Patterico's Pontifications

3/13/2013

Obama Has No Intention of Balancing the Budget

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:35 am



Don’t believe me. Believe Obama. That’s what he told George Snuffleupagus. He’s not going to “chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

He’s hoping for the do-nothing Democrat solution: growth will magically happen and solve everything.

(Hey, I even think it will work for a while. There will be a phony recovery before the crash.)

Three cheers for responsible politicians. We are screwed. Have a nice day.

44 Responses to “Obama Has No Intention of Balancing the Budget”

  1. I’m wondering when, if ever, America will understand that they’ve screwed themselves by electing and then re-electing Obozo?

    GM Roper (644b97)

  2. I wonder if his budget will get any votes his time around.

    JD (31065f)

  3. omg so what you’re saying is obama HAS NO INTENTION OF BALANCING THE BUDGET

    omg knock me over wif a feather

    omg

    I’m a read it again

    omfg

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  4. growth will magically happen and solve everything

    speaking of math-challenged douchebags this morning we also have navy goofball Samuel J. Locklear III for whom the concept of “average” proves to be frightfully elusive

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  5. here mr. navy douchebag it’s an infographic from a subversive group called “accuweather” for you to ponder using your big navy admiral brain

    I will give you a second to absorb the datas

    ok bless your heart you can have another second while I get another cup of coffee

    ok now here is another chart for you to ponder

    go ahead take the whole day sometimes it helps to take a step back and play legos for a little while then come back to the hard math problems

    but I know you can do it

    no child left behind Mr. admiral

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  6. Locklear is not wrong, happyfeet, just talking from a sailor’s perspective. The sea and the weather are sailors’ biggest dangers (and San Francisco waterfront bars, too, but that’s a different story).

    nk (53646e)

  7. Seriously, you have to ask whether he really doesn’t think debt is an issue, whether he really thinks the amount of debt is not that bad because we will grow out of it, or whether he really thinks what the rest of us think, that you can’t take on debt forever, but he is seriously doing a Cloward-Piven.

    As crazy as it seems, it wasn’t that many years ago that I would have said you were crazy if you told me about Alinsky and Rules for Radicals.

    Would you have ever believed 12 years ago that John “reminiscent of Genghis Khan” Kerry would have been US Secretary of State after having been a serious presidential cabinet?

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  8. no Mr. nk there is no conclusive evidence that the global warmings are making more super typhoons much less to where hey you sunk my battleship

    the number of the supertyphoons is well within the historical distribution

    average does not mean what navy goofball thinks it means

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  9. here is another helpful chart of the irksome supertyphoons navy douchebag thinks comprise our numero uno threat in the pacific

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  10. Maybe the good “admiral” can be a victim of SEACASTRATION…..errrrrr sequestration.

    Gus (694db4)

  11. It’s not only Obama that thinks that there is no issue with debt, he is just a reflection of his fellow left wing voters, like the guys that live around me, that think if we just tax Donald Trump enough and return to the 80% marginal tax rates all will be well. They do not get that it’s entitlements that are the issue. It just doesn’t register with them. It is absolutely amazing. Short of a major financial melt down, I don’t know how we are going to convince them to get serious on spending, etc. This on top of media clowns like Paul Krugman who advocate the same crap as Obama.

    Ipso Fatso (1e3278)

  12. nk, does The City still have waterfront bars?

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  13. What’s to worry about the debt, The Bernanke will just do a ReFi for Obummer, and let him pull a couple Trill out of the equity.
    What…what do you mean there’s no equity?
    There’s got to be equity, why just last week eight RE agents called and asked if the WH was interested in selling Manhattan.
    What do you mean the WH can’t sell Manhattan???????

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  14. Comment by Ipso Fatso (1e3278) — 3/13/2013 @ 9:02 am

    It used to be fun to scorn people who seemingly got all their info from scanning the covers of People/The Enquirer/etc in the supermarket check-out line.
    Today’s Low-Info Voter though seems to be someone who religiously reads the NYT, and/or listens/views shows that rely on The Grey Lady for the direction of “news” for their programming.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  15. Why would anyone think that Barack Obama is concerned with either the deficit or the debt? He is the epitome of the difference between a presidential candidate, a job at which he has proven to be great, and a president, of which he is the worst one in my lifetime, and my lifetime includes Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter.

    Adding $4+ trillion in debt in eight years was “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic,” according to candidate Obama in June of 2008; adding $6 trillion in debt in four years, well, that’s nothing, nothing at all . . . and it’s all George Bush’s fault anyway.

    The realistic Dana (3e4784)

  16. To the Many Faceted Dana: Bravo!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  17. 7. Someone said ‘never chalk up to conspiracy what can be more simply explained by stupidity’.

    An appeal to Ockham’s razor I suppose. But seriously, animal behavior is not one dimensional. There is no need to make a false dilemma where both factors, as well as others, like sloth, can contribute.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  18. @askeptic

    My only quibble with your post: I now refer to the NYTs as The Gay Lady. (:

    Ipso Fatso (1e3278)

  19. He’s not going to “chase a balanced budget just for the sake of balance.”

    So typical of Obama — leave the heavy lifting for the next guy. He certainly can’t compromise his all-important approval rating by doing something which might ask for sacrifices from anybody other than the wealthiest 3%.

    JVW (4826a9)

  20. Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 3/13/2013 @ 9:30 am

    True points, and yes Occam’s razor figures prominently in any one trained in medicine (not the end-all and be-all, but a significant starting point).

    I also go by taking people at their word, when they are talking when there is little gain to lying. Obama wants to do a transformation of a nation he thinks has been fundamentally unfair, and he wants to spread the wealth around. The only hard part is for everyone who doesn’t think that way to realize some do.

    “To Serve Man”

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  21. I’m pretty sure I’ve asked this before and had it answered, but just to confirm.

    There once was the basic budget, then an $800 billion or so stimulus was passed (for shovel-ready projects that weren’t so shovel ready, Wisconsin public workers pension funds, etc.) on top of it. The no more budgets were produced, just continuing spending resolutions, which essentially just kept repeating the “one time stimulus” on top of the “basic budget”. And this pretty much accounts for a big part of the growing deficit and debt, right?

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  22. Yes, MD.

    JD (b63a52)

  23. Make hime DEFINE “balance”

    jb (1e0905)

  24. Painted Jaguar; JD, you are ever so kind and patient with mr MD, probably even more patient than my mummy down here in the jungle by the deep, dark, turbid waters of the Amazon. I am such a good little cub my mummy doesn’t have that much to put up with. You, on the other hand, are putting up with MD…
    In his defense, he keeps shaking his head saying, “This is so simple, it should be obvious, why isn’t it?”, and he has a hard time thinking he is correct and nearly everyone else wrong within a 10 mile radius of his home.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  25. Democrat logic: George W. Bush’s $500 billion dollar budget deficits caused our financial crisis, but Obama’s $1.2 trillion dollar deficits are what are saving us as a nation from ruin …

    SPQR (768505)

  26. I hasten to remind you that Obama is merely stealing the business plan of the gnomes on Southpark:

    Step 1 – Steal Underpants
    Step 2 – ??
    Step 3 – Profits

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO5sxLapAts
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gnomes_plan.png

    in_awe (7c859a)

  27. The no more budgets were produced, just continuing spending resolutions, which essentially just kept repeating the “one time stimulus” on top of the “basic budget”. And this pretty much accounts for a big part of the growing deficit and debt, right?

    The trick the Dems played is that not only did they bring about this silly “stimulus” which they sold as about $900B worth of projects spread out over three or four years, but they also quietly jacked up spending in all of the regular budget categories. Thus, when the stimulus funds were finally exhausted, we were still faced with the regular budget increases that the Democrats had quietly enacted.

    I know that we are all justifiably angry at the Bush Administration for their spending profligacy, but if memory serves, the last Bush budget before the financial collapese (i.e., Bush year 7 budget) had the projected deficit for 2007 down to something like $160B mostly by freezing spending on non-defense programs. It is precisely those programs upon which the Democrats unleashed a spending binge once they took over Congress and ultimately the White House.

    JVW (4826a9)

  28. 7, 17

    You are most likely thinking of Hanlon’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

    Most apropos these days, I fear.

    gramps (bf1b3d)

  29. Gus – I had a sequestration once. With a little local anesthetic and a scalpel my doctor removed it in one office visit. No muss, no fuss. Good as new.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  30. Comment by gramps (bf1b3d) — 3/13/2013 @ 11:44 am

    Maybe it’s Hanlon Occam’s Razor- Never underestimate how many different things can be attributed to one stupid move.
    or is it how many stupid things can be attributed to one person with malice.

    25.Democrat logic: George W. Bush’s $500 billion dollar budget deficits caused our financial crisis, but Obama’s $1.2 trillion dollar deficits are what are saving us as a nation from ruin … Comment by SPQR (768505) — 3/13/2013 @ 11:31 am

    You see, Bush had a deficit because he cut revenues by giving tax breaks for the rich, meaning lots of people had extra money to take vacations out of the country where they spent money that our government should have had.
    Obama has a deficit because he spent more money than he had, hoping to make everyone stay home because they can’t afford to leave the country and spend money the government now has. And having a deficit to pay off, they can’t go next year, or the year after that, either.

    See, makes sense. Duck for the flying pig.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  31. Painted Jaguar – But Obama saved us from deficits even larger than $1.2 trillion. We should be on our knees thanking him.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  32. Painted Jaguar, oh great, now Perry will repeat that “explanation” of yours as though it were Received Wisdom …

    SPQR (768505)

  33. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9)

    Painted Jaguar: You may do as you wish, mr. daley, but my knees don’t bend like a humans to be on them.
    But my mummy said something about leaving Mr. Obama alone, just like an Armadillo.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  34. Comment by SPQR

    Painted Jaguar: Maybe your Perry likes to discuss topics when flying pigs.
    I only talk with Perry the Platypus, and he knows pigs don’t fly.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  35. He treats the Treasury like an Ivy League endowment.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  36. He’s hoping for the do-nothing Democrat solution: growth will magically happen and solve everything.

    In fairness that was Jack Kemp’s and other conservatives’ proposed solution to the long term entitlement funding problems.

    Gerald A (c7c56a)

  37. He treats the treasury like an AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BASED CREDIT CARD in WHITEY’S name.

    GUS (694db4)

  38. Julia Roberts used to be a big thing but now she’s just a faded echo of a big thing cause it’s like nobody really gives a crap anymore if she has a new movie or whatever

    that’s what I want that for Food Stamp

    I want that for him

    I want him to have that

    just like Julia

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  39. I haven’t argued with my mother since my dad died. As his time was running out, I was sorry I wasted many hours over the decades angry at him, and don’t want to feel like that again. I mention this because one of the last things my mother and I had a mild shouting match about was my assertion that regardless of his protestations, Barack Obama was an ideologue who was not focused on helping America’s economy. He is, I explained, more concerned about remaking America into a country he liked rather than bringing the America that is back from economic collapse.

    Backup for my opinion that he doesn’t like America as it is was his own statements, before and after his election. In 2001, before he first ran for elective office, he expressed his opinion that the Supreme Court should have been forced to address “redistributive change,” and that it was a “traged[y] of the civil rights movement” that the SCOTUS justices viewed the Constitution as a “charter of negative liberties.” He was hopeful they would be pressured into interpreting it in a way to declare “what the Federal government or state government[s] must do on your behalf…” (italics mine). I reminded her that Obama was a twenty-year devotee of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose anti-American (“U.S. of KKKA”), anti-Semitic, and Caucasian-bashing attitudes (the Romans who executed Jesus were “garlic-nose” Italians) were the stuff of legend. I informed her that Obama’s political career was jump-started at a fundraiser held at the home of self-described “guilty as sin” domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. I reminded her that Michelle Obama said in prepared remarks twice in one day that she only was proud of her country now that it was moving toward the “change” to which her husband was leading it.

    But above all, the thing that convinced me most that Obama’s priority wasn’t to improve the economy was what he said in a 2008 debate against Hillary (and John Edwards). ABC’s Charles Gibson asked a perfectly relevant question:


    CHARLES GIBSON: …[W]hen the [capital gains] rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why [do you want to] raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

    SENATOR OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness…


    And there you have a prime example of what HE thinks “fairness” is: extracting more money from rich people EVEN IF the economy helps everybody when they AREN’T heavily taxed. It’s not “math,” as he continually and facetiously insists, it’s a principle that he lives for, damn the torpedoes. As long as Republicans aren’t interested in that definition of “fairness,” he’s NOT interested in helping the economy in the short term. Maybe after he’s put the wealthy in their place and begun the process of bringing the lower classes up by jacking up tax rates, he’ll help out, but not a second before he flattens out what he sees as is a playing field built on the side of a mountain.

    As the first “red diaper baby” President, Obama’s goal as Chief Executive is NOT to apply the principles of capitalism to reboot our common fortunes, as has been done so many times from recession to comeback to bubble to recession to comeback, etc. throughout American history. We are all in a petri dish undergoing a live experiment in economics by a man who doesn’t understand national economies. His goal is to force the United States – which became the engine of the world’s economy and the epicenter of freedom on the planet — to become something that it’s never been. Nobody can really say what Obama’s “more perfect” America looks like because he has never been honest about his vision. If he was, he would be able to clearly explain how he’s changing the way America does business, why it will work out fine, and provide an example of when and how it has worked elsewhere. He hasn’t, or won’t, presumably because he can’t. And the members of the mainstream media won’t demand he do so. Why not? In my opinon, because 1. They’re hoping they’re right about him being as smart as they dreamed he was, and 2. Whatever he does wrong, they will always convince themselves Republicans would have made things much worse.

    I just grit my teeth and mumble about the economy if it comes up in my mother’s presence. I remind myself that someday — hopefully in the distant future — I’ll be glad I kept my opinion in my mouth.

    L.N. Smithee (b6535d)

  40. wtf does Mr. cash for clunkers food stamp know about creating jobs exactly?

    happyfeet (4bf7c2)

  41. Bravo, LN

    JD (31065f)

  42. I agree with LN and JD, that is pretty much the “smoking gun” on Obama’s view of class and economics, down with the rich even if every body else, including the poor, gets hurt too.

    That should have Been played in TV ads the last 5 years.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  43. Well, maybe it is a little bit clearer now.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/us/politics/obama-to-meet-with-house-gop-over-budget.html?ref=congress&_r=0&pagewanted=all

    Our biggest problems in the next 10 years are not deficits,” the president said, according to accounts from the meeting, bluntly rejecting an idea that has become Republican fiscal dogma.

    That left many Republicans, who are resisting the president’s calls to close tax loopholes that benefit the wealthy, wondering where they could find room for compromise.

    “Well, he doesn’t want to balance the budget in 10 years, and he wants tax increases, and he wants new spending,” Representative Darrell Issa of California said as he left the meeting early. “But other than that, we’re close.”

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.3189 secs.