Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 5, 2011

TEN ANGRY MEN.... House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) held a Capitol Hill press conference this morning, and was joined by several of his GOP colleagues. Daily Kos' Jed Lewison, who noted the lack of substantive questions during the 37-minute briefing, ran this still shot from the event.

ryanpressermsnbc_040511_lrg.jpg

Now, Jed is clearly right about the Q&A; it left a lot to be desired. But I struck by the image itself. What we saw was a House press conference held by 10 people who look remarkably similar to one another: 10 powerful, conservative, white men in dark suits, who make more money in a year than the vast majority of the American people.

And these 10 powerful, conservative, white men in dark suits all want the same thing: to approve a budget that imposes hardship on the elderly, the disabled, low-income families, and the middle class, while rewarding the wealthy and corporations with even more tax breaks.

It is, of course, the wealthy and corporations who'll help these 10 powerful, conservative, white men in dark suits stay in power, so none of this comes as a surprise.

But the image was nevertheless striking given the circumstances.

Steve Benen 2:30 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (50)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Too many white men in the same place = downfall of civilization (or nearby ones, anyways). I should know, I am one, and I do try not to congregate with too many others at once in the same place at the same time, lest people think we're a gang (of conservatives) or something. We may not take your jacket, bling, or sneakers, but that meager pension you managed to scrape up, well, yeah, break yo self, fool. That shit is ours now.

Posted by: jsacto on April 5, 2011 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

Your country in nothing more than a deep pit of capitalistic evil ... a once great country that is now nothing more than a fascist state, a plutocracy for the self appointed Zarathustra's of this world, a sadistic country in which 99 percent of your citizens are becoming nothing more than indentured servants to the fascist state. And most of your citizens are so stupid they have no idea what is happening, being 'persuaded' by your corporate media megaphones to 'believe' all this is good for them. Your corporate journalists are nothing more than true 'enemy's of the state' and yet they are paid millions do issue the propaganda they are hired to do. And then you glorify these 'media elite's' while they conspire to destroy what is left of your once great country. One out of four of your children are on food stamps while your C.E.O's make $900,000 and hour. Your country is a fucking disgrace ............

USA ! USA ! USA !

Posted by: blue on April 5, 2011 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

"white men in dark suits"

Why is it that the first things liberals always notice is race?

Posted by: Al on April 5, 2011 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

They look like a large, old band!

I'm just now realizing what this Republican plan reminds me of.

It's like a rock band that's sucked for over 30 years, always sucked, but have two albums from the past that somehow or other sold, "Tax Cuts," and the follow-up "Entitlement Cuts," that no one admits to liking, to listening to, or buying - except that mentally challenged loser down the block - but that the critics (MSM) keep telling us how serious they are, and how great they are for us, and we should buy their album and listen to them.

This is their new "Greatest Hits" compilation album, where you have every shitty fucking song they ever sang, all on one double album.

And with the help of their Mighty Wurlitzer and the MSM, will go multiple platinum.

It's kind of like a bad take on The Dead Kennedy's "Kill the Poor" - just without the talent, intelligence, or humor.

Posted by: c u n d gulag on April 5, 2011 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

You know blue, if your not from this country, take you bullshit and stay off this blog.We know the dipshits who are in power, but before you high and mightily stare down this country, make sure your shit don't stink, and i'm getting a mighty strong whiff of it even from here...

Posted by: Michael on April 5, 2011 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

Now if only Monsanto could come up with a GM disease the reduced the rich and powerful to senile, chronically-ill, crippled unemployed people!

Posted by: blowback on April 5, 2011 at 2:50 PM | PERMALINK

Well Blue I for one am certainly mortified and shocked at er.. ummm... your truthful assessment of the situation . In little pockets of America we are watching as our Government is sold out . Florida is so F**ked by Republicans who are determined to sell this State to the highest bidder . Privatize Prisons, Mental Health Facilities. Rolling back environmental protections rolling back restriction s on lobbying funding ....Arizona will look like a liberal outpost when Rick Scott is through.

Posted by: John R AKA Mr. Serf Man on April 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

Corporate boardrooms are always depicted as a group of white men, making making decisions that will adversly affect the poor. This group of white men, sit around and make decisions, that will adversly affect ALL the poor. I don't think the visual distinction is out of place...

Posted by: Michael on April 5, 2011 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK

I hate to say this but the message war has already been lost. Ryan has been officially christened as the new "Star," and he's getting the fawning, genuflecting star treatment.

I was scolded in an earlier thread for saying the Democrats have no chance of getting their message out in this corporate owned media environment. Well folks, you're seeing the power of that corporate owned media in action today. Paul Ryan is the newest, manufactured American Golden Boy, and the very people who will be most harmed by him will be the most willing to drink the sewage he's selling.

My prediction: Paul Ryan will be on the GOP ticket as the VP nominee.

Posted by: SaintZak on April 5, 2011 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

Hahaha not that I disagree with his assessment john, just that he wasn't the one to state it the way he did:)

Posted by: Michael on April 5, 2011 at 2:57 PM | PERMALINK

er or she...

Posted by: Michael on April 5, 2011 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK

So Al, are you a filthy rich hedge fund manager or just brainless water carrier for the Ayn Rand crowd, if the latter, see you in the soup line when Ryan and co. are finished with all of us, you stooge.

Posted by: Kathryn on April 5, 2011 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK

I sat there this morning and watched those white men smirk, and I began to pray that there is indeed a judgment day. I had the same thought as Steve did, and I don't think pointing out that they are all white men is racist or sexist. It is a fact of life. These men have power and they are abusing that power. They are the worst sort of human scum because they evoke their pro life mantra and they create policies that promote death. Deplorable! I don't blame Blue or anyone else for judging the USA; our leadership speaks volumes about our powerlessness and indifference.

Posted by: Gracious on April 5, 2011 at 3:04 PM | PERMALINK

Just driving home listening to my car radio, I heard a woman gushing over Ryan's brilliant plan, got home and looked up her organization online 'The Heritage Foundation' a right wing think tank!

Posted by: j on April 5, 2011 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

re Michael...

You know blue, if your not from this country, take you bullshit and stay off this blog.

Do you own this blog???

If not, then what right do you have to tell anyone to stay off this blog? Illiterately!

Posted by: SadOldVet on April 5, 2011 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

The Democrats should have a field day making fun of this guy and his plan

I'd make a 1 minute commercial -"Serving 'Privatizing' Ryan" that would explain the plan simply and easily as a meal plan.

I would show a full plate and the price for it, say $12, "This is what you pay now."
And then, things disappear one by one off off it due to this plan - and then you're offered to buy those back at many times the cost.
Roll = $5
Potato's =9
Chicken = $12
Veggies = $9
_______________________
Total = $35, for your original $12 plate.
And that's IF you can get someone who even wants to sell you anything, because you're old and sick.

But, Democrats either can't, or won't, do that.

Before I thought it was David Broder.
Now I'm wondering if it ain't his ghost.

Posted by: c u n d gulag on April 5, 2011 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

Jesus H. Christ,

Ryan has been writing op-eds, doing countless interviews and now this bullshit press conference.

WHERE IS THE FUCKING DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE?!!

I'm really starting to hate these guys more than the evil bastards.

Saintzak (or anyone else for that matter): has any Democrat of stature called a press conference and denounced this abominable piece of shit and those who created it?

Squeeky wheel gets the media grease and I'm hearing nothing from our side.

Posted by: bdop4 on April 5, 2011 at 3:31 PM | PERMALINK

I would rather have the Postal Service run my health insurance than have EXXON, AT&T, or GE run it, wouldn't you? But that's what Republicans want.

It's all very fine if you are a member of the upper class who can afford health coats out of pocket, but for the rest of us who deal with health insurance companies we know they do not have the public interest in mind, only the short term profit of their shareholders.

Anyone can say differently, but those are the facts,  They are for profit corporations and all of em pretty much have the same goals: profit, profit, and more profit for the rich which can be against against the public interest.

So you think corporations cannot survive if they operate against the public interest? Well, my young Randian apprentice let's look at the record, which shows Many companies cut corners to satify their shareholders which prove disastrous to the public interest.  Union Carbide in India, BP in the Gulf of Mexico, EXXON In Akaska. There is no reason to think that health companies do any differently in fact given refusal to fund many new treatments, preventative health care, and continually raising the prices of their products IN A RECESSION... there is every indication they work against the interest of the public at large.

 Again,  I would rather have the postal service run my health insurance than  have EXXON, AT&T, or GE run it, wouldn't you?

We had pass laws to reign in corporations at the beginning of the 20th century.  

NOW Republicans want to return to those rapacious days and have decided health insurance for the elderly and poor is another way increase the excessive wealth of those who can most afford to pay health care costs.

I say not only NO, but HELL NO!

Now remember, America and the world was never more prosperous than during those times when people paid their fair share.  THE SOLUTION to our problems is to tax the über rich and use the money to build infrastructure paying good wages for good work to good people while protecting those who cannot protect themselves.

Posted by: KurtRex1453 on April 5, 2011 at 3:54 PM | PERMALINK

10 powerful, conservative, white men in dark suits, who make more money in a year than the vast majority of the American people will in their LIFETIME.

fixed it for ya.

Posted by: G.Kerby on April 5, 2011 at 4:01 PM | PERMALINK

blue, what you are describing is our American exceptionalism. Please do not mock it. It's one of the few things we have left.

I have to disagree about the same-ness of these 10 men. They are all wearing different ties, therefore they are not the same, and by proxy, Steve's comments are patently false. Or so dictates the logic of those who see nothing wrong with the picture.

Posted by: josef on April 5, 2011 at 4:08 PM | PERMALINK

America sucks. White people suck.

Posted by: perplexed and amused on April 5, 2011 at 4:18 PM | PERMALINK

I'm wondering if Steve Benen is learning disabled. What is it about "we're broke" that he doesn't understand?

Posted by: John Galt on April 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM | PERMALINK

Steve, seriously, are you mentally retarded? Are you aware that the current year deficit is $1.6 trillion? How much longer do you think this country can continue to spend money it does not have? Sure, it's nice to spend money, but what if you simply don't have anymore? Do you handle your own household budget the same way you would have the country handle its fiscal affairs? What are you people thinking?

Posted by: Pete Dupont on April 5, 2011 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

Bob Somerby has used a lot of virtual ink explaining the failure of many "liberal bloggers" to really go after the mainstream media personalities who are failing in their duty to tell the truth to the people. He believes that they won't take the risk of offending their possible future employers.

Similarly, Obama and the Democrats won't attack the stupid Ryan "budget" with the necessary gusto because they won't take the risk of offending the wealthy and the corporations they will seek donations from and will probably one day lobby for.

The game is rigged and we're all fucked.

Posted by: Squeaky McCrinkle on April 5, 2011 at 4:42 PM | PERMALINK

Republican policy (Bush)creates a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit. And now Republican saviors want to balance their disaster on the working class and poor. Bible thumping hypocrites, wave the flag to cover it. Land of the free and home of the slave.

Posted by: rab on April 5, 2011 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Let me tell you that as a non-white person, I find your comment about white men offensive and silly. There is nothing special about non white men or women for that matter. Throw enough money and power at people and you will find a whole bunch of non whites equally willing to screw their fellow citizens. These particular bunch of corrupt morons just happen to be white and have fooled a whole lot of people into thinking their way. A lot of white male democrats are trying to fight this stupidity and have been for a long time. This is about the haves taking control and squeezing the rest. Skin color is incidental.

Posted by: rk21 on April 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM | PERMALINK

I do agree with your last sentence rk21, yet, those men in the dark suits may not have our same sentiment! To them, skin color may indeed matter! Just take a look at the company they keep! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on April 5, 2011 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

Yo Pete,

You're the mentally challenged one if you think running a country (macro economics) is like managing family finances (micro economics).

Only moronic simpletons such as yourself think we can revive this economy through austerity measures. You should pick up a paper some time and read about how the UK economy is IN THE TANK due to idiotic spending cuts.

So, rub your two nuerons together and try to grasp the concept that maybe this country needs to stop subsidizing corporate profits and paying into the massive MIC and start investing in itself for a change.

Since your last name is Dupont, maybe you're one of the uber rich, in which case you can go FUCK YOURSELF.

If you're not, you're an even bigger moron because you're acting against your own self-interest.

Deal with it.

Posted by: bdop4 on April 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

bdop4 on April 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM wrote:

"Only moronic simpletons such as yourself think we can revive this economy through austerity measures"

Invest in what? More benefits? That's not investment, pal, that's called spending.

As far as I can tell, your learned understanding of macroeconomics seems to boil down to this: when times are good, spend all the money you have, and call it "investment". When times are bad, spend even more.

Pardon me if I find this theory a little less than compelling.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

@ UVoS

"Invest in what?"

Ever heard of energy and transportation infrastructure? We need to make structural changes that will significantly reduce the 25% of total energy consumed by our society. That includes carbon-free techologies like, wind, solar and geothermal. To facilitate that transition, a substantive investment in education needs to be made in order to retool our workforce.

"As far as I can tell, your learned understanding of macroeconomics seems to boil down to this: when times are good, spend all the money you have, and call it "investment". When times are bad, spend even more."

What classic projection. Is that all you rightwingers know how to do? Times were good when you clowns took over and immediately gave everything away in tax cuts and unfunded wars.

It's the fucking republicans(i.e., YOU) that spent all the money during GWB's (i.e., YOUR president) tenure.

Starting with Reagan, every republican presidential term has resulted in massive deficit spending.

That's why when times are bad, after the republicans have driven the economy into a ditch, it's the Democrats that have to fix the economy.

Sorry, "pal," but firing people through spending cuts doesn't create jobs.

Posted by: bdop4 on April 5, 2011 at 6:02 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah Al..Liberals don't "notice the race first"..I never think about it except when Koch funded ol rich powerful white men are trying to gut the future of so many Americans and then it is striking.

Don't try to change the subject with a stupid attack of racism on Liberals..it's not working.

Posted by: Cha on April 5, 2011 at 6:30 PM | PERMALINK

"Ever heard of energy and transportation infrastructure? "

I've heard of it, and I agree that these parts of the deficit are, in fact, investments. But these expenditures make up only a very small amount of the deficit. Most of it is spending, e.g., entitlements.

"We need to make structural changes that will significantly reduce the 25% of total energy consumed by our society. That includes carbon-free techologies like, wind, solar and geothermal. To facilitate that transition, a substantive investment in education needs to be made in order to retool our workforce."

When those technologies are ready, they will commercialize themselves. Anyone with any technical and/or economic knowledge knows that they are not currently affordable, at least not without drastic reductions in our standard of living. As an energy analyst, I know this for a fact, as do others with actual technical knowledge. It is only the political scientists and the scientifically untrained who start waving their arms at this point, as if that will all of the sudden make it all feasible. It won't.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

Remember thread posters - Al is parody! Or, at least that's the way I've come to read him over the past year or so! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on April 5, 2011 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

Posted by: bdop4 on April 5, 2011 at 6:02 PM

"What classic projection. Is that all you rightwingers know how to do? Times were good when you clowns took over and immediately gave everything away in tax cuts and unfunded wars.
It's the fucking republicans(i.e., YOU) that spent all the money during GWB's (i.e., YOUR president) tenure."

That's utterly wrong, of course. If we were simply spending today what we were spending in 2007, when Bush was President, our deficit would be much, much less than it is today. Simply scaling back spending to Bush's levels would cut our deficit by about $1 trillion right away. Here we are, two years into "hope and change", and you're still blaming Bush for the results of your own spending programs. You really need to get a new schtick.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

As an energy analyst, I know this for a fact

As an energy analyst, I'm curious: what is your position on sockpuppeting, stealing the handles of the regulars on this blog, and posting links to pictures of shit to weeks on end as a way of figuratively "shitting" on these comment threads.

Follow up question: When you were sucking off the government teat doing analysis - the same teat you're now trying to close off for the less fortunate -- did you often provide reports under different names like you've done here to make your analysis appear to have greater consensus?

Final question: do you think that someone who's gone to such great lengths to disrupt conversation in this community should rightly be allowed to participate in it?

Posted by: perplexed and amused on April 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM | PERMALINK

Yoh UVoS dude - "Anyone with any technical and/or economic knowledge knows that they are not currently affordable, at least not without drastic reductions in our standard of living."

Talk about dreamland meeting the real world going on right in front of you while you continue to promote austerity policies! Man, you need to rethink your perspective!

"at least not without drastic reductions in our standard of living"

Who you talking about? Are you part of the top 2% not paying your fair share?

No one I know will see a drastic reduction in their standard of living because they've already experienced a "drastic reduction" in their ability to pay the essential bills facing their families due to the 2008 economic meltdown, spurred by economically untenable Bush policies!

Where the fuck have you been? -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on April 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM | PERMALINK

Posted by: perplexed and amused on April 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM

"As an energy analyst, I'm curious: what is your position on sockpuppeting, stealing the handles of the regulars on this blog, and posting links to pictures of shit to weeks on end as a way of figuratively "shitting" on these comment threads."

I have no idea what you're talking about, and that is the truth.

"Follow up question: When you were sucking off the government teat doing analysis - the same teat you're now trying to close off for the less fortunate -- did you often provide reports under different names like you've done here to make your analysis appear to have greater consensus?"

Never did, never had to. All my work was peer-reviewed.

"Final question: do you think that someone who's gone to such great lengths to disrupt conversation in this community should rightly be allowed to participate in it?"

By "disrupting conversation" do you mean bringing unpleasant truths to people who would rather not hear them, or citing facts and figures to people who would like to make up their own or believe things that are patently not true?

Hey, if you can't handle the truth, that's your problem, not mine.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

By "disrupting conversation" do you mean bringing unpleasant truths to people who would rather not hear them

Not at all. By disrupting I mean by stealing the handles of the regulars here to post links to pictures of shit.

I have no idea what you're talking about, and that is the truth

That's funny, because using this very handle you said, and I quote:

"I can post on any forum at Washington Monthly I want. And you can't do jack about it. In fact, now that you've pissed me off, I'll make it my mission to ensure that you will have to watch every board, every day. Let's see how long you last.

And then, in fact, you spent weeks posting turd photos and stealing handles from commenters. And you trusted IP proxies to work inerrantly to cover your tracks and yet: they don't.

Posted by: perplexed and amused on April 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

Posted by: perplexed and amused on April 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM

"And then, in fact, you spent weeks posting turd photos and stealing handles from commenters. And you trusted IP proxies to work inerrantly to cover your tracks and yet: they don't."

You've got me confused with someone else. I wouldn't waste my time doing that. Although I admit I posted the item about being able to post here any time I want to, I didn't do any of that other stuff that you mention. It's probably someone else you pissed off. I have no reason to lie.

You must realize you make a pretty juicy target. Some of your commenters here are just totally ignorant and are begging for a thrashing.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 9:27 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, and by the way. Your comment boards are totally lame in terms of the quality of people posting here. Not to mention the fact that you don't get many comments, probably because you're constantly banning people. If you had more sense and a sense of fair play, you'd let more dissenting views be printed here instead of constantly censoring people.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 5, 2011 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK


We could achieve such a low unemployment rate in 10 years bc the GOP budget will kill off a huge number of vulnerable people and all else w a brain who can will move, whether to Canada, Europe or Mexico. Of course at some pt the rich will have to import some cheap labor (slaves) when there aren't enough people here to serve them. The rich have done a devil,s job portraying poor people as the "other" as leeches to be despised and unfunded.

Posted by: Pea on April 5, 2011 at 10:40 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, and by the way. Your comment boards are totally lame in terms of the quality of people posting here.

Like, totally lame. Like, totally! I'm, like, so disappointed that they aren't up to dealing with a reallyreallyreally smart guy (still in high school!) who's just found a microeconomics textbook.

Posted by: Andrew on April 6, 2011 at 7:23 AM | PERMALINK

By "disrupting conversation" do you mean bringing unpleasant truths to people who would rather not hear them, or citing facts and figures to people who would like to make up their own or believe things that are patently not true?

The unpleasant truth that modern conservatives, like you, are so stupid, hypocritical, pig-ignorant and systematically misinformed that nearly everything they write starts to resemble the result of an untreated mental illness?

You are regurgitating the stalest, most brain-dead, thrice-debunked talking points under the name "Unwelcome Voice of Sanity". Do you seriously not understand how conceited and pathetically sad that makes you look?

Posted by: Andrew on April 6, 2011 at 7:30 AM | PERMALINK

F U Blue!

Posted by: fublue on April 6, 2011 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

Posted by: Andrew on April 6, 2011 at 7:30 AM

"You are regurgitating the stalest, most brain-dead, thrice-debunked talking points under the name "Unwelcome Voice of Sanity". Do you seriously not understand how conceited and pathetically sad that makes you look?"

Well gee, Andrew, here's your chance to show what a smart guy you are. Where would you like to start with the debunking of my "talking points"? Would you like to refute the fact that under Obama, we have a $1.6 trillion deficit? Would you like to refute the fact that last year, the Democrats did not even pass a budget? Or would you like to refute the fact that Obama's budget plan has absolutely no attempt to reduce the spending we cannot afford? Which of these "thrice debunked talking points" would you like to start with? Frankly, when it comes to "pathetically sad" and "untreated mental illness", it is your ilk that comes to my mind, but I'll play along for awhile, if you have anything to offer.

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 6, 2011 at 9:14 PM | PERMALINK

Would you like to refute the fact that under Obama, we have a $1.6 trillion deficit?

Would you like to refute the fact that the ballooning deficit was created by Mr Reagan, and that the vast majority of it is now due to Mr Bush, for whom you voted?

Oh. You can't. How sad.

Posted by: Andrew on April 7, 2011 at 4:57 AM | PERMALINK

Posted by: Andrew on April 7, 2011 at 4:57 AM

So your position is that it's Ronald Reagan's fault that Obama and the Democrats in control of Congress last year spent $1.6 trillion more than we have? Or is that George Bush's fault? How does the Reagan thing work, exactly, given that he's been dead for many years?

Is it fair to say that in your opinion, anything bad that happens is the Republicans' fault, and anything good that happens redounds to Obama's credit?

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 7, 2011 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

So your position is that it's Ronald Reagan's fault that Obama and the Democrats in control of Congress last year spent $1.6 trillion more than we have?

It is Ronald Reagan's fault, and Bush's fault, that there is any deficit at all.

In 2001, the CBO forecast average annual surpluses of approximately $850 billion from 2009-2012. Bush destroyed Clinton's work in its entirety, and left the country in a recession and with no room in which to maneuver. The spectacle of anyone identifying as a "conservative" still lecturing people about the dangers of the deficit is high comedy.

How does the Reagan thing work, exactly, given that he's been dead for many years?

It's called compound interest. Reagan's debt did not vanish when Reagan left office. Look it up.

Posted by: Andrew on April 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

Posted by: Andrew on April 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM

"It is Ronald Reagan's fault, and Bush's fault, that there is any deficit at all.

I assume you mean this is because they didn't raise taxes at every opportunity. Put another way, you mean if only the government had enough money to spend, we wouldn't be broke? Is that what your saying?

Posted by: The Unwelcome Voice of Sanity on April 7, 2011 at 6:40 PM | PERMALINK

I assume you mean this is because they didn't raise taxes at every opportunity

Reagan caused a gigantic recession by applying a crackpot economic theory (which many cons still espouse, and which is an important influence on Ryan's farcical budget). He was forced to implement the largest peace-time tax increase in history, and went on to raise taxes many times. He was never able to repair the self-inflicted damage. And Bush did not even try. If you knew anything at all about the deficit, you would know all this perfectly well.

Posted by: Andrew on April 8, 2011 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?










 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly