This page was last updated on January 22, 2010.
Debt panel; Editorial; Beaver County Times; January 22, 2010.
When the Times opines about deficit spending, it can’t be taken seriously. After all, editorials alternately oppose and support deficit spending. I covered this phenomenon in my critique of “Under control.” Read the editorial closely and it’s simply an attempt to bash Republicans.
“Just look at the GOP’s intransigence on health-care reform and how it has profited from it politically, starting with Tuesday’s senatorial election in Massachusetts.” If we are to believe what the Times claims its position is “on health-care reform,” shouldn’t the Times be happy? After all, all the Democrat bills are/were diametrically opposite to the Times claimed position.
Favoring independent commissions, panels, et cetera is an old position of Times editorials, as in 2006’s “Too political.” In my critique of that editorial I wrote, “If our elected officials can’t do their jobs, we need to replace them. Appointing a bunch of unelected boobs is running away from responsibility.” The editorial tells us “It would take 14 members to report a plan, thereby requiring some degree of bipartisanship.” I guess we were supposed to forget the previous paragraph said President Obama would appoint the commission. Does anyone doubt Mr. Obama’s appointments would reflect his agenda? Does anyone doubt Mr. Obama could find eight left-leaning “Republicans?”
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.