Jon Stewart
Out of context: Reply #28
- Started
- Last post
- 57 Responses
- jevad0
The point is often made that the republican argument, from Reagan on down, has been that government is not the solution, it is the problem.
So if you can appoint ninnies and nutjobs and morons to government positions, then you can point to them and say, "See? It doesn't work!"
Then you can cut their budget because obviously if you gave them more money they would only accomplish more screwups.
Of course, once you've cut their budget, they will inevitibly screw up even more. And the cycle of endless Grover Norquist masturbation continues.
You'd think this would backfire on them after a while, but it never seems to, because "Government takes your money and can't do anything right" is a very easy premise for any idiot to grasp, whereas "If you want them to do a better job, you must give them more money, even if you think, right at this moment, that they are jackasses, and the people we currently have in the jobs must be replaced" is more complicated.
Giving a failing student more money is counterintuitive, though giving him more money for decent schoolbooks is a good idea.
And, let's face it, the notion that government employees are all lazy idiots is so deeply ingrained in us all that it's difficult for most of us to imagine that the next guy in the job will be any different.Needless to say, this is all very, very depressing. But we went to the zoo today, as my birthday is tomorrow, and I saw porcupines and ratfish, so I'll survive it.
Seriously. I was born on Labor Day, many years ago. It explains a lot.