Like John Cole, I just can’t quit reading Andrew Sullivan, even though he is completely unreadable for weeks at a time due to a hideous combination of hysteria and self-indulgent twaddle. And even when he is worth reading, there are snippets in his posts which cause my head to meet desk with extreme prejudice. Like this conclusion to a post about how Tea Partiers want government hands off their government benefits:
Yes, more taxes for the successful is far more popular than any cuts to actual benefits.
You’re right, Andrew. It’s got nothing to do with the fact that the wealthy are currently paying insanely low rates of tax and should be paying more, this is all about liberals indulging a pathological hatred of anyone they haven’t managed to get the government to enslave in their decadent enclaves on the coasts. Or something.
This is why I have such a problem with conservatives – money rules their world. As any sensible person who watched the financial crisis unfold will know, equating wealth with success is absolute horse crap, because the people who caused it were wealthy on a scale most ordinary people can’t begin to imagine. This attitude is understandable, if completely self-centred, from the people who would be taxed more, but I have never been able to comprehend why ordinary people who would in fact benefit from the uber-wealthy paying extra object to it on the principle that it is ‘unfair’ or ‘attacking the successful’. How is it fair that someone who earns a fraction of what a CEO of a corporation earns pays a bigger proportion of their salary in tax?
It should also be noted of course, that it’s very easy for a blogger in the DC media bubble to hold such opinions, seeing as he won’t ever have to struggle to pay the bills on time.