The Fake Spending Cuts


If they're so interested in balancing the budget, why are they increasing spending and calling it a cut?

The Federal government has not had an actual, official budget for many months.

When it was time for a new budget last year, the one proposed had so much pork and needless spending hikes in it that even the Democrats who controlled both houses could not get it passed.

And neither they nor the Republicans have succeeded in passing a budget, to this day. They have instead, kept the government funded with “Continuing Resolutions”, temporary agreements to “continue” spending at current rates while the budget is debated.

In 1995, such continuing resolutions actually helped reduce the National Debt, because they held to current levels of spending for months, instead of the next year’s increases.

And people assumed that this is what was going on this year…but they underestimated just how corrupt the Congress has become. Last year the Democrats controlling Congress did not agree to traditional Continuing Resolutions, maintaining current spending…their “resolutions” were actually based on the proposed budget that most members of Congress were rejecting.

Flash forward to the last few weeks:

The Republican leadership has made a big deal about having made two billion dollars in “cuts” from the Continuing Resolution…and when that one ended, six more billion from the next CR.

They have been claiming credit for “ten billion dollars in cuts”. This would, if it were true, be the first time in something like 60 years that the budget was actually cut, instead of the rate of increase simply being adjusted.

Even the 1995 Republican Revolution only cut the amount spending was increased. This was called “cuts” by the most ridiculous Liberals of the time, because they seriously think that increasing spending the “planned” amount is not an increase, at all. So if you plan to increase spending 3%, and then increase it 2%, that is a “cut”.

This is what I had feared the “cuts” in the Continuing Resolution actually were; just reductions in the increase.

But it’s worse…as I noted above, the CRs were actually based on the rejected, larger budget. And the Republican leadership is corrupt enough to reduce only those proposed super-increases, leaving the temporary budget still higher than last year, then claim credit as if they’d actually cut spending.

This explains more clearly, to me, why 54 Republicans, mostly TEA Party types, refused to vote for the CR.

Advertisements

Uther Pendragon is a Neocon


Uther would have been right on board with the unprovoked invasion of Iraq, as long as you told him that Hussein was developing chemical, nuclear, and magical WMD

There’s this show on BBC called Merlin. It covers the story of Camelot, of Arthur and Merlin, when they’re teenagers.

Prince Arthur’s father is, of course, King Uther Pendragon. In this version, Uther’s son is learning to become the good ruler his father is not.

In watching the show, Uther is presented ambiguously, as one of the protagonists, but I find myself force to take a stance (in my head, or to friends) against him, because he is constantly doing things that, were he not one of the “good guys”, would be instantly recognized as evil.

In fact, I’ve come to the conclusion that he is actually the most evil part of the show, the actual antagonist without whom none of the greatest wrongs or conflict would occur.

What’s most interesting, though, is that every single aspect of his role in the show is identical to that of the violent, authoritarian interventionists in the American and British political class (sadly, this turns out to include Obama), in real life.

Although it’s a specific movement of Trotskyites, I’m using the term “neocon” for this movement, because it’s familiar and its evils are widely recognized across most of the political spectrum.

Uther Pendragon / A Neocon:

  • Claims to defend the people’s rights, but governs as an authoritarian, using safety as their excuse
  • Once quietly supported a movement for their own gain, but then decided it was their enemy
  • Has since imposed a police state, along with supportING violence, war, and tyranny elsewhere, in the name of stamping out that movement
  • Will unhesitatingly torture, imprison, or kill in pursuit of the war against the movement, including using proxies in order to be able to claim clean hands for themselves
  • Will threaten, imprison, and worse anyone who might reveal their involvement in some of these evils
  • With their brutality and wrongdoing in the name of crushing the movement and any other opposition, has created their own enemies
  • Those enemies included good people, driven bad by desperation under the evils of the abusive government
  • And actual evil men, criminals, et cetera, who would have been nothing more than part of a fringe underworld end up able to ally with and manipulate the desperate good people, gaining far more power and influence than they would without the evil of the abusive government
  • The people of the nation end up being subjected to retribution and violence driven purely as blowback against the previous evils of their government
  • That government lacks credibility in the struggles for justice of many other lands, despite a long-past history of being a beacon of justice

Frankly, I could have written an article about either the violent interventionists of the American political class, or Uther Pendragon, and then just did a search and replace for words like Bush/Uther, Camelot/America, and magic/Muslims, Gaius/Assange, and published the new version credibly, without any other modification.

Whose evils does this article really reveal most clearly…the fictional Uther or the real Neocons? Sadly, I think it’s hard to say.

%d bloggers like this: