Why are Republicans at war with themselves over drones but not Democrats over whether to budge on entitlements?
Why is John McCain a maverick when he's fighting with Republican leaders, but a Neanderthal when he takes on a rising Republican star?
Why is it reasoned to take on the president on drones, but unreasonable to take on the president on spending?
Why are Republicans always the ones who are inflexible when they won't budge on spending more, but Democrats are not when they don't budge on spending less?
Why is less spending stubborn and more spending not stubborn?
Why do the media praise those Republicans who work with the other side, but never Democrats when they work with the Republican side?
Why is it a sign of enlightenment for Republicans to ask for more revenues, but a sign of stupidity for Democrats to offer so much as a penny in spending cuts?
Why do Democrats escape blame for being intransigent and Republicans all the blame for being obstinate?
How is it saying no to still more tax hikes makes you selfish, but advocating still more spending on the backs of the beleaguered taxpayer selfless?
It amazes me in a nation where it takes two parties to tango, it's Republicans invariably caught in and causing the tangle. If they'd only go along, we wouldn't be in this mess -- forgetting the fact that the president's first two years with Democrats in complete control and rubber-stamping his spending initiatives got us in this mess.
I'm not here to say either party escapes blame for the spending quagmire we are in -- Republicans for putting two wars off budget, even though both sides supported them at the time, or Democrats for putting trillions more on budget since that time.
The time for blame is over. The time for partisan favoritism should be over too.
I just want to know if both parties got us here, why is it always Republicans who are getting blamed for keeping us here? I don't know. This much I do: John McCain's rapid descent from maverick to meathead boggles my imagination -- penalized this time for siding with a president, with whom he almost always disagrees. But because he challenges a rising party star on drones he's suddenly disagreeable.
Forgive him for fearing what he fears will be a carte blanche retreat on drones will not do: Make us more secure.
Rand Paul is totally right to question that. What I find weird are all these media stars aligning with Senator Paul to challenge that -- the likes of MSNBC and Jon Stewart heralding a Republican who's not so singularly obsessed about terror, that's an enlightened view. Fearing terror and forever obsessing about it, that's not an enlightened view.
So bad for Sen. McCain, but clearly good for Sen. Paul, although I might remind him about the fair-weather fickle friends now in his corner. Not so for John McCain, who's only cool when he takes on issues the media likes and when he doesn't, is all but told to stand in the corner.
Just the latest double standard and, knowing the media, I suspect it is not the last.