Jim Bunning is in my Hall of Fame for putting principle before politics in standing alone against the extension of unfunded federal unemployment benefits. The move left the Washington Post's Dana Milbank to ponder Bunning's sanity and ABC News' Jonathan Karl to stalk the elderly Kentuckian. Where are the reporters to question the sanity of running up the largest deficit as a percentage of the total economy since World War II? The feigned outrage on this issue is a bit much, particularly when considering that the senator from Kentucky voiced objection to unanimous consent, something that's easily overcome by the majority. Forty-one senators can bring the august body to a standstill. But one? Get a grip. It's not as though he's pondering aloud heretical questions like "Where in the Constitution does it authorize such an expenditure?" The former major league pitcher merely asks that his colleagues--Republican and Democrat--pay for the program. As Bunning quite sanely points out, "If we can't find $10 billion to pay for it, we're not going to pay for anything. We will not pay for anything fully on the floor of the U.S. Senate."

And what are the collectivists' solutions? Mo' taxes!! Or, more accurately, mo' socialism through mo' taxes.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/56789-afl-cio-dems-push-new-wall-street-tax

Yep, this oughta bring the economy around. Especially when the Obama administration is shooting for deficits in the range of 25% of GDP.

It's all going according to plan.

So much for Paygo, eh?

To the Democrats, that sounds great but far be it from them to actually be practical about it.

It's like Obama saying that he wants to get the deficit to within 3% of GDP while spending like a drunken sailor with a stolen credit card. Or a drunken George Bush, as the case may be.