Today, the editorial page endorsed Jeff Flake for Senate.

Its rationale for the endorsement is pockmarked with dubious arguments, the worst of which comes early in the piece:

“With the exception of Rep. Paul Ryan, perhaps no candi­date for federal office in this election cycle is more com­mitted to forcing sanity back into the nation’s finances.

“This is Jeff Flake’s mo­ment.”

Really?  ”Committed to forcing sanity back into the nation’s finances”?

Really?   Apparently the paper, like some of the more rabid partisans, believes that history began in 2009. But Flake has a history.

Did Jeff Flake vote for the Bush tax cuts?  Yes and Yes, both in 2001 and 2003.

Did Jeff Flake insist on accompanying spending cuts for those tax cuts?  No and No.

Did Jeff Flake vote to authorize the war in Iraq?  Yep.

Did Jeff Flake insist on a source to pay for that war?  Nope.

How much have the Bush tax cuts added to the national debt?  $1.6 trillion.

How much have the wars Flake initially endorsed cost?  Around $4 trillion.

Total?  Almost $6 trillion added to our national debt.

And this guy is “more committed to forcing sanity back into the nation’s finances”?  Yeah, I guess in the same way the arsonist might help put out the fire.

And let’s not even begin to examine Flake’s social views . . .