This page was last updated on December 13, 2010.
Deficit attention; Editorial; Beaver County Times; December 12, 2010.
In writing about the “irony or hypocrisy of Republicans on deficit reduction,” you have to give the Times credit for chutzpah.
The Times has published a series of editorials that alternated between lobbying for more spending and complaining about spending. You’ll recall this paper cries crocodile tears about deficit spending and debt one day and the next day pitches a fit if anyone proposes spending cuts or adhering to “pay-go” rules. For at least the last four years preceding the 2008 election, and likely from the first day of the Bush administration, Times editorials constantly and correctly complained about federal deficit spending, the country’s growing debt, and the burden that debt puts on us and future generations. Referring to these complaints as crocodile tears, I questioned the motives in my critiques because Times editorials concurrently lobbied for more spending on just about every proposal that came down the pike. As I’ve noted previously, since we elected President Obama, Times editorials now support deficit spending. Seven previous examples are “Last resort,” “Limited options,” “Budget crunch,” “Making the grade,” “Failing grade,” “Move it along,” and “Double-dip recession.”
Note the editorial didn’t complain about extending unemployment handouts for 13 months without other spending offsets to keep the payouts deficit neutral. This is yet another example of Times hypocrisy.
The editorial concludes with “Extending the Bush-era tax cuts, … will cost the U.S. Treasury $3.7 trillion over 10 years.” In today’s other editorial, the Times told us “Because those cuts would come to an end, billions of dollars (in the form of increased taxes) would be taken out of the pockets of American workers. That’s not exactly what you want to happen in an economy that is struggling to get back on its feet.” Is your head ready to explode yet?
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.