Dems: "You can't cut spending!" So Republicans don't

Okay, I've got to be late reaching the obvious on this one, but here goes:

It's been known for eons that in a conflict, you can avoid a costly battle against your opponent if you can demoralize him to the point that he doesn't show up on the battlefield. Same thing works in politics.

Since the Liberals lost their majority in the House, and the House must originate all spending bills, a lot of pet projects are in danger of being cut. Solution? Argue that because so-called "entitlement programs" (like Social Security and Medicare) comprise the bulk of government spending and are untouchable, it's not possible to cut gubmint spending by meaningful amounts by cutting other programs. So why try?

Man, that's brilliant. Demoralize conservatives and maybe enough will defect to the Dems when it's time to vote that the Dems will win.

Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened. When a measure to cut $22 billion in spending came to a vote last week, half of the Republican conference--including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)--voted with every Democrat against it.

So looks like government will continue business as usual--i.e. racing toward the cliff of national bankruptcy due to crazy, outrageous failure to spend no more than what the government receives (takes) in revenue.

Amazing that these alleged Republicans are acting like they don't see that coming. It can't possibly be that they don't know it's coming, but must be that they'd rather be re-elected than do the hard, unpopular but necessary things to fix the situation.

What do you do when you're in a friend's car and he pushes it up to 100 on a winding road? I truly don't know.