So, Andrew Sullivan is ’taking on’ Instapundit? Heh.
Today, David Brooks has a fine column that makes many of the same points. And all Reynolds can talk about is pork and the stimulus! In fact, that's all he ever talked about. In this post bragging that he actually took on the GOP for their "big-spending ways", he cites two posts about pork. That is simply not serious; and never was. It was credentializing to cover for his own support for the most fiscally reckless administration in recent history. If you want to find an intellectually honest fiscal conservative who didn't shill for Bush for eight long years, read Bruce Bartlett, who is now honest enough to envisage a VAT. Or this blog, from 2001 onwards. I have some cred on this issue that extends beyond silly posturing about pork.
Sullivan says that the only thing Reynolds talks about or has ever talked about is pork. However, in the world according to Andrew, Reynolds may have said he was against pork during the Bush years but he didn’t really mean. Either Sullivan isn’t a long time Instapundit reader or he has a serious reading comprehension problem.
Anyone interested in Bruce Bartlett’s views on the VAT would do well to skip Sullivan’s link and go to here. That we are so deep in debt that enacting a VAT only points to how disastrous the Obama presidency has been. On the other hand, I could envision a VAT if it replaced our current system and was the only tax imposed. That would be fair. To enact it in addition to the current system would be burdensome to the breaking point.
As far as Sullivan’s cred, he did call Bush out on spending. If he wants to be “credible” he should call Obama as well. Calling out Glenn Reynolds, who has a long history of advocating fiscal prudence and responsibility is just silly.
Reaction at The Other McCain
Althouse has a poll up. Vote early, vote often