There are times when a statement by a politician is so far from reality that it takes a while to be able to come up with a response other than laughter.
For instance, in case you missed it, Nancy Pelosi, defending her four years as House Speaker made this astounding claim:
“Deficit reduction has been a high priority for us. It is our mantra, pay-as-you-go.”
When I first heard her say this, I thought perhaps I had misunderstood, but it becomes more ludicrous each time the soundbite is played. Here are the facts:
When the Pelosi Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, the national debt stood at $8,670,596,242,973.04. The last day of the 111th Congress and Pelosi’s Speakership on December 22, 2010 the national debt was $13,858,529,371,601.09 – a roughly $5.2 trillion increase in just four years. Furthermore, the year over year federal deficit has roughly quadrupled during Pelosi’s four years as speaker, from $342 billion in fiscal year 2007 to an estimated $1.6 trillion at the end of fiscal year 2010.
She also claims that the Democrats were “all about market-oriented solutions” and that the reason the unemployment rate is so high is due to [are you ready for this?] the policies of George W. Bush. There just doesn’t seem to be any statute of limitations on this blame game. Businesses, however, know why things have been so bad:
Pelosi’s comments beg the question: does she really believe what she is saying? Option one: she does believe it, thereby showing how blind a person can become when wedded to a false ideology. What the apostle Paul said with respect to people being blind to the Gospel message can have application here as well:
And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. [2 Corinthians 4:3-3]
In this case, she is blinded from seeing the truth because she already has a predetermined philosophy that keeps her in the darkness.
Option 2: she doesn’t really believe what she is saying but hopes to mislead the public and return to power in two years.
I’m not really sure which option is the case, but if the first, she is out of touch with reality—and if the second, her character disqualifies her from public service.
There are always those who will be fooled, either because they are enmeshed in false ideas—or for other reasons:
That part of the electorate can always be counted on to remain faithful to whatever policies “progressive” leadership enacts. Others, though, are becoming more skeptical:
In fact, the number of skeptics is growing and becoming quite vocal, as witnessed by the events of the past two years and the election results:
May true enlightenment continue, and may the veil that blinds the people be pulled aside.