Bunning - help me figure this out

OK OK, so

we have ONE senator, who has stopped payments to the unemployed (i.e. "poor") AND stopped highway construction (isn't that all the JOBS CREATION that the Republos are so desirous of?) because he SAYS that he doesn't want the deficit to increase.

YET!!! He basically has stated (and I think the others have caved to this demand, we'll know in a day or so) that he would stop his opposition to paying the unemployed and letting highways get built IF the government agrees to stop taxing estates over $7mil.

SO, if these American buggers can follow the logic, basically, Bunning is saying that he

will SPEND MORE

if the government TAKES LESS.

Let me spell this out for you - make it simple so you can understand it: you tell your family that you're not going to buy food for them until you start bringing home less money. And when that pay cut comes, then you'll go out and buy more things.

Wouldn't your spouse kick you out on your arse if you tried that?

Shouldn't we do the same to these guys.

I tell you this, pleebs, if you seriously vote for people who will only spend money to help the American workers ONLY when they get tax breaks for their rich buddies, AND WHEN THEY TRY TO SELL IT TO YOU IN A PACKAGE OF "I'M TRYING TO BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE" then you deserve the crud government you get.

Let me say it one more time, just so you get it right:

Bunning says he wants to be fiscally responsible.

Bunning stopped payouts.

Bunning will agree to payouts if estate taxes are cut.

Cut estate taxes = government gets less money.

That means less money for things like, oh, I dunno, UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION.

So, he's willing to contribute to a scenario that would decrease income and increase expenses, which is directly contradictory to his statement of wanting not to increase the deficit.

He's a liar - and the American people are buying the lie. I mean, you have to know you're being lied to.

Don't you?

Please, tell me you know.

I'm drowning here!

VG