Intrepid Truth Vigilante Andrea Mitchell hosted intrepid Director of the National Economic Council, Gene Sperling, earlier today to press him on Republican and Villager concerns that President Obama’s SOTU ideas for letting the Poors have a little extra cake might cause History’s Greatest Evil, the National Debt That Nobody Actually Cares About, to asplode and kill us all even faster than the roving drug gang/Muslim death squads will after Shaka Zulu Obama takes all our police and guns away, thank you Wayne for that not at all insane rant. I can’t get the video to embed (HECK OF A JOB, WORDPRESSY!), or even to play consistently on MSNBC’s own website, but if you click on over you might try watching it. According to the accompanying article:
On Wednesday, Gene Sperling, director of the White House National Economic Council, joined Andrea Mitchell Reports to discuss that criticism, which he called “political remarks” that “are not based on any substantive facts at all.” Sperling, who serves as the assistant to the president for economic policy, proceeded to list examples of Obama’s past commitments to cutting the deficit. Mitchell then pressed Sperling to answer the question of how the president planned to pay for his new proposals, which include expanding pre-kindergarten programs, revamping the federal aid system, and boosting manufacturing.
Yes, OK, except that’s not exactly what she asked about. Watch the video, and after Sperling goes over past deficit reduction efforts and Mitchell stops him, you get this from Ms. Mitchell (my transcription):
That wasn’t the question, though. The question is, what about the new proposals that he made last night, because…what they’re saying is, regardless of what was proposed, and negotiated, and never, um, reached agreement before, what about the new proposals, for pre-K, the new proposals for the minimum wage increase. How do you pay for the things that he specified in the State of the Union?
Now, it’s at these moments when I think that if I were in an important job where I got interviewed by teevee personalities, like Gene Sperling has, first of all I would probably get a better haircut, but second of all I would immediately lose my job when I began shouting, “OH HAI, LADY WHO SOMEHOW HAS AN INFLUENTIAL AND LUCRATIVE JOB WITH A MAJOR NEWS NETWORK! DID YOU KNOW THAT THE MINIMUM WAGE IS PAID BY REGULAR BOSS PEOPLE TO THEIR WORKER FOLKS, AND THAT THE GOVERNMENT DOESN’T ACTUALLY HAVE TO SPEND MORE MONEY WHEN THE MINIMUM WAGE GOES UP? IS THERE ANYBODY HOME IN THERE? SHOULD I COME BACK WHEN IT’S NOT “STUPID HOUR WITH ANDREA MORON”?
To his credit, Gene Sperling did not do this, which is why he is where he is and I am not, although probably the fancy economics degrees and generally higher intellect also figure in there somehow, blah blah, it’s a rich tapestry. Instead, after arguing that part of the goal of deficit reduction should be opening up new budgetary space for worthwhile projects, he said, “…and the minimum wage has no government cost at all, that’s just a commitment that we, as a people, believe that if you work full-time, you work hard, you should be able to raise your family in dignity, not in poverty.”
And with that, Andrea Mitchell made her best You Win This Time face and muttered, “Fair point about the minimum wage; that comes out of the private sector, obviously, and some would argue will cost jobs, but w-we can debate that another time” before quickly changing the subject to “What about the sequester?” Look, I get that Ms. Mitchell’s (never disclosed on TV) husband, the Great Sage of Big Shitpile, must be mortally opposed to the minimum wage on principle, because Moochers or whatever, but how does Andrea Mitchell hold down a seemingly prestigious journamalism job at NBC asking questions like that?