Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Politics, Taxes | Tags: Late Budget Request, Obama Won't Negotiate, The Spending Problem
President Obama had another press conference to explain why maxing out the national credit card was perfectly normal and really the fault of the Republicans in Congress, ans since it’s maxed out, he needs a new credit card so he can go shopping again.
The White House has informed the House Budget Committee that it won’t meet budget deadline. Acting Budget Director Jeff Zients told Paul Ryan (R-WI) that they will miss the deadline of February 4, as required by law, for sending a budget to Congress.
In the letter, Zients said the administration is “working diligently on our budget request.” The letter blames the late passage of the “fiscal cliff” deal for the delay because tax and spending issues were nor resolved until Jan. 2, the administration was forced to delay some of the budget’s FY 2014 budget preparations which in turn will delay the budget’s submission to Congress.
Ho hum. Under the law the deadline for submitting a budget is the first Monday in February, but has managed to meet the deadline only once. The act of submitting a budget is supposed to start the congressional budgeting process, but that’s not going too well either. The Senate last passed a budget resolution in 2009. (Yes, Harry Reid, 4 years ago!)
Major Garrett asked President Obama in his press conference today:
“As you well know, sir, finding votes for the debt ceiling can sometimes be complicated. You yourself as a member of the Senate voted against a debt ceiling increase. And in previous aspects of American history, President Reagan in 1985, President George Herbert Walker Bush in 1990, President Clinton in 1997 … all signed deficit reduction deals that were contingent upon or in the context of raising the debt ceiling. You yourself four times have done that; three times those were related to deficit reduction or budget maneuvers.
“What [NBC's Chuck Todd] and I think many people are curious about is this new adamant desire on your part not to negotiate when that seems to conflict with the entire history in the modern era of American presidents in the debt ceiling and your own history on the debt ceiling. And doesn’t that suggest that we are going to go into a default situation, because no one is talking to each other about how to resolve this?”
President Obama responded:
“But what you’ve never seen is the notion that has been presented so far at least by the Republicans that deficit reduction will only count spending cuts, that we will raise the deficit … or the debt ceiling dollar-for-dollar on spending cuts. There are a whole set of rules that have been established that are impossible to meet without doing severe damage to the economy. And so what we’re not going to do is put ourselves in a position where in order to pay for spending that we’ve already incurred, that our two options are; we’re either going to profoundly hurt the economy, and hurt middle-class families, and hurt seniors, and hurt kids who are trying to go to college, or alternatively we’re going to blow up the economy. We’re not going to do that.
“If we want to have a conversation about how to reduce our deficit, let’s have that. We’ve been having that for the last two years. We just had an entire campaign about it. And by the way, the American people agreed with me, that we should reduce our deficits in a balanced way, that also takes into account the need for us to grow this economy, and put people back to work.”
Oh yes, cutting spending would hurt the poor, seniors, middle class families. Reducing spending will lead to” blowing up the economy.”
We just had an entire campaign about how to reduce the deficit? No, we did not. The Republican had an entire campaign about how to reduce the deficit. The Democrats had an entire campaign about attacking Mitt Romney.
There were too separate and distinct campaigns, and the Democrat campaign did not include any discussion of Obama’s plans for the next four years, or the deficit, or the debt, or how to put people back to work, or how to help the economy to recover. The Democrats’ campaign was about what a perfectly awful person Mitt Romney was, which was amazingly strange, since Mitt Romney was probably the candidate for the presidency who was not only completely qualified, but who was a truly good man, in every sense of the word.
Funny, I was at the Ophthalmologist today (light blogging — can’t see) and looking through the old magazines. One was TIME from earlier last year, which wondered why when the economy was recovering, was the recovery so wimpy? The economy is not recovering. What appear to be lower rates of unemployment are not because the size of the workforce is cratering because so many people have stopped looking for work. Record high welfare recipients from Medicaid to food stamps to disability claims. Weak consumer spending, weak economic growth, rising consumer costs, lower household net worth, and our national credit-rating has been downgraded.
The Keynesian “multiplier effect” of government spending didn’t work in the 1930s, didn’t work in the 1970s, and didn’t work again in 2009-2010. Trillions of dollars of spending every year have not led to economic growth or job creating. The president is not willing to acknowledge that. Economic recovery comes from private sector spending, and this president has done nothing to give the private sector an incentive to spend.
So there we are. He wants another new credit card. Should we give him one?
Filed under: Capitalism, Conservatism, Democrat Corruption, Media Bias, Politics, The Constitution | Tags: Perpetually Discontented Democrats, Political Delusions, The Possibility of Cooperation
Political beliefs and political illusions — endlessly fascinating. A delusional op-ed from one Jacob Weisberg, at Investors’ IBD editorials is the most immediate case in point: (Do read the whole thing, and the comments too)
Barack Obama’s most cherished illusion during his first term was the possibility of cooperation with Republicans.
Time and again, the president came to Congress bearing pre-emptive concessions — on his original economic stimulus package, his health care plan and the 2011 debt-ceiling fight — only to have the door slammed in his face by an obstructionist GOP that viewed politics as a zero-sum game.
Because the president has long seen himself as a conciliator and a bridge figure, he was unwilling to let go of his faith that if he only hewed to the path of moderation, his opponents would eventually have to meet him there.
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa President It’s-my-way-or-the-highway has long seen himself as a conciliator and a bridge figure? Of course the president won almost no Republican votes for any of his major initiatives. Keynesian stimulus does not work, has never worked, and was totally ineffective, as predicted. $815 billion simply wasted.
His health care plan was just turned over to Nancy Pelosi to produce behind closed doors with no attempt to consult, talk to, or engage Republicans in any way, has been a disaster, is expected to double the cost of health care for Americans, has put millions out of work as employers try to cope with the new rules, and been a major factor in our continuing recession.
Weisberg says “The one advantage of Obama’s relentless reasonableness was that it rendered him immune to Republican charges of ruthlessness and extremism in the past election.” Relentless reasonableness?
On the last day of 2012, Richard Cohen, wrote in his column about “Republicans Adrift”
It is conservatism that is both intellectually exhausted and nearly indefensible. It is the movement of the ideologically ossified, of gun zealots and homophobes, of the immigrant-phobic and the adamantly selfish. It insists that government must be small (an impossibility!), education must be local (a stupidity) and that debt, no matter what the reason, is immoral and reckless. The movement has lost its reliable monster. Godless communists have been replaced by the church ladies of Planned Parenthood. History giggles.
PowerLine recently grabbed a couple of headlines from the Associated Press:
“Republican Party seems as divided , angry as ever” and “Debt-limit fight takes shape: Won’t Republicans ever be happy?” It’s hard, Powerline notes to exaggerate the political importance of the Democratic Party’s control over the news media. The steady drip-drip of pro Democrat and anti-Republican propaganda is perhaps the dominant fat of American political life in the 21st century. One place where we see this is in headlines, which are important because they are what low-information voters mostly see.
Michelle Malkin has assembled the Progressive “Climate of Hate” into an illustrated primer, 2000 – 2010, which reminds us of the past graciousness and cooperation of the Democratic Party.
I’m sure you have plenty of examples of your own. They are continually enraged because Republicans dare to disagree with them. I suspect because they cannot discuss these things rationally. Republicans talk about economics, or the Constitution, or math, or history, and Democrats are just more involved with feelings. Don’t trouble me with facts, don’t you understand how I feel?