We have two new fresh examples of how the political parties are as inconsistent in their arguments as possible.

Today, a judge ruled that the Senate Democrats went too far in trying to legally stop Lt. Governor Bill Bolling (R-Hanover Co.) from casting a potential tie breaker vote in how the now evenly divided State Senate will make up its committees. The judge said in part that she couldn’t rule on a tie breaking vote that Bolling hasn’t yet cast.

Yet, Republicans would like the Supreme Court to rule on the health care reform now with one of the big arguments being that it is an unconstitutional tax on Americans. Here’s the problem: the provisions requiring Americans to buy health insurance won’t take effect until 2013, well after the Supreme Court may rule on the matter.

Then there’s the issue of taxes. Democrats insist that the economy won’t be hurt if the Bush tax cuts are eliminated, but they are fighting for the payroll tax cut to be extended. Yes, these tax cuts impact different people (in some circumstances), still it’s a difficult argument to make.

Likewise, Republicans have long argued that the government taxes too much and spends too much. They have advocated for a combination of tax cuts and spending cuts to lower the deficit, until it comes to the payroll tax cut, which they are more than happy to see go away.

Yes, both are head scratchers, as there is no consistency. In fact, the only consistency is that both parties are guilty of this.

For me, this is one of the most frustrating thing about politics. I appreciate political debate and the fact that the two parties have different philosophies about how our country should be governed. But my appreciation stops when they argue one thing when it benefits them and turn around and use the opposite argument on the next issue. No wonder people have lost faith in our political institutions.

Sigh.