Pres. Eisenhower), which as part of the "shadowy government" (Sen. Inouye), has its own funding anyway. But no.
The lines divide in another way: Democrats want to protect MediCare and social programs, whereas Republicans insist they have to protect the super rich and corporate personhood.
Given that both parties are largely corrupt, who would take the side of the bailed out, largely untaxed, welfare-siphoning super rich?
The "trickle down" theory of economics (the idea that if we give more and more money to the super rich, some of it will eventually fall down to the rest of the 99%) is a fiction that ignores the human needs of most American, even though they cost much less to provide than more tax breaks for the rich.
How deluded or insensitive must one be to imagine him or herself a beneficiary of so unfair a system?
Whatever happens after this catastrophic failure to reduce the deficit, at least country music superstar Taylor Swift's award for "artist of the year" is safe. At least we have that. (*Sigh*).
- Super Committee Fails, but Obama campaign machine rolls on
- Insight: Super committee had glimpse of elusive compromise
- US Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction...
- "Super committee" fails to reach agreement (CNN)
- What's next after "super committee" failure? (CNN)
- Obama to veto any attempt to roll back automatic cuts after...