Do you favor tax cuts? If so, you're no better than a congressman wanting to slip the pants off a page. Worse, for that matter. That's the reasoning of Rosa Brooks, L.A. Times columnist. In Grand Old Party of Child Endangerment, Brooks argues that:
"Foley's acts may have damaged the handful of boys unfortunate enough to have attracted his attention, but the damage to children caused by his abuse of power is still far, far less than the damage to American children caused by this Congress' disastrous mismanagement of the American economy."
By "mismanagement," Brooks makes clear she largely means tax cuts:
"Though only the Foley scandal has generated substantial media coverage, the Republican-led Congress has a long record of child endangerment. Recall that from 2000 to 2005, Congress handed out tax breaks for the rich like hors d'oeuvres at a Republican fundraiser. They slashed the estate tax and the capital gains tax, selling these cuts with an advertising campaign that misled ordinary people into thinking the cuts were going to help working Americans, instead of just the rich."
You might have thought that believers in more welfare as the solution to poverty had gone the way of the carrier pigeon, but there is apparently at least one member of the species left extant out in L.A. Brooks wishes taxes were higher so we could pay for "meaningful spending on healthcare, job-creation and anti-poverty programs." Guess the trillions the federal government has spent on the programs she mentions, notably including the out-of-control Medicaid program, don't mean nuthin' to Brooks. With standards like that, buying her a birthday present could be a scary proposition.
To summarize: unless you buy into big government, you're a child abuser. Just one more way the MSM seeks to exploit L'Affaire Foley to promote its liberal agenda.