Sunday, October 13, 2013

Selective Outrage and Concern

The US Treasury Secretary and other spokesfolks have expressed extreme concern over the "irrevocable damage" a default on US payments would cause.  I have to laugh at these folks, not that such a default wouldn't be very damaging.

Where is their concern over the wild spending the federal gov't has been doing over the past decades, esp in the last years of the W Bush and Obama administrations?  What's the national debt, $16 or $17 trillion? How about the unfunded liabilities, maybe 7 or 8 times that?  And these fools in the Senate and White House want to increase the debt ceiling, that is, spend even more.

The CBO (I think) said if we keep spending at the same rate (income being equal), the federal gov't will run out of money by 2032!  That's Social Security, Medicare, everything I guess.  Where is the Treasury Secretary's worry over that?  Oh, that's right--he can kick the can down the road and let others worry about that in future, near future, years.

He's just like the current brand of politicians.  Nobody, at least not many, is/are willing to do the right thing, not if it means they have to make hard, unpopular decisions.  (Isn't that a definition of cowardice?  I'm just asking.)  Let the next guys do that.

Again, I'm struck by the pettiness/smallness of the current administration in the so-called "shutdown" (remembering a sizable portion of the federal gov't isn't "shut down").  It can't be anything other than inflicting the most damage and inconvenience on the US people.  Should the efforts be toward minimizing the worst effects?  And yet people elected this guy, not once, but twice, even after the earlier "sequester" was handled the same way--hammering the US people as badly as possible.  For instance, the WW2 Memorial was closed. Why?  First, it's an open-air memorial, no buildings or rangers needed.  Second, the NPS had to rent barricades to block it off!  Again, when will the IRS and Dept of Ed be "shut down?"  They are certainly "nonessential," at least to me.

I'm not a Tea-Partier, but I don't understand the LameStream Media and establishment politicians (esp the Republicans) preoccupation with lambasting them.  Why isn't there equal negative coverage over, say, the irresponsible spending of the past two administrations, the lies and distortions coming from our federal government officials (elected and appointed), the numerous scandals such as Fast and Furious and Benghazi and IRS shenanigans (esp from "the most open and honest administration in history," yet another example of how little we know about our history)?  Need I go on with "We need to pass this bill to see what's in it," the many career politicians, etc.??????


No comments: