Search This Blog

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

A Scathingly Bipartisan Editorial

I try to keep Blognoscor apolitical most of the time, but the whole blogosphere is doing a thing where we all get on and gripe about the tax compromise going through the Senate in the morning.  Anyway, apparently I didn’t get the email and I didn’t realize we were doing it until I got home and I had the only blog not complaining about this legislation.  It was like showing up bare headed on hat day… so embarrassing.

Anyway, I threw this together kind of quickly.  I’m far-center politically and thus have no horse in the race.  I also know that I have both conservative and liberal readers so I’ve tried to keep the griping fair to everyone.  When you encounter parentheses, read the option on the left if you are a Democrat and the right if you are a Republican.  This way we can all enjoy being unhappy with the compromise together.

(Democrats | Republicans) Cave to (Republicans | Democrats)

As we approach the end of 2010, we are left to reflect on the (slow recovery | unabated freefall) of the economy, the (slowly recovering | hopelessly devastated) housing market and the (necessary | Marxist) (extension | expansion) of unemployment insurance to people out of work (through no fault of their own | because of Obama’s job killing strategies).

With Obama’s (unacceptable | unacceptable) tax compromise finding only token opposition in the Senate, the House is expected to (fix | fight) the bill in the coming days.  But will (a tax break | continuation of current tax levels) make a significant difference in economic recovery?  Will it (lift people back out of poverty | make me rich)?  Will it make (trees happy |  immigrants go away)?  More importantly, will it please the (union | corporate) overlords and keep the donors happy?

The (Democrats | Republicans) are proceeding despite strong opposition from their base.  (Democratic | Republican) voters have made it clear that the last thing they want is (tax breaks for the rich | a bigger deficit).  Poll after poll shows that the voters in their party are far more interested in (being whipped repeatedly | balancing the budget) than continuation of the Bush tax-cuts for the top 2%.

Despite that, (Obama | House Leaders) hammered out a hasty compromise with unacceptable concessions on (the estate tax | unemployment benefits) that (are | is) in direct opposition to the overwhelming voice of the base.  It was as if (he | they) were not even listening to the people.

But was a compromise necessary?  (Obama | Republicans) had a winning hand and likely could have earned more by moving (quickly | slowly) and allowing the dirty-handed tactics of the (Republicans | Democrats) to be seen by the American people.  The fact that (House Republicans | Obama) would be willing to stand in the way of (his | their) demands would be powerful ammunition when it came time to (hold | regain) the White House in 2012.

I, (tree hugging, acai berry eating self-anointed protector of people I still see as beneath me | overweight, middle aged, balding “everyman” who could order a sandwich pedantically) will say with certainty that the (Republicans | Democrats) would have caved before allowing people to go into the next year without knowing the status of their (unemployment | tax rates).  The spectacle of the fight that (Democrats | Republicans) could have so easily won would have made it worth dragging out ad nauseum.

I say compromise has no place in politics.  (Republicans | Democrats) are (heartless | stupid), (greedy | Godless) automatons that trust people like (Rush Limbaugh | Michael Moore) and (planned 9/11 | kill babies).  Are those the kind of people you want to compromise with?

(Arianna | Ann) (Oberman | Savage)

Aaron Davies

No comments:

Post a Comment