that it didn't suffer enough from Republican malfeasance in the 2010 midterms. Tragically, there will be plenty of "collateral damage" as a result of this hard-learned lesson.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
but the goddamn electorate showed that it didn't suffer enough from Republican malfeasance in the 2010 midterms.
I'd say the 2010 election results had a lot more to do with banksters getting showered with the Obama Administration's favors while unemployment was hitting 10%.
~
I've been on the "they're trying it on/having a tantrum/being obstructionist" side of looking at it as a nice diversion from believing that GOP congresscritters actually think, against all evidence, that austerity and small government are actual good things. But the signs are there that at least some of them must, even if their mixed messages have looked like a monsterous hedge: "The sequester will probably be horrible, and it's Obama's fault, and he made us vote for it, and we need a vacation, now, anyway, and regardless, can't remember how to do legislation."
In which case, if the "majority of the majority" in the House does think the sequester is glad tidings of great small government joy (wingnut Xmas), we can look at the sequester as a trial-run for the government shut-down. Which in my heart of hearts I hope reminds people (while they still have voting rights) that You. Can't. Trust. People. In. Government. Who. Don't. Believe. In. It. And they kick the f*ckers out in 2014.
I'd say the 2010 election results had a lot more to do with banksters getting showered with the Obama Administration's favors while unemployment was hitting 10%.
Of course, the financial bailouts were put in motion by the Bush administration, and by 2010 employment had started moving the other direction but don't let reality get in the way of your hatred. If you want to blame everything on Democrats, go ahead.
Hey, look. BBBB and I have just about the same take on the whole sequester thing! If two people tell you you're sick, lie down. And if two people tell you the sequester cuts have the potential to move lots of people out of the Republican fever swamp, it may actually be so!
I'd say the 2010 election results had a lot more to do with banksters getting showered with the Obama Administration's favors while unemployment was hitting 10%.
I still think Obama should never have abandoned the coalition that got him elected. He had an awesome activist base built up, and he totally dropped it.
In which case, if the "majority of the majority" in the House does think the sequester is glad tidings of great small government joy (wingnut Xmas), we can look at the sequester as a trial-run for the government shut-down. Which in my heart of hearts I hope reminds people (while they still have voting rights) that You. Can't. Trust. People. In. Government. Who. Don't. Believe. In. It. And they kick the f*ckers out in 2014.M.U
That's what I am sincerely hoping. I really hope people learn that anyone who's saying "government is the problem" is no person to vote for, EVER.
Of course, the financial bailouts were put in motion by the Bush administration, and by 2010 employment had started moving the other direction but don't let reality get in the way of your hatred. If you want to blame everything on Democrats, go ahead.
I think the real problem is that things didn't move fast enough or far enough for your average working-class or middle-class individual, so people became burned out quickly. Of course, that's no excuse to fall asleep during the midterm elections. The damage done in 2010 is going to take at least a decade to undo.
I'd say the 2010 election results had a lot more to do with banksters getting showered with the Obama Administration's favors while unemployment was hitting 10%.
I wonder what Thunder's take would be if GW Bush and Obama DIDN'T act to prop up the too-big-to-fail banks and the resulting depression resulted in 20% unemployment and an even more depressed economy?
Oh. No I don't. He'd blame OBAMA!!!
Hey, look. BBBB and I have just about the same take on the whole sequester thing! If two people tell you you're sick, lie down. And if two people tell you the sequester cuts have the potential to move lots of people out of the Republican fever swamp, it may actually be so!
Great minds think alike, and so do ours!
A good outcome of the sequester would be if the defense cuts give John McCain a heart attack.
Post a Comment