Wednesday, November 24, 2010

David Brooks Is Discouraged

We've seen a number of interesting and thought-provoking plans to address debt and deficit in the past few weeks, and as I've said before, there is a lot to like in some of them.  David Brooks has surveyed the offerings and also finds them of interest.  He however, has access to leaders in DC (both parties), and in his conversations, has come up with a sense of discouragement that there is anything close to a plan (on either side) that would seek to implement even some of the more popular measure being discussed.

Brooks makes an interesting assertion, one that I find plausible.  He indicates that if a package came forward that was 90 percent spending cuts and 10 percent tax increases, many Republicans would sneer at it--as the "no new taxes" pledge taken (and broken) by George H. W. Bush has now become canonical.  I think he's probably right, and I think that's bad for the country. The New York Times had an interesting little debt calculator that allowed you to frame your own debt reduction plan--and I came up with an approach that was 84% spending cuts and 16% tax increases.  Of course I'm convinced of the reasonableness of my plan, but I also realize that it would be DoA on Capitol Hill, as at the very least, the mortgage and real estate industries would unite to fight my abolishing of the home mortgage interest deduction.

What do you think, Republicans?  Can ANY taxes be raised as part of a deficit and debt reduction approach? 


"The Hammer" said...

David Brooks is the Northeastern liberal establishment's house boy. He's probably got a poster of Nelson Rockefeller in a speedo hanging on the wall of his playroom. He is a punk, he is a loser and as evidence I offer his employment record. If he weren't what I say he is, he would not draw another breath as a NY Times employee.
Why anyone listens to this asswipe is beyond me. He's Alger Hiss, he's Klaus Fuchs, he's Kim Philby and he's Arlen Specter. He's a false-flag disinformation campaign and he's a liar.

The Conservative Wahoo said...

Now Hammer--take your meds.

George "Whammer" Michael said...

"He's probably got a poster of Nelson Rockefeller in a speedo hanging on the wall of his playroom"

Beats having collection of signed jockstraps from NC basketball legends in a living room display case.

"The Hammer" said...

That "take your meds" line is getting old CW. And as for you my numb-nutted friend, at least we have basketball legends at State. We could be UVA, Wally Walker, Jeff Lamp, HAH! Ridiculous.

The Conservative Wahoo said...

It is getting old, Hammer. You're right, and thanks for pointing it out.

But then again, so is your occasional intellectual Tourette's.

"The Hammer" said...

That's one getting old too. Look it's like this. Ever heard of Frank Zappa? Of course not, but anyway Zappa was a rockstar (not top tier) and he would release two albums while I was brushing my teeth (very prolific). Much of his stuff was crap but he was like John Dryden, when he was brilliant he was off the chart brilliant.
That's me. Mostly bullshit with the occasional gem.

Anonymous said...

Does David Brooks pay mortgage interest?
Does Conservative Wahoo pay mortgage interest?

"The Flamer" said...

"he would release two albums while I was brushing my teeth" So he had two what

Mudge said...

Is there anything I would increase taxes on? Sure.
1. Salaries of movie stars (80% seems a reasonable amount for starters).
2. Anyone who breaks into our country or assists them in doing so. (If they have no money to pay their newly-found civil obligation, put them into forced labor camps until they pay it off, then send them back to their native land)
3. Prisoners.
4. San Francisco.
5. Any fund associated with anti-US terrorist groups. Screw freezing accounts. Just apply a 100% tax rate.
6. George Soros (90% for starters)
7. Anyone directly associated with "The View."
8. NEA, UAW, ISEA, etc.
9. Everyone with an Obama sticker on his or her car.

Since these are the people who tend to cost the taxpayer (or support the policies that do), let THEM pay for their poor choices for a change.

That's just a sampling off the top of my head of course.

Mudge said...

BTW, a better title would be "David Brooks is Discouraging"

I'm with Hammer on his assesment of this imposter. I get more angry with him than the Rachel Maddows and Keith Olbermanns of the world. At least they make no bones about where their true allegiences lie.

"The Yammer" said...

"Mostly bulls**t with the occasional gem."

Don't flatter yourself Hammer. It's all bulls**t.

But keep those rambling non-sequiturs coming. Eventually, you may impress one of the hookers you have chained up in your basement, or attract the attention of the feds.

"The Hammer" said...

Nice one Yammer, that comment is actually humorous. You are definitely improving. But I still think you're a cowardly little dweeb who enjoys throwing rocks at the big boys.

Why not call in to tonight's podcast and introduce yourself. The show needs a liberal/dumbass.

Ghost of G "The Hammer" D said...

The show already has a dumbass hillbilly, doesn't need another dumbass.

Newer Post Older Post Home