Socialism - 1
Free Market - 0
Over the Christmas holiday, our family was discussing the "compromise" budget deal as negotiated by Rep. Patty Murray and Rep. Paul Ryan - the deal that Tea Party Patriots - and veterans - are outraged about. One member of our family had watched Rep. Murray making the talk show rounds and was favorably impressed by Murray, who was touting the value of compromise. The Washington Times reported one of those TV interviews:
Sen. Patty Murray said Wednesday the budget she struck with Rep. Paul Ryan “wasn’t easy,” but it had to be done to rebuild trust in Washington and clear the way for work on tax and entitlement reform.
Mrs. Murray, Washington Democrat, said she knew both sides of the political spectrum would not be pleased with everything that went into the deal, but that’s the of compromise.
“In order to deal with the long-term challenges that our country faces … we have to have the trust of the American people, we have to have the trust of each other in Congress — in a divided Congress — to do that,” she told CNN’s “New Day.”
Compromise rebuilds trust, so compromise is a good thing. Or is it?
Here is another way to look at these "compromise" pieces of legislation. Imagine the United States is the football, and Congress represents the competing teams. The blue end-zone represents the Free Market, supposedly the goal of the conservative team (supposedly comprised of Republicans). The red end-zone represents socialism, the goal of the Democrats/Socialists/Progressives. One could make the case that the United States is already about 2/3 of the way down the field toward the Socialism goal line.
The "compromise" budget means that instead of Socialist/Progressive getting, say, a one yard advance, they got only an inch this time. But it is another inch in the wrong direction. These much-touted "compromises" (including tax hikes and elimination of sequestration budget restraints) end up being compromises for only one side: those who champion the free market. For Rep. Murray and her team, "the price of compromise" was pretty much zero.
# # #