Why is it that the so-called party of so-called fiscal discipline voted -- without a single dissenter -- AGAINST renewing the "pay-go" rule for Congressional legislation?
I can only conclude that, in its typical choice of party power over the public good, they think that deficits are good to run against. How else to explain it? And what does it tell us that after railing against deficits (and, of course, ignoring the reappearance of them under Bush ((and the emergence of them under Mount Reagan))) they, to a wo/man, line up like toy soldiers to vote against a plan to reduce them? You know what it tells us:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments back, moderated. Preference given for those who stay on topic.