Not being able to get a straight answer to a question or a relevant comment on a subject that has been raised is nothing new for a politician, but Representative Cantor has lowered his comments to total irrelevance.
I saw him first on Morning Joe, not a locale known for persecuting right wingers, and the interview with Mr. Cantor held true to that expectation. None but soft balls were lobbed at the Republican Leader. Later I watched Mr. Cantor online as he was interviewed by David Gregory on this morning’s Today Show. Mr. Gregory was not such an easy interviewer to deceive. Following is the substance of the conversation with my own objections added:
Gregory: Yesterday the president indicated a willingness to give on spending cuts. Are you willing, as you indicated you would be yesterday, to raise revenue?
Cantor: What I said yesterday was in response to the president’s comment about corporate jets. It‘s counter intuitive to raise taxes when the economy is still sputtering.
Me: It was clear from the context that the president used corporate jets as an example, not as his sole concern about corporate wealth. It’s disingenuous for Mr. Cantor to pretend he didn’t know that. It’s also clear Mr. Cantor isn’t answering the question Mr. Gregory asked.
For Mr. Cantor to imply that the Democrats want to raise taxes on lower and middle class Americans is at best, again, disingenuous, and at worst, a bald faced lie.
Gregory: Are you willing to increase revenues by closing loopholes in the tax code?
Cantor: Yes, I’d like to see (tax) rates taken down. What we want is offsetting tax cuts somewhere else.
Me: Excuse me? Mr. Gregory didn’t say anything about lowering tax rates. He asked if Mr. Cantor would be willing to have loopholes in the tax code closed to increase government revenue.
Me again: So Mr. Cantor wants the tax rate lowered, he also wants to “make up” for lower tax rates by cutting taxes elsewhere. How do those two things that reduce revenue increase revenue? Reminds me of a trick older kids played on younger kids: Heads I win, tails, you lose.
Mr. Gregory makes essentially the same objection I did, asking how Mr. Cantor’s ideas would reduce the deficit, presumably the point of Republican efforts.
Gregory: How does that get you anywhere?
Cantor: This is about stopping spending money we don’t have — not easy cuts for anyone!
Me: No, that is not what “this” is about. What “this” is about is Mr. Gregory’s question, “Are you willing to increase revenues by closing loopholes in the tax code?”
Gregory: Democrats have agreed to spending cuts (hard for them). What are Republicans going to do that’s hard?
Cantor: It’s very hard to sit here and say we’re going to increase the debt limit of the country when we have a fourteen trillion dollar debt.
Me: I’m doing my best to resist saying to Mr. Cantor, “Easy for you to say, “It’s hard” standing there in the nation’s capitol with food and clothing and shelter, health insurance, life insurance, transportation, every need for your family all provided in the best possible way, while the others whose assistance you’re willing to cut, must provide all those things for themselves. And it’s hard for you to “SAY” it’s hard for you?
I won’t ask you to give me a break, Mr. Cantor, because you won’t even give a break to hungry children and sick and old Americans