In today's NY Times, David leonhardt takes Republicans to task for not giving sufficient detail in their Pledge as to how they plan to cut spending. Imagine, the Times that saw nothing wrong with passing a three quarters of a trillioon dollar stimulus bill that no one had even read, now bemoans the lack of detail in the republican plan. the times that saw nothing wrong with having an Obamacare bill that according to Nancy Pelosi had to be enacted into law so that we could see what was in it, has a problem that there is not enough detail in the Republicans' Pledge to America. The Times that never once criticized the Democrats for playing all sorts of games so that they could get the CBO to say that Obamacare would save money has questions about why there is not more detail in the Republicans' plans. What utter nonsense!
The truth is that the Republicans make clear in their pledge where they would cut spending initially. They call for limiting discretionary federal spending to 2008 levels and returning both unspent TARP money and Stimulus money to the treasury, among other things. These moves would save something on the order of 250 billion dollars at a minimum in 2011.
For their part, Democrats have not come forward with a single cut in spending that they would support. Not so much as a dollar would be cut under any Democrat proposal. Where is the Times when it comes to asking about detail with regard to spending cuts by the Democrats?
I read the Times daily for almost 40 years. During that time, it went from being the paper of record to being a broken record that just repeats the talking points of the liberal Democrats. It no longer has news, it is basically all commentary. I no longer even bother to buy it. Why should I when I already know what it is going to say?
No comments:
Post a Comment