It is interesting to watch how the various factions of our culture interact on the matter of governmental budgets. It is though a budget is an end in itself. It is though a budget is the final product of government. Many apply a puritanical spin on budget and debt concepts. This country produces Cotton Mather characters every generation.
What is important about a budget item is what it does out in the field. OK, elected officials pushed the funding for a particular program or acquisition. It seems to me that what is of interest is the result of the funding, not the protracted battle for funding. The headline should be the funded project and the politicians can take their credit in the Congressional Quarterly.
The contrived acrimony over budgets is a battle over abstraction. People make wild claims as to the market or social imperatives and morality of various magnitudes of spending. Spastic gesticulations and flying spittle get air time on the tube. But perhaps we should go to the actual object of the budget item and have a look? Who knows what we’ll find?
What the republicans bring to the proceedings is a plan for nothing less than social reconstruction. They plan to wrest control over government so they can kill it. The Teahadist wing and their antebellum jive appeals to a subset of the electorate more at ease with the Luddite ideals of the John Birch Society than to the social ideals of the 20th century.
I can’t believe that history will look favorably on the conservatives and their irretrievably antisocial doctrines. People who have benefitted in more ways than they understand from the massive civil infrastructure of the USA now want to stop contributing to it.
It’s too bad there isn’t a libertarian confederate homeland for them to go to. They could spend their days privatizing themselves silly while sitting there in the shade, counting their Krugerrands and sipping Mint Julips. Wait a minute, that sounds pretty relaxing …