The New York Times poison penned an editorial blasting Republicans for failure to compromise (read: cave) on the debt ceiling.
Now ‘Puter’s a simple man-child, and he understands that editorials are by their nature opinion. But that’s no excuse to avoid reason, logic and truth, as is the NYT’s apparent editorial policy.
1. “Negotiations require listening to those on the other side and giving them something they want in exchange for some of your goals.”
Um, no. Negotiations require having a position and knowing what portions, if any, of that position you are willing to compromise. If your opposite party’s positions are unacceptable to you, you are not required to bargain against yourself. That’s not negotiation, that’s political suicide.
“I will let you live so long as you give me all your Cheetos!”, is not negotiation. Sure, ‘Puter wants all your Cheetos, and you want to continue your life (unless you’re married to a Kardashian or Debbie Wasserman Schultz). You give ‘Puter your Cheetos, he lets you live. The Cheetos are “something [‘Puter] wants” and not taking a dirt nap is “some of your goals.” But it’s not negotiation.
2. “It has been obvious all along that cutting government services alone is not a solution to either the budget deficit or the mounting national debt.”
False, and verifiably so. The only people to whom “[i]t has been obvious all along” that cutting spending won’t solve a debt and deficit problem are liberals. As a matter of fact, cutting spending well below revenues will solve a deficit problem immediately, and will eventually solve a debt problem. See, if you spend less than you make, you cannot, by definition, be in a deficit. ‘Puter believes the term is “surplus.” Let’s say it together, NYT editors: “Sur-plus.” And, if you’re taking in more than you’re spending, you can use the surplus (there’s that word again) to pay down the debt.
Perhaps what the NYT means is that their favorite programs (Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security (and now, with more ObamaCare!)) are untouchable, so therefore revenues must be raised (that is, taxes raised) to meet the programs’ ever-expanding, economy-ruining, future-mortgaging “needs.” This is the heart of the NYT’s argument. We are entitled to redistribute your wealth for what we perceive to be the greater good, no matter how much damage doing so has done, is doing and will do in the future. The editors are simply too chicken to make this argument out loud.
3. The NYT editors close with this. “Republicans cannot walk away from their responsibility to pay the bills and keep the economy out of further crisis.”
That’s rich. The Democrats refused to pass a budget last year knowing full well that the uncertainty would screw the economy. And screw the economy it did. Worse, the Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate, as well as a President who shared their priorities. So why did the Democrats refuse to pass a budget? Simple political expediency. The Democrats calculated that in avoiding controversial public stances (i.e., hiding their true policy positions, they could avoid a drubbing at the polls. The Democrats calculated wrong.
The editors’ hidden agenda is that taxes must be raised to support their pet programs. And yet the editors fear to say so.
If the Democrats (and their house organ the NYT) were convinced the public agreed with them, they’d make their argument outright. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and ObamaCare are sacrosanct. They must be preserved in exactly their current form. All other programs and policies, from national defense to highways to education, can be savaged to maintain the Big Four. In order to maintain the Big Four, taxes must be assessed at confiscatory rates, both on the rich and the middle class. We are comfortable with condemning the country to low growth and golden-chain program slavery for the foreseeable future.
There, that wasn’t so difficult, was it?
Always right, unless he isn’t, the infallible Ghettoputer F. X. Gormogons claims to be an in-law of the Volgi, although no one really believes this.
’Puter carefully follows economic and financial trends, legal affairs, and serves as the Gormogons’ financial and legal advisor. He successfully defended us against a lawsuit from a liquor distributor worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid deliveries of bootleg shandies.
The Geep has an IQ so high it is untestable and attempts to measure it have resulted in dangerously unstable results as well as injuries to researchers. Coincidentally, he publishes intelligence tests as a side gig.
His sarcasm is so highly developed it borders on the psychic, and he is often able to insult a person even before meeting them. ’Puter enjoys hunting small game with 000 slugs and punt guns, correcting homilies in real time at Mass, and undermining unions. ’Puter likes to wear a hockey mask and carry an axe into public campgrounds, where he bursts into people’s tents and screams. As you might expect, he has been shot several times but remains completely undeterred.
He assures us that his obsessive fawning over news stories involving women teachers sleeping with young students is not Freudian in any way, although he admits something similar once happened to him. Uniquely, ’Puter is unable to speak, read, or write Russian, but he is able to sing it fluently.
Geep joined the order in the mid-1980s. He arrived at the Castle door with dozens of steamer trunks and an inarticulate hissing creature of astonishingly low intelligence he calls “Sleestak.” Ghettoputer appears to make his wishes known to Sleestak, although no one is sure whether this is the result of complex sign language, expert body posture reading, or simply beating Sleestak with a rubber mallet.
‘Puter suggests the Czar suck it.