I happened to stumble across an interview with Senator Lieberman last night. He's always seemed to me be quite bright, sensible, and one who takes a basically honest stance in his positions. But, I had to realize, once again, that at heart even the practical Lieberman is still really only a politician.
The question asked of him regarded the now likely passage of extension to the Bush tax cuts, which he felt was the right thing to do. And then he went on to mention that there are other serious issues that need attention, more specifically, passage of a bill dealing with the military, raises in their pay, additional benefits for them and other things our forces surely deserve. However the bill has hit a roadblock in Congress, which he says imperils passage, despite the importance of the bill's enactment before Congress adjourns.
When pressed as to why this bill has hit a snag, considering that it directly effects our troops and the fact that if it doesn't pass they don't get paid, Lieberman casually responded that some legislators have a problem with the fact that the rescinding of "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy has been included in the package.
So here you have the essence of what politics is really all about. Because recent information has come out that the Pentagon ordered studies on the effect of Don't ask, Don't tell are flawed, and if nothing else, the issue needs more and better study before any kind of changes are made.
But, no. Politicians don't work that way. They disguise and bury the issues they champion by sliding bills and enactments into other needed legislation, holding passage for ransom unless their demands are met. And in that way these lowlifes wheedle, finagle and worm legislation in that has extremely serious effect, yet might not pass if proper homework is done. Which is how we all get stuck with total disasters like Obama's bill on healthcare.
Right after the Lieberman segment, some representative, who's name I don't know nor want to, was expounding on how upset he was that the president "gave in" on tax cuts when, according to this representative, the American people are so against extending the cuts that backing down on the issue is almost beyond belief.
Now, I didn't take notes, so my numbers may be somewhat off, but here's roughly what the interviewer said. According to the interviewer, it's estimated that extending the cuts will likely add three and a half trillion dollars to the economy in time, and the tax cuts equate to 90 billion dollars. So, if that's the case, or anywhere near it, why would any rational person object? The politician's answer was, that it's the "rich" whom are getting the benefit and these people who have millions and billions don't deserve it.
After that comment, I was quite glad that I've matured somewhat over the years. Because my first instinct was to throw something heavy at my TV screen. But then this clown would have gotten me twice. Once because of his moronics, and then again when I had to go out and buy a new set.
In closing the brilliant representative said he would have preferred that the president wait until the very last hour of the Congressional year before "caving" on the tax issue. Because that way, for the next two weeks everyone would see those who favored the extension on the screen all the time, pushing for passage and exposing themselves to the public. And, in that way, the representative felt the public would know precisely who was responsible for their grandchildren's need to pay our overdue tax bill.
Although I thought the interviewer took a patient, even-handed approach though obviously trying hard not to insult or embarrass the representative, a thought came back to me that's at the core of all of these income related issues. The money that's in question here doesn't belong to the government, it belongs to the folks that earned it. And if some people make more than others, it's not the earners fault, so long as they play straight up. What's more, the rules in this country are pretty simple. If you want or need more, get off your duff and go earn it like you're supposed to.
And that's why I think perhaps a change might be needed to how tax money is spent. Because high earners might be happier and maybe even agree to donating a little bit more if they had more specific control over how funds were directly spent. Because in that way they'd be able to insure that no matter how a guy like this flea-brained representative whined and squawked, not a nickel would ever go to him or his constituents.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment