What if the beast you "drown in the bathtub" is also the source of stuff you need?

GOP-elected House freshmen, most with Tea Party support, are acting as if you can address single issues and forget about the collateral consequences. The Wisconsin senator, Ron Johnson, who defeated Russ Feingold, denied that they were over-reaching.

“What we are facing is an American public that is really on the Republican side in their desire, on a macro basis, to cut spending, balance the budget and show real fiscal restraint.”

Yes, but that same American public also wants a lot of those things that you're drastically cutting -- and, remember, the American public says, "Don't mess with my Social Security and Medicare."

Obama has responded to the changed political climate by focusing on spending cuts. His, of course, are more judicious; and he's tried to beef up things that will create jobs. But it is a major swing away from what most economists were saying just a few months ago: this is not the time to worry about the deficit; get control of unemployment, get people back to work, and then tackle the deficit.

As E. J. Dionne, Jr. writes in today's AJC:

You would never know that it's [the conversation in Washington] taking place at a moment when unemployment is still at 9 percent, when wages for so many people are stagnating at best, . . .

No, we are acting here as if the only real problem the Unites States confronts is the budget deficit; the only test of leadership is whether a president is willing to make big cuts in programs that protect the elderly; . . .

Any analysis of the economic struggles many elderly people endure would get in the way of the "greedy geezer" story line being spun to justify big cuts in Medicare and Social Security.

Thanks to the tea party, we are now told that all our problems will be solved by cutting government programs.

Shades of Reagan's "welfare queen," a favorite anecdote about a woman arriving in her limousine to collect her welfare check. Of course it was bogus -- but that didn't matter. It was the perfect "justification" for "pulling the plug" on welfare as we knew it.

Yes, Obama could use his bully pulpit to better effect in educating the public about the basics of deficit spending in a time of high unemployment. But -- let's face it -- the fourth estate has a lot to do with whether they amplify that bully pulpit or muffle it. And the media have jumped full force into amplifying a different message -- the one that's making news as these Tea Party members of Congress make their mark.

Cutting government spending makes intuitive good sense. But who is standing up and demanding that the cuts not disproportionately hurt the lower and middle class workers?

Well, Obama is, for one. But is that the message the media amplifies? Definitely not.

We are in a time of pandering to the lowest common denominator when it comes to "news" on TV. Even the blogosphere is not immune. You can find thoughtful, progressive analysis, but you have to go find it. What grabs the headlines are the antics and the bloviating of the "spending cuts" crowd.

Ralph