The GOP: Marginally Organized Sociopathy

Sorry for the two Chait links in a row, but this one on the House GOP savagely cutting food stamps while increasing agricultural subsidies that redistribute wealth upward in multiple respects is essential. Responding to the assertion by an NRO writer that “[t]he conservative war on food stamps is the most baffling political move of the year” because “[c]onservatives have suffered [not really –ed.] for years from the stereotype that they are heartless Scrooge McDucks more concerned with our money than other people’s lives”:

It’s not baffling, nor is the notion that the Republican Party protects the class interests of the rich a “stereotype.” It’s an analysis that persuasively explains the facts.

Indeed, it’s the only analysis that persuasively explains the facts. I’d prefer to abolish agriculture subsidies completely while keeping in place (or boosting) food rations for the poor. A libertarian might want to abolish both programs, a socialist might want to keep both. I’d disagree but attribute the disagreement to philosophical differences. What possible basis can be found to justify preserving subsidies for affluent farmers while cutting them for the poor? What explanation offers itself other than the party’s commitment to waging class war?

See Cohn as well. And while we’re here, let me recommend this one. The state of American politics in one sentence: the Republican Party is Richie Aprile, and the United States of America is Beansie Gaeta. (Republican donors are currently busting out Ramsey Outdoor.) And the crusade that the Republican Party may well blow up the world economy over? Providing health care to the non-affluent, which they oppose. If the typical congressional Republican was a heavy in a Frank Capra movie you’d consider the caricature overbroad.