Prayers for Wah

As the threat of a cut in government spending the equivalent of a rounding error draws near, I'm finding myself just a little perplexed: are we, a people $16 trillion in debt and climbing, really having a discussion about whether or not it's a good idea to curb spending? This is like having a discussion about whether or not it's a good idea to stop ingesting strychnine.

Our government, as a matter of routine, votes itself permission to go further into debt every few months. On what type of bizarro world could this behavior be interpreted as healthy or sustainable? Our debt will probably surpass $20 trillion in the next four years. Current, actual unfunded government liabilities, depending upon whom you ask, are somewhere between $45 and $100 trillion. This WSJ article pegs it at around $87 trillion.

Eighty-seven trillion dollars. Unfunded. And yet we're expected to stomach Paul Krugman's schoolmarmish, finger-wagging admonitions to abandon this sequester nonsense, and all this talk of unsustainable spending, because there is no-and-I-mean-it-young-man-no crisis. You boys stop scaring the other children with your crazy talk! And stop slouching. And would it kill you to run a comb through your hair once in a while?

Excuse me, Paul, but who exactly is sounding a bit agitated here? Democrats are characterizing the $85 billion in cuts as the fiscal equivalent of the chainsaw scene in Scarface. I guess I'm a little too jaded from the frequent insults my intelligence has endured over the years at the hands of these people to declare, as Rush Limbaugh did, that these goofballs make me "ashamed of my country." Me, I'm rocking more of a bored depression.

But Rush is right that this utter lack of seriousness in addressing spending is shameful. Obama is trying to incite panic over cuts (all his administration's idea, by the way) that amount to about eight days of government spending. If we as a nation can't withstand these cuts--in reality, not cuts at all, but rather a restriction in the rate of increase-- then it's time to give up. Let the Huns in. Say "hi" to the four horsemen and the flying monkeys. Dogs and cats, living together, mass hysteria.

Am I saying sequestration is nothing? No. it is very likely that a lot of people will lose their jobs, that potential new jobs will be frozen or eliminated, that some services will be reduced or eliminated. For the record, I work in a segment of the economy that relies upon government spending. Sequestration may have an adverse impact upon my employer, and potentially, me. Of course, given that the amount of the reduction is a thimbleful compared to the vast ocean of annual government spending, there are doubtless numerous ways to minimize the impact of these cuts on most people. Just don't ask our elected officials to make any symbolic cuts from their own budgets. As Madame Pelosi said, it's beneath their dignity.

Whatever. If we have to take the hit, we have to. And the next day, when the sun comes up anyway, and the general public is just that less dependent upon the government dole, it will be a good day for America.