Yes, the title is a double entendre, by design.
I read a piece on page 14 of The Star Ledger today, that dying albatross of a New Jersey newspaper, hearkening back to halcyon times when the big name media told us what to think. A nameless opinion writer opined "slowly, yet sanely, some Republicans are snapping out of their mass hypnosis. One-by-one, they're renouncing allegianc to Grover Norquits and his paralyzing no-tax hike pledge." (emphasis added)
Whomever this writer is, he or she is clearly not living in reality. You see, there's the real world and then there's Filburt's world, and you don't have to be a rocket surgeon to know which is which. The author, hearafter dubbed Steve, talks about "Mitt Romney's eye-opening defeat." Eye-opening? Romney lost by 3% of the popular vote, which is well within the margin of error for all major polls. This was as close as the 2004 election, which no one said Bush won by a landslide, or that Bush shellacked Kerry, or that the Democrats need to seriously rethink their strategy.
Steve goes on to say "In a Rasmussen poll last week, 72 percent of Americans said they want tax hikes in the formula for reducing the nation's debt." Yeah, and about half of Americans pay no federal income tax, so they have no stake in the game and therefore their opinion's do not count. To put it another way, if 72 percent of Americans said they wanted to reintroduce slavery would that mean we should reintroduce slavery or that slavery was morally right?
"They realize 'compromise' isn't a dirty word." Compromise with insanity is, and increasing taxes in the middle of the worst economy since the Great Depression is insane. It all boils down to something called the Laffer Curve. When you raise taxes above a certain point (most economists agree that that point is about 33 percent) the amount of revenue the government takes in from taxes decreases because there is less incentive for people to work if they see all their hard earned money going out the crapper. Kennedy increased tax revenue by cutting tax rates, Reagan increased tax revenue by cutting tax rates, and Obama will send us into a new depression if he raises taxes.
Let's face it, most people have no understanding of basic economics, which is why they vote for things like birth control and food stamps. Young adults take student loans they can never pay off because society tells them they need a worthless degree to get a job they that does not exist so they can dream about living like millionaire playboys. Millions of people took home loans on houses they did not need and could not afford because society told them that home ownership was the "American dream," leading to the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007 that nearly collapsed the world economy.
The government is spending more money than any amount of tax hikes could solve. At the current rate of spending, even if 100 percent of all the assets of everyone who makes over $60,000 a year were confiscated it would only last a few weeks and permanently destroy the world economy. Federal debt is 114 percent of GDP with over $90 trillion in unfunded liabilities. World GDP is only $70 trillion, so even all the money in the entire world is not enough to solve this problem. Spending MUST be cut, drastically, or it really will be the end of the world. Only AFTER the Democrats agree to something like $600 billion in spending cuts, minimum, will it be morally acceptable for Republicans to agree to compromise to tax increases. If those spending cuts do not come FIRST you can raise taxes all you want and it will not make one iota of difference.