BCT Editorial – 5/18/07

This page was last updated on May 19, 2007.

Flip-flop; Editorial; Beaver County Times; May 18, 2007.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Talk about flip-flopping.”

[RWC] Since the liberals’ horse and the Times’ recommendation [Sen. John “I voted for it before I voted against it” Kerry (D-MA)] in the 2004 election exposed himself as one of history’s all-time flip-floppers, they have since tried to apply this label to conservatives and Republicans whether supported by the facts or not.

“The Associated Press reports President Bush has struck a hard line on spending, warning Democrats in Congress that their efforts to boost domestic programs such as education would provoke vetoes this fall.

“In a letter to lawmakers, White House budget chief Rob Portman vowed that President Bush will veto appropriations bills - the 12 annual spending measures funding Cabinet agency budgets - that bust Bush’s budget targets.

“We’ll pause for a minute until the giggles die down.

“This sudden conversion to fiscal conservatism comes from a president who watched the borrow-and-spend Republicans who controlled the House and Senate go on a six-year spending binge that piled an enormous amount of debt on future generations of Americans. He did not veto a single spending bill in any of those years.”

[RWC] While I wouldn’t put President Bush in the “fiscal conservative” category, the idea he spent out of control is a myth not supported by the facts. Please read my critique of “Fiscal lushes” for details.

“Of course, the difference is that Democrats now control Congress. We get it. In Bush’s simplistic Manichaean worldview, Republican spending, good; Democratic spending, bad.”

[RWC] In case you don’t know (as I did not), Manichaeism is an obscure religion founded in Persia in the third century AD.

You have to get a kick out of this paragraph. To the best of my recollection, just about everything President Bush and Republicans have done has generated a negative editorial. In Times-speak, “Republican, bad; liberal, good.” I’ve heard someone comment, “Listen to what liberals accuse Republicans of doing, and that’s actually what the liberals are doing.” This paragraph appears to support that hypothesis.

“Our nation is going to pay for Bush’s fiscal irresponsibility, which is only compounded by his hypocrisy.”

[RWC] Amongst the Bush bashing, did you note what’s missing? The fiscally responsible Times (“We’ll pause for a minute until the giggles die down.”) didn’t have a bad word to say about Democrats adding to President Bush’s allegedly irresponsible budget. In other words, in the Times view, while it’s irresponsible for President Bush to submit a $2.9 trillion 2008 budget, it’s apparently OK for Democrats to pass an even larger budget. As a result, we have another example of why I believe Times editorials have no credibility.