Channeling His Inner Ebenezer


While the political press had a good laugh aboutEtch-a=Sketches, Paul Ryan doubled down on his screw the poor vision of our country.

But it’s one thing to say to hell with ’em, and quite another to pretend it’s “for their own good.”

Ed Kilgore:

I know that some conservatives with the best will in the world have concluded that smaller government, lower and more regressive taxation, and in general a world where private forces exert more power produce a better society for everybody. I don’t agree, but I can respect their position. But when they befoul it with this sanctimonious claptrap about concern for the “moral fiber” of lesser breeds, it makes me crazy…

You know, much as I dislike theviral adolescent-intoxicating legacy of Ayn Rand—you know, the author ofAtlas Shrugged, the book Paul Ryan used to (or for all I know, still does)require his staff to read—at least she had the honesty to disclaim any pity for the poor. Indeed, she called altruism the one great moral abomination, as bad as “looting.” I’d have a lot more respect for Paul Ryan if he loudly and proudly embraced the “virtue of selfishness” himself, and didn’t pretend he wanted to cut food stamps in order to improve the lives of the working poor through some character-building hunger.

7 thoughts on “Channeling His Inner Ebenezer

  1. Btu, but, but that wouldn’t let me feel morally superior.
    Something about the great egality of the law which forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping on the streets, begging for food, etc.

  2. It’s simple: they all read George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language”, and learned how to camouflage their most disgusting acts with a lot of sweet-sounding bullshit…Y’know, like saying that humiliating women who want an abortion is simply about a “women’s right to know.” Concern trolls, indeed.
    These people get an A+ in Hypocrisy and Dissembling…

  3. If less government by itself was a good thing, then New Orleans immediately after the flood should have been a magnet for conservatives…

  4. Dumb Question: How come those who advocate less govt intervention for the people (and the moral good of the people) are those who advocate harsher penalties for non-white-collar crime (for their own good and needed to get their attention) are the same who advocate that corporations (run by people) need fewer legal restrictions and fewer laws because the people in corporations will always choose the high ground?
    Best logic that gave us Enron.

Comments are closed.