Fiscal cliff, sure, and in a few hours, if I don't appease it, my sofa is going to chase me around the house and kill me.

I disagree with your assertion that

..the American electorate is not the sharpest pencil in the box

I do agree with your statement that

This is not the time to be cutting government spending. It is time to increase it in stimulative ways. But the Media either does not understand this, or instead chooses to ignore it.

The dummies are the leaders in government. Including the president. Who is presenting the electorate with accurate information? Who is using the bully pulpit to educate and inform the electorate?

WASHINGTON -- The corporate CEOs who have made a high-profile foray into deficit negotiations have themselves been substantially responsible for the size of the deficit they now want closed.
...
During the past few days, CEOs belonging to what the campaign calls its CEO Fiscal Leadership Council -- most visibly, Goldman Sachs' Lloyd Blankfein and Honeywell's David Cote -- have barnstormed the media, making the case that the only way to cut the deficit is to severely scale back social safety-net programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security -- which would disproportionately impact the poor and the elderly.

What are they willing to contribute? They will gladly allow the government to

As part of their push, they are advocating a "territorial tax system" that would exempt their companies' foreign profits from taxation, netting them about $134 billion in tax savings, according to a new report from the Institute for Policy Studies titled "The CEO Campaign to `Fix' the Debt: A Trojan Horse for Massive Corporate Tax Breaks" -- money that could help pay off the federal budget deficit.

Yet the CEOs are not offering to forgo federal money or pay a higher tax rate, on their personal income or corporate profits. Instead, council recommendations include cutting "entitlement" programs, as well as what they call "low-priority spending."
...
while Cote strongly recommends cutting those benefits, when it comes to the tax obligations of corporations, he's clear about what he wants: a corporate tax rate of zero.

"From a fairness perspective, nobody would be able to stand [a zero tax rate on corporate profits]," but if the U.S. really wanted to create jobs, he said this spring, "we would have the lowest rate possible."

A few heaping helpings of "middle-class taxes are going to go up over $2,000!" and pretty soon, the public is panting right along with the media in urging the Congress to "do something."  Considering how often they don't "do" anything, and when they do, how wrong-headed they are, I sometimes can't believe we would entrust anything of value to these chuckleheads.

Here's the question: where's the real leverage?  Answer: it should be obvious that Democrats have much more leverage all the way around, but especially with respect to reinstituting the Bush rates on incomes below $250K, if they let the clock strike midnight.  

So, why is it that so many Democratic voices keep talking about putting "entitlement reform" on the table in order to get those tax rates?  Because the end game isn't about lower tax rates for us little people.  

Duh.

And why isn't the payroll tax cut in the conversation at all?  We're being led to believe that we desperately need to keep the lower rates on incomes under $250K in order to prevent the economy from slowing down, but what effect does reducing wages by 2% have on that same economy when the payroll tax cut goes away on January 1?  

We are just pawns in this political game - not that that's anything radically new, but the stakes are getting higher, and we're the ones who will be paying the price even if the Dems "win."  

And, we share the burden and austerity reins supreme.   Better than B.S. (Bowles/Simpson).  This should  be just what will save the economy.  No government stimulus.  So what's the problem?  

Too much austerity?   Actually balanced?     It would seem perfect but for the increased taxes on the rich, and no cuts for  Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security (i.e., means testing, change in eligibility age, increase in premiums).  We will have to work on that part.

I come by this honestly (my mom was a proofreader back in the day, and my sister still is).

People who report these types of stories must correct the dialog focus, as in,