Obama: Nah, my budget won’t balance

posted at 8:41 pm on March 12, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham

George Stephanopoulos got a rare sit-down with President Obama today:

President Barack Obama will go one-on-one with George Stephanopoulos, anchor of “Good Morning America” and “This Week,” in an exclusive interview on Tuesday, March 12. The interview comes as President Obama is initiating conversations with Republican lawmakers to help avert another budget showdown later this month. Last week the President hosted a dinner with 12 Republican lawmakers, a lunch with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan and Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the committee’s ranking Democrat. This week he is expected to continue courting lawmakers by traveling to Capitol Hill to meet with both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

We now know at least one thing about Obama’s budget, which, unlike Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget, is nonexistent:

“Paul Ryan, today, put forward his budget,” says ABC, “and he says, he’s challenging you to come forward with a budget that also reaches balance. Are you going to do that?”

“No,” Obama says. “My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

No kiddin’, Mr. President. I was under the impression “balance” was the most important quality known to mankind. It’s apparently also not the president’s goal to chase a budget that’s released on time and gets at least one vote in Congress, just for the sake of doing the barest minimum.

E.M. Zanotti enlightens us further on the president’s invisible budget. Is there no end to his wonders? (And, if you’re not reading Naked DC regularly, start!)

At any rate, the White House has obviously responded, first by characterizing Paul Ryan as a mean old meanie who wants poor people to starve and die in the streets so that he can stack them and use them as his own personal sidewalk, and then by trumpeting their own 2014 budget, which was authored by the very breath of the savior of mankind and his cadre of economic geniuses carefully selected from throughout history.

While the House Republican budget aims to reduce the deficit, the math just doesn’t add up. Deficit reduction that asks nothing from the wealthiest Americans has serious consequences for the middle class…

That’s why the President has put forward a balanced approach to deficit reduction with no sacred cows. It includes more Medicare savings over the next decade than the House Republican budget, but it does so by cracking down on waste and fraud, not by asking middle class seniors to bear the burden. It closes tax loopholes for the wealthiest and biggest corporations so we can still afford to create jobs by investing in education, manufacturing, infrastructure, and small businesses. The President’s plan puts our nation on a fiscally sustainable path and grows our economy from the middle class out.

It is also invisible.

Because, as it turns out, the White House has not released a 2014 budget (note the use of the words “plan” and “approach”). The last budget it released was for 2013, and that was kind of a stinker in the sense that no one actually voted for it – not even Democrats. Probably because it also happened to be a carbon copy of previous budgets that were released and that no one voted for. Because – and this is key – despite what the White House think is in there, it’s pretty much just a mess.

As for Senate Democrats, they will finally, after four years present an actual budget. Only because they can’t get paid if they don’t, but hey, progress. It will reportedly add $1 trillion in new taxes and only manage to fake $800 billion in reductions over 10 years. Don’t expect much, says Phil Klein:

Unfortunately, according to the National Journal, Senate Budget Committee Chair Sen. Patty Murray’s budget is “expected to offer only broad outlines of many of the (Democratic) party’s usual talking points.” According to the report, Murray’s budget will raise taxes, call for more economic stimulus spending, largely ignore reforms to entitlements, undo automatic spending cuts (i.e. sequestration) and rely on phony savings such as winding down the war in Afghanistan (as if the nation would otherwise be at full strength in Afghanistan for the next decade).

So, after four years of avoidance, Senate Democrats are finally putting out a document called a “budget.” But it’s unlikely to represent a serious attempt to get the nation’s debt problem under control.

They won’t even let Republicans see this long-awaited document before mark-up, which I’m assuming means there’s not likely to be a press conference in which they’d have to field actual questions about the contents thereof. Courage.

More from Obama’s interview as it becomes available.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I just keep spending like there’s no tomorrow. /PBHO

Khun Joe on March 12, 2013 at 8:43 PM

No to a balance budget…

Hey…

Let’s re-elect a chronic spender..

How about someone that steals from you…

[Thunderous Applause]

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:45 PM

Remember when liberals crowed about Clinton`s balanced budgets and bitched about W`s couple hundred billion deficits?

ThePrez on March 12, 2013 at 8:49 PM

Dereliction. No.

Treasonous. Yes.

RealMc on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

Balanced budgets are so…old school.
/

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

Did Stephie score the interview as a thank you for starting up the “war on women” attack, up in the NH GOP primary debate? Or, perhaps it was because of his weekly strategy conference calls with the WH political staff back in 2011-2012?

Ah we’ll, good times, good times.

Budget-time, huh? My question is will this be the first year the President proposes a budget that actually passes the Senate? Gets a single vote even?

This is all kabuki theatre. Ridiculous.

MTF on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

Balanced budgets are so…old school.
/

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

You didn’t need that sarc..

We know ya.. :)

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:54 PM

MTF on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

New York Times headline:

Obama budget fails Senate vote 99-1. White House touts progress!

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

How can Obama cross his legs like that? No dink?

SparkPlug on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Obama: Nah, my budget won’t balance

…an Ivy League dumbphuck!

KOOLAID2 on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

You didn’t need that sarc..

We know ya.. :)

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:54 PM

Just in case there were any noobs checking in. ;)

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

“No,” Obama says. “My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

Shocker! The rat-eared bastard that ran up $6T in debt in just four years isn’t interested in curbing spending. I thought the filthy lazy coward called such spending “unpatriotic” when talking about the GWB contribution to the national debt. What does that make this traitor?

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

How can Obama cross his legs like that? No dink?

SparkPlug on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Michelle keeps it in a lock box.

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

How can Obama cross his legs like that? No dink?

SparkPlug on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

It’s an accessory..

“Junk Not Included”..

It was on his released birth certificate..

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:57 PM

How can Obama cross his legs like that? No dink?

SparkPlug on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

…EVERY SINGLE TIME!…now I know why Mooches mouth looks so wierd!

KOOLAID2 on March 12, 2013 at 8:57 PM

***Balanced Budgets For Un-Balanced DemonRats ***********!

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 8:58 PM

Just in case there were any noobs checking in. ;)

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Speaking of that..

During the last few months when there was something important going on….

there are many unknown screen names posting..

As if they have always been posting..

Weird.

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:59 PM

It closes tax loopholes for the wealthiest and biggest corporations so we can still afford to create jobs by investing in education, manufacturing, infrastructure, and small businesses.

Yeah, loopholes like depreciation, expenses, employee health care costs. You know, stuff like that. Except for Google, Berkshire Hathaway and G.E., of course.

I own a small business, but somehow I don’t think I’ll be on the receiving end of any “investing”. Not that I want to be. I just want to be left alone. Anyway, when the big boys get whacked by the government, for some reason I always get whacked too. Someone should tell Obama about this odd coincidence.

Curtiss on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

I thought the filthy lazy coward called such spending “unpatriotic” when talking about the GWB contribution to the national debt. What does that make this traitor?
Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 8:56 PM

You’re seething in your own ignorance. There’s a different trajectory to spending under Obama, historic in nature.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm

As a share of GDP, outlays fell in 2012—to 22.8 percent, which was less than the 24.1 percent recorded in 2011 and 2010 but still above the 40-year average of 21.0 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43697

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Cloward Piven. Need we say more?

SOB!

NavyMustang on March 12, 2013 at 9:04 PM

“No,” Obama says. “My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”
======================

Wait a tic,that amounts to Un_Equality Social Justice Sumpin!
(sarc)

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 9:07 PM

You’re seething in your own ignorance. There’s a different trajectory to spending under Obama, historic in nature.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm

As a share of GDP, outlays fell in 2012—to 22.8 percent, which was less than the 24.1 percent recorded in 2011 and 2010 but still above the 40-year average of 21.0 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43697

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

How many times have you cited those two articles? It’s getting old. How about you find some new ones. That should keep you busy for awhile.

Curtiss on March 12, 2013 at 9:08 PM

My neighbors are facing a double whammy under sequestration. One is a DoD employee the other a contractor employed by the DoD. What struck me when talking to one of them this evening is that, as much as it will hurt them personally, they realize that something has to change. That we can’t continue to spend the way we have in the past.

I don’t think they (and the Nomad family) are alone in that thought. The arrogance of the rat-eared wonder in his comments really pisses me off.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:09 PM

You’re seething in your own ignorance. There’s a different trajectory to spending under Obama, historic in nature.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm

As a share of GDP, outlays fell in 2012—to 22.8 percent, which was less than the 24.1 percent recorded in 2011 and 2010 but still above the 40-year average of 21.0 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43697

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

LOL..

Obama called it unpatriotic because he wanted to send the message that Bush was robbing from the innocence.. Americans..

Obama??

No one is free.

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 9:09 PM

Balance for VJ’s pool boy means incrementally forcing socialism down our throats without the media turning on him.

antipc on March 12, 2013 at 9:10 PM

A plate of Victory Gruel sounds more appealing. Viva la Fascist!

Excuse me whilst I wretch.

Polish Rifle on March 12, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Is it not “Law” for the Congress to have a budget?

Why is no one being held accountable?

Why is the POTUS allowed to add $6T to the debt?

Why am I and millions of law abiding citizens being place into indentured servitude because of corrupt politicians?

When will it end?

And who will lead the way?

D-fusit on March 12, 2013 at 9:15 PM

You’re seething in your own ignorance. There’s a different trajectory to spending under Obama, historic in nature.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm

As a share of GDP, outlays fell in 2012—to 22.8 percent, which was less than the 24.1 percent recorded in 2011 and 2010 but still above the 40-year average of 21.0 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43697

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Only on planet bayam are you wetting your diaper over the fact that the rat-eared wonder (credit: Happy Nomad) only spent $1.1 trillion when he could have spent $1.3 trillion.

Clearly that qualifies him for being lower case unpatriotic.

VietVet_Dave on March 12, 2013 at 9:15 PM

“No,” Obama says. “My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

Real leaders don’t chase. They lead. Obama’s statement reveals part of his core thinking, in my book.

Gee, maybe he wants another Nobel, this one for economics? The Peace Prize was a freebie, so maybe expects another such handout.

Liam on March 12, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Speaking of that..

During the last few months when there was something important going on….

there are many unknown screen names posting..

As if they have always been posting..

Weird.

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Not sure what you mean by this EG- I lurk more then I post, however, I feel like I know all you regulars. I enjoy your debates and your bantering. Always good for a few laughs especially when I’ve had enough of this administration! Maybe there are many others who do the same?

wolverinefan on March 12, 2013 at 9:18 PM

Murray’s budget will raise taxes, call for more economic stimulus spending, largely ignore reforms to entitlements, undo automatic spending cuts (i.e. sequestration) and rely on phony savings such as winding down the war in Afghanistan (as if the nation would otherwise be at full strength in Afghanistan for the next decade).

So, after four years of avoidance, Senate Democrats are finally putting out a document called a “budget.” But it’s unlikely to represent a serious attempt to get the nation’s debt problem under control.

The last budget the commies presented went down 99-1,this one looks headed to a similar defeat.

rodguy911 on March 12, 2013 at 9:20 PM

The President’s idea of “balance” is to confiscate the income of every taxpayer to the point that they qualify fall into the poverty range and are then entitled to a place at the government teat.

That’s kinda like “From each according to his ability. To each according to his need.”, isn’t it?

WestTexasBirdDog on March 12, 2013 at 9:22 PM

FUBAR….obama is a punk…..he is a pansey boy that has gotten his big chance to be a bully……

crosshugger on March 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Not sure what you mean by this EG- I lurk more then I post, however, I feel like I know all you regulars. I enjoy your debates and your bantering. Always good for a few laughs especially when I’ve had enough of this administration! Maybe there are many others who do the same?

wolverinefan on March 12, 2013 at 9:18 PM

I have seen you post..
I just can’t remember when..

:)

I get what you are saying though..

Electrongod on March 12, 2013 at 9:24 PM

Um,ah um ah,..what………………..

Barack Obama ‏@BarackObama

RT if you agree: We should reduce the deficit by closing tax loopholes for millionaires—not by raising middle-class taxes.
Expand
=======

8 hrs Barack Obama Barack Obama ‏@BarackObama

FACT: Obama’s balanced plan reduces the deficit by cutting waste and closing tax loopholes that benefit the wealthy. http://OFA.BO/ijntsk
Expand
======

8 hrs Barack Obama Barack Obama ‏@BarackObama

FACT: The House GOP would cut taxes for millionaires and reduce the deficit by raising taxes on middle-class families by more than $2,000.
Expand
=======

8 hrs Barack Obama Barack Obama ‏@BarackObama

“The math just doesn’t add up.” —@PressSec on how the House GOP budget threatens the middle class: http://OFA.BO/rSAfa1
=======================================================

https://twitter.com/BarackObama

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 9:24 PM

Obama: Nah, my budget won’t balance I don’t know the first thing about leadership

FIFM

ShainS on March 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

why is damn near every republican a friggin’ pansy coward that won’t stand up and tell the world what this #@!$%&* is all about? seriously……why?

GhoulAid on March 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

I lurk more then I post, however, I feel like I know all you regulars. I enjoy your debates and your bantering. Always good for a few laughs especially when I’ve had enough of this administration! Maybe there are many others who do the same?

wolverinefan on March 12, 2013 at 9:18 PM

I’m not entirely sure what EG meant but I will add this observation. At certain times HA gets all sorts of new players even though it has been months since the last open registration. Some of them may be “lurkers” like you but most seem to come with an agenda that belies what is supposed to be a conservative blog. Clearly some of the folks employed by OFA banked accounts.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Dems pathetic

cmsinaz on March 12, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Both Dems and the GOP present these ridiculous 10 year budgets like they are running the P.R.O.C. (chicomms)

When ever has a budget been tracked and followed for a period of ten years? Never

All ten year budgets do are hide any cuts in the out years and load up “revenues” in the first years. Speaking in terms of “trillions” seems to make it all sound like they are accomplishing something but in reality it’s all a smokescreen.

Man up and tell us the effects of your “budgets” for 2 years, you know, the years you are responsible for before the next congress comes in and makes their own budget.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:30 PM

why is damn near every republican a friggin’ pansy coward that won’t stand up and tell the world what this #@!$%&* is all about? seriously……why?

GhoulAid on March 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

I agree completely but comments like the rat-eared wonder saying he isn’t even interested in balancing the budget is good fodder. We need to wait and see how it is used in the upcoming budget battles (not even started with sequestration).

My hope is that the GOP is able to carve out the position of doing what needs to be done and turn the perception of the rat-eared wonder from hero to spendthrift zero. It can be done but it takes a disciplined message and courage so I have my doubts it can get past the GOP traitors who exchange principles for a dinner date with the rat-eared wonder.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:33 PM

Democratic budget – “fake but accurate” – as long as you don’t really examine it…..then it’s pretty much “fake”.

GarandFan on March 12, 2013 at 9:34 PM

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:30 PM

Both Dems and the GOP present these ridiculous 10 year budgets like they are running the P.R.O.C. (chicomms)

Point taken. But no plan is stagnant over ten years. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t plan. The goal is a balanced budget in ten years (much as JFK approached an American on the moon). Adopt the plan and take corrective measures between now and then.

Man up and tell us the effects of your “budgets” for 2 years, you know, the years you are responsible for before the next congress comes in and makes their own budget.

Honesty about the sacrifice to those other than “the rich?” Hard to do when one political party (hint it isn’t the GOP) relies on greedy stupid people, illegals, neer-do-wells, and other parasites for any political power. These are the first to feel sacrifice because they are the leeches on society.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:33 PM

but there’s been PLENTY to use against him all this damn time. i cannot imagine if i, or any of you would be able to bite our tounges around this punk if we were in washington. why would any self respecting person continually put up with his crap??? i guess i wouldn’t make it a week. i would have to sit on my hands not to punch his lights out if i were even in a meeting with him. U-G-H!

GhoulAid on March 12, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Both Dems and the GOP present these ridiculous 10 year budgets like they are running the P.R.O.C. (chicomms)

When ever has a budget been tracked and followed for a period of ten years? Never

All ten year budgets do are hide any cuts in the out years and load up “revenues” in the first years. Speaking in terms of “trillions” seems to make it all sound like they are accomplishing something but in reality it’s all a smokescreen.

Man up and tell us the effects of your “budgets” for 2 years, you know, the years you are responsible for before the next congress comes in and makes their own budget.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:30 PM

Seems these dirtbags learned how to play Kick The Can at a much earlier age than most. Apparently they were far too much of a group of pansies to pay Smear the Q_eer. No pun intended. Perhaps an introduction to something a bit more aggressive is in store?

Personally, I see nothing short of bad times ahead. Gird your loins.

Polish Rifle on March 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM

I guess George is happy to discuss Obama’s imaginary budget just as he was happy to spend time on the Republicans’ imaginary War on Women.

I wonder what he named the unicorn he got from Obama after his election.

talkingpoints on March 12, 2013 at 9:40 PM

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Let everyone here know who promised to cut the deficit in half and what progress has been made? I’ll spot you an “O”…have at it.

hillsoftx on March 12, 2013 at 9:40 PM

Obysmal isn’t interested in a budget, balanced or otherwise. He is not interested in an economic recovery or growth either.
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/031113-647576-regulation-restricts-oil-production-on-federal-lands.htm?p=full

onlineanalyst on March 12, 2013 at 9:41 PM

According to Obama’s handmaidens, “balance” is the highest virtue known to man. Except in a budget.

Truly, this man is devoid of substance, he is a pigheaded, empty charlatan.

matthew8787 on March 12, 2013 at 9:43 PM

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Yes, maybe I phrased that in-eloquently, but my point was not to stop long range planning. I think until the 10 year focus is abandoned, there is too much wiggle room to hide in.

The media, and the people, should be forcing government to explain the near term impacts of budget plans and be held accountable on near term results. Long range forecasting is better handled by the CBO or other truly non partisan entities.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:44 PM

but there’s been PLENTY to use against him all this damn time. i cannot imagine if i, or any of you would be able to bite our tounges around this punk if we were in washington. why would any self respecting person continually put up with his crap??? i guess i wouldn’t make it a week. i would have to sit on my hands not to punch his lights out if i were even in a meeting with him. U-G-H!

GhoulAid on March 12, 2013 at 9:38 PM

But the media is nothing but a propaganda arm of the administration starting with (but not limited to) Jay Carney who is married to a “journalist.” There has been no vetting of the rat-eared wonder. Ever.

Yes, there has been lots to use against the rat bastard traitor but this is a different game so long as the GOP doesn’t cave. Despite what supposedly conservative weasels claimed, the last election did present a difference and we are seeing it. The current administration wants to continue spending away our great grandchildren’s chance of having anything close to the quality of life we have enjoyed. The GOP is trying to hold the line. So long as they push the point, they can gain ground in this debate.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:46 PM

With O, all deficit reduction has to be achieved through a “balanced” approach. End result of actually “balancing” the budget, not so much.

Fair share, sumptin sumptin.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:48 PM

Long range forecasting is better handled by the CBO or other truly non partisan entities.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Oh can_con! You had me until this comment. The CBO is hardly non-partisan. They’ve cooked the numbers for the rat-eared wonder from day one. They accept with little question the gloriously optimistic economic factors and assumptions put forth by this administration and score legislation accordingly.

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:49 PM

To Contain Future Budget, US Must Raise Taxes By 35%, Cut Entitlements 35%; Without Cuts, Taxes Must Rise By 88%

To restrain the U.S.’s future budget crisis, the federal government must raise taxes by at least 35% and cut entitlements such as health care and Social Security by 35%, International Monetary Fund economists warned Monday in a new working paper.

While the projected ballooning of future costs of entitlements as the so-called baby boomer generation enters old age isn’t new, the IMF paper’s quantifying just how much the federal government will have trim its balance sheets sheds fresh light on the political hurdles ahead.

Raising taxes and cutting spending on health care, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are some of the most sensitive issues for voters.

The IMF paper, written by Nicoletta Batini, Giovanni Callegari and Julia Guerreiro, shows that if the government doesn’t cut entitlements, it will have to raise taxes by 88% to pay for their costs.

Since the federal government has historically collected around 18% of gross domestic product in taxes, the mandatory entitlement programs may absorb all federal revenues as early as 2026, when the cost of servicing the debt is included in the calculation, the economists say.

IMF: To Contain Future Budget, US Must Raise Taxes By 35%, Cut Entitlements 35%; Without Cuts, Taxes Must Rise By 88%

Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Happy Nomad on March 12, 2013 at 9:49 PM

Damn, grammar is not my best trait. That is what I meant by stating “and other truly non partisan entitites”. Should have typed “the CBO, or better yet..yada yada yada.”

Certainly agree that CBO is partisan.

can_con on March 12, 2013 at 9:55 PM

They accept with little question the gloriously optimistic economic factors and assumptions put forth by this administration and score legislation accordingly.

Actually I believe they are REQUIRED to accept the parametres, given….

JFKY on March 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM

“My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

See? It’s balanced. It’s a balanced budget. Sock it to the rich, spend more money that we don’t have, and engage in wishful thinking. Et, voilà! “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” becomes “L’espoir, le changement, et l’équilibre!” (The Hope, Change and Balance!).

Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 9:59 PM

Et, voilà! “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” becomes “L’espoir, le changement, et l’équilibre!”

Help him he spoke FRENCH!

Now I’m going to play the banjo.

JFKY on March 12, 2013 at 10:02 PM

Not sure what you mean by this EG- I lurk more then I post, however, I feel like I know all you regulars. I enjoy your debates and your bantering. Always good for a few laughs especially when I’ve had enough of this administration! Maybe there are many others who do the same?

wolverinefan on March 12, 2013 at 9:18 PM

You should join in more often. We need all the help we can get!

VegasRick on March 12, 2013 at 10:06 PM

Why ask why.

Philly on March 12, 2013 at 10:07 PM

MeanWhile………….Fox/Ryan Weigh In:

March 12 2013–9:33ET.

Paul Ryan Reacts to President Obama Telling ABC’s George Stephanopoulos He Won’t Put Out a Plan to Balance the Budget
************************************************************

Hours after releasing his proposal to balance the budget in 10 years without raising taxes, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan joined Hannity and reacted to President Obama’s response to his plan. The president said in an ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos that he will not put forth a plan to balance the budget.

President Obama said, “My goal is not to chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance. My goal is how do we grow the economy, put people back to work. And if we do that, we’re going to be bringing in more revenue if we’ve controlled spending and we’ve got a smart entitlement package, then potentially what you have is balance. But it’s not balance on the backs of the poor, the elderly, students who need student loans, families who’ve got disabled kids – that’s not the right way to balance our budget.”

“That didn’t sound too charming to me,” Ryan told Sean Hannity after hearing those comments. “Our budget grows government spending every year by 3.4 percent instead of the president’s path that we are on right now which is five percent a year.”

He said, “Is it so Draconian to scale back the increase in spending. […] I’d also say, balancing the budget helps grow the economy and that’s what we’re trying to do here.”

Ryan’s plan includes defunding Obamacare, something the Democrat-controlled Senate and the president won’t be on board with. “This is a terrible law,” Ryan said, standing by his proposal. “Americans are in for a rude awakening. We’re showing how we’d repeal it and what we’d replace it with.”

PART I:

Video:(8:09)

Part 2

Video:6:27)

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/03/12/paul-ryan-reacts-to-president-obama-saying-he-wont-put-out-a-plan-to-balance-the-budget/

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM

You’re seething in your own ignorance. There’s a different trajectory to spending under Obama, historic in nature.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm

As a share of GDP, outlays fell in 2012—to 22.8 percent, which was less than the 24.1 percent recorded in 2011 and 2010 but still above the 40-year average of 21.0 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43697

bayam on March 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Obama’s spending is a record low? I have a bridge in Nevada I want to sell you too.

gwelf on March 12, 2013 at 10:09 PM

why is damn near every republican a friggin’ pansy coward that won’t stand up and tell the world what this #@!$%&* is all about? seriously……why?

GhoulAid on March 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

GloulAid:

Dude,you Obama Mom Jeans are on to tight!!!

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 10:19 PM

Cloward Piven. Need we say more?

NavyMustang on March 12, 2013 at 9:04 PM

Not to quibble, but the Frankfurt School and the Fabian Socialists merit inclusion.

wolfsDad on March 12, 2013 at 10:22 PM

MeanWhile,..the Daily KAOS,says Hopey has Shovel Ready Jobs,
buried somewhere in their Budget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob‏@2011teacher

Senate Dem. Budget Has $100 B Stimulus for Job Creation!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/12/1193603/-Senate-Dem-Budget-Has-100-B-Stimulus-for-Job-Creation … via @dailykos #budget

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/12/1193603/-Senate-Dem-Budget-Has-100-B-Stimulus-for-Job-Creation

canopfor on March 12, 2013 at 10:24 PM

Help him he spoke FRENCH!

Now I’m going to play the banjo.

JFKY on March 12, 2013 at 10:02 PM

He’s been hanging out with John “French” Kerry. :-)

Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 10:26 PM

New York Times headline:

Obama budget fails Senate vote 99-1. White House touts progress!

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Who voted for it? Elizabeth Warren?

22044 on March 12, 2013 at 10:34 PM

MTF on March 12, 2013 at 8:50 PM

New York Times headline:

Obama budget fails Senate vote 99-1. White House touts progress!

predator on March 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Not to be picky (!!), but if it failed, it would be 1-99! Ayes come first!

herm2416 on March 13, 2013 at 12:05 AM

Wait. I thought this cat was all about balance. He was Mr. Balanced Approach.

BTW, there should be a corollary to “not balancing a budget just for the sake of balance.” Something like “I am going to run up deficits just for the sake of my legacy.”

TexasDan on March 13, 2013 at 1:32 AM

Budgets?………..We Don’t Need No Stinking Budgets Gringo!!!

FreedomLover on March 13, 2013 at 1:37 AM

“No,” Obama says. “My goal is not chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

“Hi, my name’s Barack…and I’m a spendaholic” (hi, Barack, welcome, and keep coming back)

olesparkie on March 13, 2013 at 7:23 AM

Obama: Nah, my budget won’t balance

“And what difference does it make at this point anyway?” — Comrade O.

It’s only important if Dear Leader says it is.

farsighted on March 13, 2013 at 9:44 AM