House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer flip flops on balanced budget amendment

Hoyer can no longer support a balanced-budget amendment because of the deficits under Bush? There are so many ways that statement doesn't make sense. Do reporters just laugh when politicians make these statements? The vastly bigger deficits under Obama don't matter? The fact that deficits are bigger now make a balanced-budget amendment less desirable? From The Hill Newspaper:

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer argued Tuesday that his current opposition to a balanced-budget amendment is perfectly consistent with his past support for similar legislation.

The Maryland Democrat said the political environment was much different in 1995, when he voted in favor of amending the Constitution to require Congress to balance its books each year. He blamed Republicans in the White House and Congress for since adopting "irresponsible" policies that he said make such an amendment unworkable now.

"What I said in 1995 I absolutely agree with today," Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol. "Unfortunately, I did not contemplate the irresponsibility that I have seen fiscally over the last nine years, or eight years, of the Bush administration and Republican leadership of the House and the Senate, and this last few months where Republicans took America to the brink of default." . . .