Understanding Politicians and Other Drunkards

by Sean Purcell

The 2011 budget is now done… and before the 2011 fiscal year actually ended too!  Not a moment too soon either because coming up next, our politicians will debate a double header:  Raising the Debt Ceiling plus The 2012 Budget.  There’s going to be a lot of talking… 

Sometimes what’s needed when watching important national, economic debates (or “The Theater of the Absurd” as we refer to it around the dinner table), is a frame of reference; a way to make sense of the contradictions and false promises made by members of Congress and the President.  I’ve used one for a while now that provides me a great deal more clarity than I might otherwise have listening with a passive ear.  It’s called The Clarity of the Drunkard, and the premise is really quite simple: Drinking = Spending.

When you hear a politician speak, you must learn to recognize where they are on The Clarity of the Drunkard scale.  There are really only 4 possibilities: 1) never drinks, or drinks responsibly; 2) is a drunkard and is probably drunk right now; 3) is a drunkard who is being confronted about their drinking (and may or may not be drunk right now); 4) and finally, is a drunkard who is in recovery.  Let’s take a quick look at how to use this scale:

• Never Drinks / Drinks Responsibly – This covers a very wide range of people, including most of us who never run for office and even many who run for office for the first time.  This may also cover some percentage of the (appropriately named) Tea Party politicians, though that remains to be seen.  This person doesn’t spend too much and, when confronted with a scenario that their spending will exceed their income, makes a very sober and rational decision: They rob a bank… No, no, I’m sorry, I’m moving ahead of myself to some of the other stages.  No, what this person does is STOP SPENDING.  It makes sense and it’s easy to understand and when you hear someone say something that rational, you can assign them to this end of the scale.  Unfortunately, an understanding of Group 1 provides almost no clarity when listening to politicians.  Moving on…

• Drunkard – Understanding this group will clarify the vast majority of what you hear and read during these debates.  A Drunkard loves to spend; you could make a very strong argument they are addicted to spending.  This person, very simply, doesn’t make much sense because… you know… they’re drunk!  For example, I recently watched Congressman David Schweikert (R) AZ, explain in an interview on Freedom Watch why he would most likely vote to raise the debt ceiling.  “What happens,” he said “if we stand firm, and we do what’s right on the debt ceiling; vote, and the bond markets go nuts on us?” He goes on to explain that a 1 point rise in the interest rate equals an extra $100 billion in debt service.  Gee, that sounds pretty logical.  But less than 2 minutes later, same interview, when asked what he wants in return for raising the debt ceiling, replies: “Got to get something that tells the markets we’re serious; because this game of raising the debt, containing the spending … little marginal items; eventually the world out there is not going to buy our bonds.”

Uh… let me get this straight.  We have to raise the debt ceiling because we don’t want the markets to go nuts, but if we continue doing things like raising the debt ceiling… the bond markets will go nuts.  What?  Oh, wait a minute; let’s apply our scale.  A drunk says he must keep drinking or things are going to get ugly.  But a drunk will also tell you he must stop drinking or… things are going to get ugly.  See how easy this is?  Rep. Schweikert is not an illogical, almost psychotic man; he simply has a spending problem and like all drunkards, he makes very little sense when under the influence.

• Understanding the third group and applying the scale to them is a little trickier.  These are the people addicted to spending – normally drunk – and being confronted about their drinking.  They will say almost anything you want to hear:

“I don’t have a problem.”

“This is social drinking / for the social good.”

“I’m not hiding anything.”

“I know how bad it is, and I’m going to get my house in order. I swear.”

“Listen, I’m not like you. I can handle this and it’s not affecting me.” (That’s the Tiger Blood argument made famous recently by Charlie Sheen.)

“Okay, I’m going to make some changes.  I’m only going to drink on the weekends / I’ll only spend when it’s important.”

“Starting right now, I’ll spend / drink less.” (This last one is really insidious; can you imagine watching someone, over the course of just one evening, drink a case of beer and a fifth of rum, tell you they understand your concern and so they’re going to start drinking one less beer and one less shot per evening?)

• For a prime example of how to use this part of the scale to make perfect sense of someone, tune in to the President’s speech tomorrow night.  At first it will sound great, full of all the things we might want to hear.  But then apply the scale: is this someone who spends responsibly or never spends at all?  No.  Is this someone making no sense and contradicting themselves?  No.   Is this someone telling me exactly what I want to hear: promising to drink one less beer out of the case or changing from rum to vodka?  Is this someone telling me spending is bad, but he can handle it?  It’s only social spending?  Is this person swearing he’ll clean up his act (has already started even) while simultaneously ordering more liquor?  Hmmm, that makes a lot more sense now that I understand this third group.

• Finally, we have Drunkard in Recovery.  You don’t need to use this part of the scale very much, because you rarely hear from people in recovery.  You see, a spending drunkard in recovery is a politician who has been voted out of office

Read more at Stop Taxing US