Opinion: Following Jim Bunning’s recent example

Advertisement

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Senator Jim Bunning, unaccompanied (or should I say “unencumbered?”) by Republican support, temporarily stopped the passage of a $10 billion bill that would extend unemployment benefits to about one million people, demanding to know how a bankrupt government can afford to support the people from whom it took jobs.

He held up the routine process of looting our country for an infinitesimal amount of time.

He deserves a Presidential Medal of Honor. Instead, he is mocked and marginalized.

Fourth–string Senator Jay Rockefeller sniffed at this breach of bureaucratic etiquette. To him, it’s “just awful” to imagine anyone going without government checks for two days.

In the real world, people are usually paid every two weeks.

Then again, try explaining this concept to a debt–addicted gang of 535 men and women, who receive salaries extorted from unwilling taxpayers, who are able to vote themselves a raise any time they please, a raise mysteriously disconnected from any measure of competence, including keeping the oath of their office.

Reality, like truth, isn’t considered a virtue in their ranks. Just look at how they treat Ron Paul.

The spectacle of the liberals clamoring to be the first to condemn Bunning is unsurprising.

First they came for Ryan Sorba, then they came for Bunning, and you know the rest. No one’s speaking up for these guys. We run into the same problem we did with Congress, though. It is awfully hard to reason with a mindless mob, especially one that includes members who want kids killed in the womb and pedophiles saved from society’s rightful incarceration of their sorry behinds.

Paul Krugman leads the charge, calling Bunning’s stand “immoral.”

Right.

He and his liberal legislators, champions of reckless, deficit spending and abortion on demand, are the vanguards of morality. It’s difficult to think a Keynesian economist, especially a Nobel Prize winning one, as ethical or honest, anyway. Krugman seems to have won his prize precisely because he knows how to best wreck an economy––namely ours. Maybe the Nobel Committee gave it to him as a cleverly–disguised warning to the entire world: “Whenever this idiot starts talking, plug your ears and recite Mises and Hayek from memory AS LOUDLY AS YOU CAN.”

Maybe prizes were given out on Opposites Day.

A girl can dream.

In this manic frenzy, there is no neutrality, no room for kind words or even intelligent discussion. If you’re not stomping your feet to the tune of the liberal stampede, you are filled with “hate.” (Just ask Vanity Fair.) Everything is reduced to an emotional level. Internal, questionable motives rule; external, iron logic means nothing.

So what if the ten percent of the federal budget is dedicated solely to paying interest on its egregious debt?

So what if the government loans itself money, scrambles to pay itself interest on its own IOUs on time, and cooks the books while pretending nothing shifty is going on?

So what if taxpayers can only pray that the printed strips of paper and cloth hold out enough for them to buy gold, silver and oil? And unlicensed guns? And food?

None of these flagrant acts of high treason ever seem to draw the ire of the liberals.

I guess nothing in the world is more infuriating or more, uhh, “immoral,” than watching a retired baseball pitcher making the rest of the Senate stay up past midnight so he can wonder aloud how it’s supposed to pay for the bills it doesn’t read or write.

Yep, nothing makes me want to whip up a mob more than seeing an elderly old man making a futile last stand against an irredeemable horde of bandits. Nothing worse than that.

Katie McHugh is a member of the class of 2013. She can be reached at [email protected]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email