BCT Editorial – 5/9/10

If you follow Times editorials, this is one of those that can make you want to wrap your head in duct tape to keep it from exploding.

Does the Times really expect its readers to forget Times editorials support just about every spending proposal that comes down the pike and aren’t serious about spending cuts?  Heck, as recently as early April the Times advised, “Let’s see what April’s revenues are before slashing state’s budget.”  As I noted several days ago, “Pennsylvania collected $2.9 billion in General Fund revenue in April, which was $390 million, or 11.8 percent, less than anticipated.  Fiscal year-to-date General Fund collections total $22.8 billion, which is $1.1 billion, or 4.6 percent, below estimate.”

As for more spending, the most recent example, and the biggest, is Times support for the $1+ trillion Obamacare entitlement.

Further, since we elected President Obama, we’ve been treated to at least seven Times editorials supporting deficit spending, including “Last resort,” “Limited options,” “Budget crunch,” “Making the grade,” “Failing grade,” “Move it along,” and “Double-dip recession.”

Please explain to me how the Times can support more spending one day, cry crocodile tears about deficits and debt the next day, and then expect to be taken seriously.