Not sure if this is just a North Dakota thing or more of a talking point handed down from national Democrat leadership (kinda like how five minutes after the NSA story broke every single leftist commentator out there was referring to President Bush as "King George," amazing how they all march in lockstep) but state Democrats here have taken to referring to Dick Cheney as "the grinch" after his was the deciding vote in the Senate to pass spending cuts to several government programs.
It is amazing just how much that comparison plays into their warped world-view.
If Cheney is a grinch, stealing presents from people, then the government must be Santa Claus, if the metaphor is to be believed. And that's really how these people view the government. Just a big, lovable friend who comes buy and showers presents on the populace. Well that couldn't be further from the truth.
The government does not "give" us anything. We, the people, give the government its power and its money. When politicians vote to cut spending they aren't taking something away from Americans, they're just spending fewer of our tax dollars. That's a good thing, especially when it comes along with tax cuts that put more dollars back in the pockets of Americans.
"But these spending cuts were made to necessary programs," these Democrats will cry. That's baloney. Spending wasn't really cut at all, just spending growth. There will still be more tax dollars spent on these programs next year than this year. The cuts were made to automatic discretionary (read: optional) spending increases. Though, really, most of these programs should have been cut more. There's plenty of fat and waste.
"But we can't afford to cut taxes now," these Democrats will say. Again, baloney. Tax cuts stimulate economic activity. Increased economic activity leads to increased federal tax receipts. To deny that is just plain naive.
"But the tax cuts went to the rich!" these Democrats will say. Well, that's right. But who pays the lion's share of taxes? The rich. The "poorest" fifty percent of Americans in this country pay next to nothing in taxes. How could we ever cut taxes if we never cut them for "the rich?" They get a disproportionate amount of the tax cuts because they pay a disproportionate amount of the taxes.
At the end of the day this all just plays into the differences between "conservatives" and "liberals." Conservatives believe in personal responsibility. All we demand from our government is a few essential services (security and infrastructure, for instance) and the ability to earn our own way in the world with as little interference as possible. Liberals view the government as Santa Claus. There to take care of us. There to re-distribute our money back to us according to how their Marxist politicians see fit.
Well I know which side of that divide I come down on. I want to keep my money and use it to take care of my life and my family as I see fit.
You can read more from Rob Port at SayAnythingBlog.com
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 9
Medicare recipients. Increased premiums for Medicare patients. Reduced Medicare payments for imaging services and in-home health care.
Bottomline: Elderly and special needs patients hurt.
Student Loans. Reduced subsidies to lenders which means loans will be both harder to get and more expensive.
Bottomline: Fewer students able to go to college. Just what the US needs to compete in the global economy.
Social services. Cuts child support enforcement and foster care.
Bottomline: Women and children hurt.
Happy holidays from the 'personal responsibility' GOP!
"Tax cuts stimulate economic activity. Increased economic activity leads to increased federal tax receipts. To deny that is just plain naive."
Well then, let's cut taxes down to 0% since that'll increase government tax income! Or wait...
Even the original supply-siders who came up with that idea wouldn't agree with that statement. Wiki search the Laffer Curve if you're so inclined, which is the economic model that pretty much set off the idea of supply-side tax cuts.
Meanwhile, to cut through the rest of your Limbaugh-esque rhetoric, discresionary spending has still ballooned under Bush and the Republican congress. So no, you're wrong in saying "All [conservatives] demand from our government is a few essential services," because your conservatives in power are spending as madly as the liberals you lambast. And very few conservatives I've heard are critical of this. Wonder why.
Your posts confirm that this is wholly impossuble as long as there are those willing ot be blinded by ideology. As to these mad ramlings, I've not much more to add to what the previous
Calling the Vice President "Grinch" is, I will grant you, juvenile. It is also, however, true. If we are basing the definition of "grinch" on someone who acts in diametric opposition to your ever beloved "Christmas" spirit, then the VP is most certainly a grinch. Voting to rob fromt he poor is pretty damning evidence.
As to the rest of your absurd argument, you are right that people do view the gov't as Santa Claus. Those peole are the wealthy that benefit from the tax cuts.
Dear Santa, please bring me more cash while making sure that the least amongst us are forced to suffer even more. I mean c'mon Santa, sir, they are embarassing and prove to the French that we really aren't all that.
Love,
Non-white, supply-sider fool
Hardly a grinch, those liberals just don't understand.
"amazing how they all march in lockstep"
The best irony is inadvertent.[chuckling]
Good comments here from many of you thinking types. Now lets get together and have an "alternative" party to map out a manifesto for real change. We have a whole history of successful civil rights movements to draw from. Personally, I'm thinking of using my next "tax savings" to buy the Saki for just such a get-together. (I find it comes out of the cloth of my "Made in Mexico/China" outfits better.)
Buy, buy for the holidays all us loyal Americans!
Allan