I simply had to hurry and add this to the previous posting since they are so related. I wrote the previous posting about how the Republican party sees the renewal of the unemployment tax and the possible elimination of tax cuts due to expire in December 2010. My initial reaction, came simply from the Senator interviewed in the article and the article itself. Now! comes more revealing news on the same subject.......all I find, very interesting ..................and funny. Apparently Sen. Crapo-(R) Idaho, a member of the finance committee, which writes tax law ( he was basically unknown before this article, except to his constituents) has now got some top heavy guns following him. Sen. Jon Kyl-(R) Arizona the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, was asked the obvious question: If deficits are so worrisome, what about the budgetary cost of extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, which the Obama administration wants to let expire but Republicans want to make PERMANENT? What should replace $650 B or more in lost revenue over the next decade? His answer......needless to say.......was either for the students of the NEW ENGLISH or people totally out of whack with the English language. " You do need to offset the cost of increased spending, and that's what Republicans object to, But you should never have to offset the cost of a deliberate decision to re-duce tax rates on Americans." So, what your saying is $30 Billion in aid to the unemployed is unaffordable, but 20 times that much in tax cuts for the rich doesn't count..............Now the best part..............The very next day Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) and Senate minority Leader, confirmed that Kyl was giving the official party line: There's no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue ( I would say going further in debt would be evidence) . They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy, so what I think Sen. Kyl was expressing was a view of virtually EVERY REPUBLICAN on that subject. Now, I know that calling the economy of the Bush years was perhaps a little harsh being noted as "sluggish" and "stagnant" but this simply enforces the Republican commitment to keep things screwed up with their absorbent claim that tax cuts increases revenue......It increases revenue only for the identity that enjoys the tax cut...................then again. THAT'S WHAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS FOR ..............THEMSELVES. I guess that according to both Kyl and McConnell cutting taxes FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE simply means cut tax for the wealthy and keep the rest of the population so poor that they need not pay taxes. Compare that with the economy class passenger being given an empty bowl during food service and permission to visit the First Class section and beg for extra leftovers.
For 1 and 1/2 years now, I've heard nothing but how we must reduce spending in order to save our children..blah! blah! blah!!. SPENDING AND GIVING AWAY are basically the same thing.......in spending you hope to get something back...........giving away YOU GET NOTHING BACK. I am being selfish though, I'm speaking from the nations view. Congress speaks from their view, I am sure THEY ARE GETTING SOMETHING BACK!!!! My eyes have now been opened to the fact that:
1- Republican lawmakers do not understand economics.........or simple math
2- Republican lawmakers are hypocritical saying things all over the map that make no sense, also known as not answering the question.
3-Republican lawmakers want to intentionally create a fiscal crisis that can be used to push through unpopular policies, like dismantling social security.
Between the Democratic and the Republicans, it is, without doubt, the Republicans that use scare tactics to give the larger false and confusing arguments for all causes. They simply feel that they are the ONLY capable humans to run the government and are not able to admit to anything else. Apparently they are also unable to understand what makes a balanced budget.
