The stunt known as the "super committee" of 12 congressional figures, 6 from each political party, has been purposely designed by both sides to avoid party and lawmaker responsibility for passing legislation which a wide majority of American citizens do not want passed.
That's what bipartisan has come to mean. Passing stuff the electorate is overwhelmingly against....no matter how many stunts are needed to get the job done.
Here are a few sentences from 3 members of the super committee. Try to figure out whether the people who signed on to this op-ed are Republicans or Democrats.....
Trillions of dollars in private capital are sitting on the sidelines because businesses are not yet confident enough in our economy or in their lawmakers to invest in the future.
Let's take it one piece at a time. In the first sentence the assertion is made that the reason big, flush corporate shakers are "sitting" on "trillions" rather than investing those dollars in new job creating enterprises is because they are not "confident enough" "in their lawmakers to invest in the future."
Sounds like something a Republican would claim, no? Government is bad. Private sector is good. The good private sector is being held back from spending any of the $2 trillion they are hoarding because they are oh-so-not-confident in "their lawmakers."
That is a claim St. Ronnie.....or Newt Gingrich.....or Steve Forbes...or Larry Kudlow....would make. Only it wasn't Republicans who wrote those lines. It was Democrats. Senators, Patty Murray (D-WA), John Kerry (D-MA), and Max Baucus (D-MT) co-authored the words found in the Wall Street Journal op-ed.
And therein lies the problem America faces. Quite frankly, it is a problem to which I can't see a solution.
Both political parties have been co-opted, and thus, compromised, by their fealty to a very small group of very wealthy and powerful corporate owners on whom both parties depend for their electoral campaign futures. Those who are "sitting" on a couple trillion in cash are the same players who pay for the campaigns of elected officials from both parties.
That explains why three corporate-sponsored Democratic senators would start out their WSJ op-ed by defending the bogus claims of the rich and powerful. Unless your brains are, in fact, made of cement....you know that the reason flush corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing in their businesses, and more importantly, creating new jobs....is because demand for goods and services has plummeted during the deep recession.
The Standard & Poor's downgrade of America's credit rating was an unprecedented wake-up call for those who have for too long acted as if overheated rhetoric and dysfunction in Washington has no consequences for Main Street and working families. The shockwaves that roiled financial markets after the downgrade was a condemnation of Congress's inability to address the unsustainable trajectory of our current fiscal policies.
Remember....these are the words of Democrats. Democratic senators are defending S&P's U.S. bond downgrade. S&P has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are untrustworthy. S&P was not only asleep at the wheel when Enron and WorldCom scams were being perpetrated during the early 00's, but S&P, as an investigation concluded, was the "gateway" to the mortgage meltdown crisis....still listing Lehman Brothers as a AAA company ONE MONTH before Lehman went belly up.
S&P has no credibility and exists only to do the bidding of corporations. Yet, three Democratic senators pretend that S&P's recent downgrade of U.S. debt, a ridiculous move by a proven failure in the ratings business, is to be taken seriously. The claim of "shockwaves" that shook financial markets is equally ridiculous. Yes, stocks have taken a beating since S&P's stunt.....but the very debt vehicles that S&P downgraded, that is, Treasury bonds......have seen RENEWED demand. The 10 year Treasury set a record low this week with it's yield breaking down through 2% and moving as low as 1.9%. That means that investors are flocking to buy Treasuries...in record numbers. If our debt vehicles were, as S&P stated, not quite as good an investment as they used to be.....investors would be selling treasury bonds. Instead, it's just the opposite.
Yet compromised "super committee" Democrats are defending S&P's bogus analysis and ignoring S&P's proven record of irresponsibility by attempting to leverage the S&P stunt to convince unknowing Americans into accepting another $1.5 trillion in spending cuts....during a time when the government should be spending hundreds of billions more to create jobs.
We know that our goal is to reduce spending. But we also know that America faces not just a budget deficit but also a jobs deficit. Nobody on this committee would be happy if we reduced the budget deficit but even more Americans end up losing their jobs.
Of course, the total paragraph is incoherent. It takes government spending to create jobs....yet, the "super committee"'s job, according to three prominent Democratic members, is to "reduce spending." But is that the committee's real job? Of course not. The job of the committee is to work towards deficit reduction. Deficits, obviously, can be reduced by increasing revenue through the tax code. So, what we have here is three Democrats agreeing with the bogus Republican construct that their "goal" as an unconstitutional "super committee" is to "reduce spending."
Given this sickening and completely dishonest explanation from Democats on the committee.....the best hope average Americans have is for the committee to fail to arrive at an agreement.
About This Blog