Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Hey folks, David Brooks here ready to have plain-speek with Real Americans, and boy it feels good to wash the filth and debris of the liberal degenerates that infest the NY Times building like pot-smoking termites. Just let me lock the door of my office, spray some eau du country club, leave an offering of jelly beans on my Reagansattva....ah, I'm all set.
Now you're thinking, "David, what could you possibly have to say that will be any different from anything any right-wing, anti-social-program, anti-tax, anti-anything-includingt-the-kitchen-sink have to say that's new?"
Well you might well ask that--that why exactly, 30 years after the Reagan Revolution. we still need to cut more taxes and services. It's simple: budget surpluses create more jobs. Jobs create more income to tax. (Which we shouldn't). And with this tax we can provide more services, improve our infrastructure, and create a more civil society. (Which we won't.) But the point is, we could. If we cut taxes. Which we can't.
Turns out Republicans also like government spending--it gives them jobs when they leave the government. And when conservatives have money, they can use some of it to prop up shills like me in propaganda mills....er, think tanks....and give jobs to people like me (cheap shills). Not to mention those lobbyists that everyone hates unless they happen to elected.
Now when Shrubya (and Reagan) decided to cut taxes and run up a massive deficit, it was good. Because how else can tax-cutters stay in power in order to cut taxes? You just cut taxes! But you need to keep up those huge tax breaks to your cronies in business, the lobbying industry, the arms manufacturers, nation-invasion-suppliers, petroleum drillers, petroleum spillers, etc. etc. etc. The list just goes on and on. So what do you do? Run up a huge deficit till you lose a round of elections--then you can blame the new guys (some of whom are really old guys but let's not split hairs) for the giant shit pile you left behind. And that's where I come in--a cheap shill to help point fingers and redirect blame. And by gob, here I am!
Do I really know if deficits are bad, or surpluses good? How could I possibly know? I'm either a cheap opinion-whore or a frightening combination of smugness with utter cluelessness, utterly lacking in the slightest detectable trace of shame or humility!
So the message of deficit reduction is this: I'm never going to change. Why should I? If this job falls through I'll just go to Fox News.