Matt Steinglass considers the cognitive dissonance inherent in Judson Philips' objection to cuts in defense spending, because building aircraft carriers would put people to work, yet Mr. Phillips doesn't want the U.S. to raise more taxes or increase borrowing authority.
How do you pay for a $9 billion aircraft carrier if the government can't seek greater revenue or mortgage the cost?
Beyond the paradox there, it's worth noting that Mr. Phillips own words would support the notion that government spending is stimulative. Yet, I doubt he'd be on board for another stimulus bill despite the fact that the cost to the U.S. of borrowing money is almost zero.
Judson Phillips and his ilk aren't serious people.