From Mark Evanier's Blog: newsfromme.com
The Congressional Budget Office is a non-partisan entity that analyzes bills and proposals and says, with pretty good accuracy it would seem, "Here's how much this one will cost us." If the CBO numbers support your argument, they're infallible and accurate and fair and not to be disbelieved one bit. If they say you're wrong, what the hell do they know? The other night on Hannity, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann debated Congressman Anthony Weiner and she actually, in the space of about 180 seconds, dismissed as ridiculous a CBO estimate that indicated she was wrong about one proposal and then cited a different one as absolute proof she was right about a different proposal. Bruce Bartlett discusses this kind of inconsistency and he adds this...
CBO's great sin, in Republican eyes, is that it's always telling them that their pet ideas are wrong: tax cuts don't automatically pay for themselves through the Laffer Curve, the Affordable Care Act didn't raise the deficit, the budget can't be balanced only by cutting domestic discretionary spending, and other heresies to Republican dogma.
He also quotes Walt Kelly, which we always enjoy around these parts. But really, is it too much to ask that politicians decide on which are the reliable sources and stick with that? It's fine to cite the Gallup Poll if you believe in it but you oughta stand by it when it tells you something you don't want to hear. Same with the CBO. Same with any reference or survey. Or maybe the rule should be that once you say it's wrong, you're not allowed to cite it to support your side for two years or something.