More False Equivalence from the Mainstream Press
This time from Matt Bai in the New York Times. This one was motivated by the idiotic, pandering Republican presidential candidates who, in a debate the other day, unanimously stated that they would not accept a deal that included $1 in additional revenues for every $10 in cuts. Here's Matt's take:
For anyone still puzzled about the truth of such claims, let me state the simple truth:
First of all, Matt, nice of you to claim that the Republicans were just lying about this. That's comforting. Unfortunately, given their recent behavior, there isn't a reason on earth to believe that the Republicans wouldn't continue their destructive conduct in exactly this manner.
More importantly is the inevitable claim, without a shred of evidence, that the Democrats are just as bad. I must state that I happen to be a person that would not accept $1 in Social Security cuts to help balance the budget, no matter what. Why is that? Is it because I am an intransigent, corrupt ass like the Republicans? No, it is because, as everyone knows, Social Security does not contribute one cent to the national debt, and to agree to such a deal would be simply to advance the Republican goal of destroying Social Security altogether.
Thus, principled action by Democrats, aimed at protecting the American people, becomes the equivalent of Republican attempts to thieve the money which workers have paid for decades, in order to bail out the rich from the consequences of their greed. And let's not fool ourselves into thinking this is an accident. That's what our bought-and-paid-for mainstream press exists for today- to diffuse any likelihood that the American people will come to understand what has happened to them.
" Bret Baier, asked the eight candidates on stage whether any of them would walk away from a “real spending cuts deal” that required one dollar in new tax revenue for every 10 dollars’ worth of reductions... Not a single candidate gave any hint that he or she would even entertain such a totally one-sided compromise.
Now, to be clear, I don’t believe most of them for a second on this, and neither should you...For anyone serious about governing, it’s a no-brainer.
...If this were merely a Republican phenomenon, the party would be alone in suffering the wrath of the average American voter. But it isn’t. You could have put a lot of Washington Democrats up on that stage, and asked them if they would have accepted $10 in new taxes or new stimulus in exchange for $1 in cuts to Social Security, and you probably would have gotten much the same response: hell, no. "
For anyone still puzzled about the truth of such claims, let me state the simple truth:
First of all, Matt, nice of you to claim that the Republicans were just lying about this. That's comforting. Unfortunately, given their recent behavior, there isn't a reason on earth to believe that the Republicans wouldn't continue their destructive conduct in exactly this manner.
More importantly is the inevitable claim, without a shred of evidence, that the Democrats are just as bad. I must state that I happen to be a person that would not accept $1 in Social Security cuts to help balance the budget, no matter what. Why is that? Is it because I am an intransigent, corrupt ass like the Republicans? No, it is because, as everyone knows, Social Security does not contribute one cent to the national debt, and to agree to such a deal would be simply to advance the Republican goal of destroying Social Security altogether.
Thus, principled action by Democrats, aimed at protecting the American people, becomes the equivalent of Republican attempts to thieve the money which workers have paid for decades, in order to bail out the rich from the consequences of their greed. And let's not fool ourselves into thinking this is an accident. That's what our bought-and-paid-for mainstream press exists for today- to diffuse any likelihood that the American people will come to understand what has happened to them.
Comments