Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Democrat Theme: "Whatever"

Okay, I just read an opinion piece by David Sarasohn, one of these syndicated columnists, titled (fetchingly): “GOP’s Unified Economy Theme: ‘Whatever.’” DS mocks Republican Senator Richard Shelby, who when asked on ABC’s “This Week” if we should let CitiBank fail, said “Well, whatever.”

The funny thing about the article lurks at the edges, where it tries to connect with the world in which we actually live. As in, “who cares what the Republicans think right now?” Democrats have a virtually bullet proof Senate majority – first time in a generation either party’s had that kind of margin. So why does DS spend 20 column inches ranting about a Republican Senator’s verbal tick on a Sunday talk show watched by maybe 23 people? Because now that the Dems are in charge, talking about the feeding frenzy going on at the public trough is too depressing for DS.

No Republicans in charge means DS has lost his ideological bearings, not to say his mind. DS is a cool, hip, lock-step liberal kind of guy. Does his organic garden on the weekend, drinks a little wine, watches foreign language films. Right now his homies are in charge and are busy fornicating and vomiting on the frat house floor at the Capitol. After decrying Republican deficits for 8 years – “we are mortgaging our children’s future!” - we find out in a few blunt months that all the decrying was over the word “Republican,” not the word “deficit.” 8,000 earmarks and a $1.7 trillion deficit is a hell of a lot of pork grease to put out, even by Washington standards. Actually, “hell of a lot” doesn’t do this sausage factory justice: “mind-numbing,” “unprecedented,” “largest re-distribution of wealth in the history of the world” are some phrases that immediately leap to mind.

So DS writes about Republicans, saying talk about a “spending freeze” is “insane.” Since any talk by Republicans is just hypothetical, who cares? DS cares, that’s who. Reading the article is like listening to a defense attorney talk for 45 minutes about the lack of DNA evidence against his client, never mind the dead victim, the ballistics match on the gun he threw away while running from cops, the 5 eye witnesses and the confession.
As we are in no danger of any spending freeze in the next 8 years, why bother debating it? Is DS’ fear that freezing government spending may be bad policy even worth talking about right now? I have carefully calculated this, and I think it is safe to say this fear has a 1 in 750,000 chance of becoming real in the next 8 years.

How about this for an article about things that actually might happen:

“Are Huge Tax Increases and Huge New Deficit Spending Going to Help
The Economy During a Recession?”

Or maybe this (more concise):

“Does Anyone Remember Weimar?”

But then, that would require writing about the fornication and vomiting going on at the Capitol by DS’ homies. And that would be depressing, like writing about the Fall of the Roman Empire. So DS writes an irrelevant 20 column inches about an irrelevant “whatever” comment by an irrelevant Republican on an irrelevant talk show. As if the only possible alternative to the vomitorium we see right now in Washington is shutting down the federal government and letting everyone go to hell. As if the biggest concern we have right now is the almost infinitely small possibility that the government might try to shrink the deficit in the next 8 years. What stupid tripe.

It’s a real profile in journalistic courage to take on irrelevancies while ignoring actual abuses by those in power.

What a wimp.


Eternal Optimist

1 comment:

  1. "As if the biggest concern we have right now is the almost infinitely small possibility that the government might try to shrink the deficit in the next 8 years. What stupid tripe."

    Gosh, I can't even remember the last time we had a federal budget surplus. Oh wait, yes I do, it was at the end of the Clinton administration.