Some Questions For Republicans

How can a party that asks its candidates to sign a “no tax increase” pledge be trusted to govern the country?  Isn’t such a pledge completely irresponsible — if not downright insane — given the current fiscal mess engendered by Republican wars, Republican tax cuts and Republican recessions?  Indeed, could anything be more hypocritical than a Republican blaming Barack Obama for our budgetary woes?  Aren’t the names “Ronald Reagan” and “George W. Bush” forever linked to the word “deficit”?

For the life of me, I can’t see how an intelligent person could even consider voting Republican until the party stops its brain-dead pandering on taxes.  How am I wrong here?  (And don’t bother mentioning the Blue Dog Democrats who support such nonsense.  They’re part of the problem.)

I would no more vote for a Republican — at least at the federal level — than I’d vote for a member of the Flat Earth Society.  They can be dog-catchers and maybe even governors, but we can’t let them make macroeconomic policy.

UPDATE: Paul Krugman relays some fresh Republican fiscal buffoonery.  I guess Henry Paulson was right:

Meetings with the Senate GOP were “a complete waste of time for us, when time was more precious than anything,” and Eric Cantor’s suggestion that TARP be replaced with an insurance program was met with outright derision from Paulson.  The usually un-snarky Paulson hits the minority whip particularly hard, ridiculing Cantor’s insurance plan by sarcastically suggesting the administration abandon efforts to prop up the collapsing financial system — just to try out Cantor’s unproven, “unformed” insurance scheme.  “I got a better idea. I’m going to go with Eric Cantor’s insurance program,” he writes. “That’s the idea to save the day.”

And Cantor is one of the party’s shining stars.  Ouch.

About these ads