Tuesday, July 22, 2014

What Andrew Sullivan Is Trying To Say Is...

After noting that the radical tax cut experiment in Kansas is in the process of ruining the state, while tax increases in California has been accompanied by job growth that is outpacing the national average, Mr. Sullivan concludes:
Obviously, there are other factors involved in both cases, and you should read the links to see the qualifications. But they are qualifications. We’ve know for a long time that cutting taxes does not help the government’s bottom line and has very limited potential for job growth given the historically low rates of tax in the US right now. But we didn’t know that tax increases could coexist with quite robust job growth and fiscal health. Count this as one more piece of evidence that re-thinking Republican economics on reformocon lines is a necessary but not sufficient initiative to alter GOP dogma.
Obviously no one could possibly have realized that higher taxes or tax increases could co-exist with job growth and fiscal health, unless, of course, they had ever read anything whatsoever about, say, the 1950 or, say, the 1960s or, y'know, the entire Clinton Administration. 

I believe what Mr. Sullivan is trying to say is that those fucking Liberal were right all along.


But not to worry: I'm suregMr. Sullivan will continue his proud tradition of ignoring Liberals (almost) altogether and focusing on trying to sail his little, paper reformocon boats the painted lake of True Conservatism for years and years to come.  


Batocchio said...

But we didn’t know that tax increases could coexist with quite robust job growth and fiscal health.

…Gah. A line from The Master springs to mind: "Pigfuck!"

I mean, all Sullivan had to do was study some basic history regarding taxes, fiscal policy, economics… or read Paul Krugman at any point during the past 20 plus years. It's not as if this was secret knowledge. It's just that the conservative vortex of stupid, evil and crazy has actively denied reality. (And let's note, British conservatives such as Sullivan, a Thatcher groupie, have been peddling the same crap as their American counterparts for decades.)

I suppose it's useful that he's come around, but holy FSM, wouldn't it be nice if conservative pundits actually earned their positions through merit and weren't always graded on such a steep curve?

Dan said...

Because we cut taxes during every war and oh actually we didn't until The Pretzldent Incident.
Puppies and ponies ever since.

Anonymous said...


As you know, Mr. Sullivan loves him some Ronnie Reagan. If he really admits that trickle down economics is a the massive fuckup it is, by admitting that the DFH’s were right, then what happens to his man crush on Ronnie and his favorite chicken choking fantasy.

He’ll be spending a long time never actually admitting that the Liberals were correct and a longer time hanging on to his Ronnie.

tmk said...

+1 Batocchio, AKA "What you mean 'WE', Paleface?!?!"

Sully is such a cossetted little prick...

--Mad in KS

dinthebeast said...

Braaaaains! Brrrraaaaiiins!
No brains? Still? Or maybe "I'll just be eating this, you weren't using it anyway..."

-Doug in Oakland

n1ck said...

Well, he can't just come out and say that conservatives are always wrong and that liberals are always right. His literal livelihood depends on his analysis being cogent.