Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) says we can't fund the Children's Health Insurance Program because "we don't have money anymore" but apparently also because "I have a rough time wanting to spend billions and billions and trillions of dollars to help people who won’t help themselves." Always they bring the WE'RE BROKE!!!!!! rubbish, plus he had the cojones to say this right as he was shepherding a tax "reform" bill through the Senate that would reduce federal revenues by (in the Joint Committee on Taxation's rather charitable assessment) over $100 billion annually! So the question is this: does Mr. Hatch really regard children as "people who won't help themselves," or was he just deflecting into general rightwingmoocherspeak? It doesn't really matter, I suppose, because either way, it's bad argument. As a right-wing bumper sticker reminded me many years ago: know thy enemies, for they are your leaders. (If they would only just be our representatives, rather than the representatives of their big donors, we'd have no reason to hate them.)
Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley is little better, not just trotting out the long-discredited notion that estate tax repeal will "help family farms" but also that "not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies." We already know that folks who "spend every darn penny" usually have to, and if they don't meet their bills it's because they don't get paid enough, but a philosophy that exalts investing and disdains spending is also a philosophy that says poor people are worse people than rich people, which, given the childish way Our Glorious Elites constantly act, we also know is not true. By the way, if I suggest that this is Mr. Grassley's actual political philosophy, please understand that I'm giving him credit. After all, most mammon-worshiping right-wingers want to shelter investment from taxation merely out of greed.
Surprise, surprise, the President of Honduras, who probably would have lost his recent attempt at re-election if it were a fair one, is now using forces trained by the United States to put down folks who are protesting the election results. You know, by instituting curfews, launching tear gas into crowds, and arresting people who bang saucepans, in addition to the usual fighting and killing. Anyone whose heart went out to the million Iranians who took to the streets at great personal risk after Mr. Ahmadinejad's "re-election" in 2009 has no business tut-tutting the protestors in Honduras. (They have no business tut-tutting American masked protestors, either, if they applaud the TIGRES.) And if you think this couldn't happen here, recall that our 46% President says he lost the popular vote because three million people voted illegally. Of course, if Democrats actually nominate an economic populist for President in 2020, instead of some centrist weakling who "can win," they might just make moot anything Mr. Trump might be tempted to try.