Survival of the richest

Survival of the Richest

by digby


Man, Chris Wallace really, really wants to make my old age nasty, brutish and short. (Sadly, at my age, my chances of becoming a millionaire are almost a high as my chances of becoming an Olympic gold medal ice dancer.)

WALLACE: "So now, as a non-career politician, as the anti-Barbara Boxer, you tell me specifically what are you going to do to cut the billions, the trillions, of dollars in entitlements?"

FIORINA: ... See, Chris, I have to -- you know, Chris, I have to say, with all due respect, you're asking a typical political question. [...]


WALLACE: Ms. Fiorina, but that's where the money is. The money is in Medicare. The money is in Social Security. We've got the baby boomers coming. There is going to be a huge explosion of entitlement spending, and you call it a political question when I ask you to name one single entitlement expenditure you're willing to cut.

FIORINA: Chris, I believe that to deal with entitlement reform, which we must deal with, we ought to put every possible solution up on the table, except we should be very clear that we are not going to cut benefits to those nearing retirement or those in retirement.

But having said all of that, for years and years, career politicians, frankly, of both parties have said, Oh, no, the only way to cut spending is to deal with entitlements. It's the political third rail. And then they never get about the business of cutting out waste and inefficiency. They never get to the point of banning earmarks.

WALLACE: But we've been talking about waste, fraud and inefficiency --

FIORINA: Exactly. Exactly.


WALLACE: -- for 30 years. I covered Ronald Reagan in 1980 when he talked about it. There isn't that kind of money in waste, fraud, and inefficiency.

FIORINA: But you know what, Chris? The budget just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger. And every year as it gets bigger, particularly in the last two, there is more waste, fraud and inefficiency. And you're right, nobody ever gets around to it. It's why voters in California and, I believe, a lot of voters all across the country are tired of career politicians. [...]

WALLACE: I'm going to try -- I'm going to try one last time and if you don't want to answer it, Ms. Fiorina, you don't have to. [...] You're not willing to put forward a single benefit -- I'm not even talking about the people that are 60 or, let alone, 65 or 70. I'm talking about people under 55.

You're not willing to say there's a single benefit eligibility for Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security that you're willing to say, Yeah, I would cut that?

FIORINA: blah, blah, blah, conversation, bipartisan, yadda yadda yadda.

Granted, Fiorina is a typical Republican putz and she loves to talk about cutting spending and eliminating the deficit and yet has no answers for how we're supposed to do it. But the arrogant and wealthy Wallace's lies, distortions and arrogant insistence that "that's where the money is" and that people are gonna have to pony up is just sickening.

Sadly, his point of view isn't a FOX phenomenon. It's beltway conventional wisdom.


.