What K-Hammer Did NOT Say

This guy gets it, but doesn't follow through on his logic.

Obama's Democrats have become the party of no. Real cuts to the federal budget? No. Entitlement reform? No. Tax reform? No. Breaking the corrupt and fiscally unsustainable symbiosis between public-sector unions and state governments? Hell no.

Along the way, he makes another point which cannot be repeated too often--and here's where he pulls a punch:

In the private sector, the capitalist knows that when he negotiates with the union, if he gives away the store, he loses his shirt. In the public sector, the politicians who approve any deal have none of their own money at stake. On the contrary, the more favorably they dispose of union demands, the more likely they are to be the beneficiary of union largesse in the next election.

By inference, it's the Party of Government (POG--or more accurately, PIG). K-man did not say that "managers" get the same bennies that union members do, but he could have.

He did NOT say that Government is a monopoly. He did NOT say that only Government provides Government "services." He did NOT say that Government gets what it wants at the point of a gun.

He did NOT conclude: "The beneficiaries? Government employees. All of them."

He could have.