More mushy thinking from a die-hard liberal

E.J. Dionne is one of my least favorite writers, not because he's a bad writer, but because I disagree with just about everything he writes. His columns are so left-wing biased that the facts seem to get in his way.

(Of course, we all tend to do this with our built-in psychological filters, but my experience shows me it more pronounced with liberals. Of course, it could be my conservative filters, but I'm betting not. Being aware of them is the first step toward intellectual honesty.)

But when it comes to liberalism, even E.J. admits that liberals are avoiding that label today.

Conservatives have had great success in discrediting liberalism, to the point that most liberals dare not call themselves by their own name.

E.J., liberalism has discredited itself. After 70 years of liberal policies, look where we are: high unemployment, high crime, high poverty rates (after 4 trillion dollars, have we lowered it any?), etc. And we are being taxed out the gazoo, with government -- currently run by the left-wing of the Democrat party -- wanting more. Much more. When will this madness stop?

There comes a time when government sucks so much out of the private sector, that the private sector can't create any growth. Everyone gets poorer.

He then goes on to blame the economic downturn on Wall Street (a favorite punching bag for liberals).

...they were the high fliers who tanked the American economy.

Not quite true, but this is where the left points their finger. It really was liberal government policies mucking with the market -- and greedy business people -- that caused the meltdown in financial markets.

If government had stayed out, and let those firms fail, things would have been bad for the short term, but better for the long term. You don't reward failure; this is a die-hard liberal belief though, and you'll never convince them otherwise. Just look at the policy of our schools in which no one fails.

Then he excuses Obama's deficit.

In the short run, deficits make sense to boost the economy. In the long run, they will have to be dealt with.

I wish someone could point to one example of where higher government spending actually boosted any economy, any where, at any time. Come on, I'm waiting, E.J.

A higher deficit because goverment lowered taxes so that more people had more money would be beneficial. Tax cuts have always worked. But government has not.

Here's a biggy.

This also has the benefit of challenging the Tea Party movement to come clean on whether it really is populist, or merely using populist rhetoric to pursue the same old low-tax, low-regulation agenda that got us into this mess.

Low-tax, low-regulation got us into this mess? This is so far from the truth that it amazes me that anyone can think this, let alone someone who is educated and writes for the Washington Post.

This is one of the starkest differences between liberals and non-liberals. Liberals want big government, conservatives don't.

Those of you out there who don't pay attention to what liberals write should start doing so now. It makes for some interesting reading.