After ballooning our debt to $13 trillion after just one year in office, all of a sudden Obama is taking cues from his former opponent and now wants to cut spending. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll take it. For this guy to use a coupon to buy milk would be a miracle of fiscal responsibility.
But anyone who has followed politics for the last year knows that Obama’s social agenda has run unchecked doing untold damage to the American economy while spending unheard of amounts of money. The voters have had enough. After the loss of governorships in blue New Jersey and purple Virginia, the Democrats didn’t get the message.
Or did they?
Perhaps they knew they were losing popularity and intended to stuff health care down our throats before they lost his filibuster-proof majority. Maybe Obama thought his phony deadlines of August 2009 and December 2009 could allow Democrats to avoid election year losses. But with the election of Scott Brown to the seat formerly held by a drunken murderer, the progressives have finally heard the message:
Stop Spending
Obviously Obama’s plan to halt non-discretionary spending is an attempt to move to the right and distance himself from Pelosi and Reid who are now immensely unpopular. He knows, like I do, that there is no way all of the one time voters who turned out in droves to elect him are going to get off the couch a second time. Basically, he knows he’s a one term president.
But where did he get the idea for a spending freeze? Was it Orszag? Emanuel? Biden? Gibbs? Think again. Obama got this idea from none other than his former opponent, John McCain. At the time Obama attacked him saying he was using a “hatchet where a scalpel was needed” promising to go line by line through the budget to eliminate the waste (instead he signed tens of thousands of earmarks into law in his first three months).
Does anyone remember the first Presidential Debate from 2008?
Keep in mind, Obama’s latest move is not a spending cut. All he is doing is maintaining the current level of spending, which he increased by more than 30% in a year where revenue was down considerably. That translates into an estimated deficit of $1.3 trillion for 2010. This after the stimulus, the bailouts, the omnibus, and his gargantuan 2009 budget with a $1.38 trillion deficit.
Well, Mr President, I’m glad you finally found your hatchet. Now get choppin!
~Man Overboard
Image used in this Post
Obama Claus photo courtesy of Flickr user azrainman published under the CC license.
14 Comments
Obama wants to cut spending, why does it matter whose idea it was? You know I am no fan of his budget based on my own analysis. But why should he be taking criticism for trying to compromise with what he believes their viewpoint to be? Why has the Republican Party become the Party of No to such an extent that they can’t even bear to say, “Hey, it’s not exactly what we wanted but at least he finally decided to try and do something unpopular within his own party to meet us part-way.” You know I am all about cutting government spending and this is at least a move in the right direction. Sure, discretionary spending is only 1/6 of the total budget, but it is a step. It is proof that our president, who has been less then impressive, is willing to do something unpopular in his own party and that is encouraging
Frankly, the biggest budget items are social security, medicare & medicaid, and defense. These are the only budget items that will make a difference to the overall picture. However, while you discuss this enormous deficit figure you fail to own up to the fact that Bush passed him a half of a trillion dollar deficit and a bank bail-out he had to not only live with, but support and somehow make work since Bush got to spend and run with no accountability. So, of the $1.3 trillion deficit for this year, he inherited most of it because Bush gave it to him. It is very convenient to say he racked it up but that is a lie. Just like saying Clinton balanced the budget; the budget was balanced during Clinton’s term in office but the decisions that led to the outcome were made by Bush Sr.
I guess I am just frustrated by the constant Republican opposition no matter what happens. Obama could cut taxes for the rich tomorrow, let oil companies drill off US coastlines, oppose gay marriage, go pro-life, and embrace every other Republican stereotype-position and the Republicans would somehow find a way to find fault with what he does. I am not saying he does a lot right, but I sure am sick and tired of people being so polarized that they are ready to twist and turn the facts to manipulate a situation so that they can still belly-ache in the face of compromise. It’s pathetic and I wish people would look in the mirror and see how horrible they are. Rant over.
Well, the first paragraph says “don’t get me wrong I’ll take it.” Meaning I’m not against it. But it’s a drop in the bucket of what he SHOULD be doing.
It doesn’t matter so much who’s idea it was, as it is exposing how wrong he was on the campaign trail (about everything else as well).
Oil companies SHOULD drill off the coastline unless you would rather pay the Arabs, Russians, or Venezuelans s for it. Gay marriage and abortion are distractor issues that don’t matter for anything, but while were on it, killing an unborn baby is the most deplorable act a human being can commit.
Republicans won’t be against this, but they will expose it for what it is: a cut of ZERO dollars, and a pledge that Obama will be hard pressed to keep given his out of control agenda.
Bush sure did grow the deficit, but how much longer is Obama going to use that as an argument? It’s insulting to the intelligence of any person when he tries to pass of the Mass senate election as an affront to BUSH – please. He’s like a drug addict saying he can stop anytime he wants to.
Obama has been THE MOST DIVISIVE president in my lifetime (includng Bush) and within his first year. FACT
Every piece of legislation he has proposed has been voted on across party line – didn’t he run as a unifier? Did that mean everyone just has to do what he says? He has passed shady pork riddled legislation with corrupt bargains meant to buy votes and he did it behind closed doors without even admitting Republicans. He had promised on the campaign to have CSPAN IN THE ROOM DURING NEGOTIATIONS. He passes 1,000 page bills 10 hours after making them available to Republicans to read. Now THAT is bipartisanship! (note sarcasm)
His approval rating has dropped more than 25 points in one year (rightly so – he lied on the campaign repeatedly) and he has already broken half of his campaign promises: gitmo, transparency (yeah right), cut spending (yeah right), reach across the isle (to give the finger), and end the wars (escalated one while the other was already winding down).
Don’t let his rhetoric fool you. His spending freeze is a smoke screen of an attempt to appear fiscally responsible before the SOTU and he is doing it because his party is about to get trounced in a midterm election and he is sweating his job.
One more thing – 500 billion is not half of 1.38 trillion or the 1.3 trillion this year. It’s closer to 1/3 actually. And your also not counting a 300 billion dollar omnibus, the stimulus is up to 800 billion, 75 billion in mortgage protection, 10 billion in cash for clunkers, and over 100 billion to car companies that are going to die in another year anyway. That’s another 1.3 trillion right there in discretionary spending in one year. Shall we consider his failed attempt at a 1 trillion dollar healthcare overhaul that was little more than a handout to the insurance companies and a tax/fine for everyone else? The bailouts (banks anyway) and shared with Bush. But there is no way you can possibly compare Bush to Obama on spending, not without omitting a couple of zeros.
Your math is way off. But aside from that, your position is fulling entrenched in partisanship, something you are claiming to be against in your comment.
Regardless, the $500 billion was the actual amount laid out at the time he took office only 4 months into the fiscal year. Decisions made prior to his taking office continued to outlay cash well into the fiscal year, going upwards of the $680 billion needed to hit the halfway mark if you want to get that detailed.
Again, I don’t necessarily agree with Obama. You want to know why legislation was passed without CSPAN and with only 10 hours for them to read 1,00 page legislation? It’s because he, like most everyone else, knows that Republicans will unite against any position put forth by Democrats regardless of what that position is simply because it wasn’t put forth by a Republican. I can’t blame them for that, the Republicans have done nothing but say “no” since last January without providing a valuable alternative.
And, like a typical Republican, you jump on the abortion thing as if my comment had anything to do with it at all. If you read what I said, all I was trying to do was make an example that no matter what Obama said or did, he could lean as far right as possible and he wouldn’t ever gain any favor with Republicans. It had nothing to do with the actual substance of those issues, but you couldn’t control yourself. It is indicative of exactly the problem with the Republican Party.
Do you think the republicans have been allowed to offer an alternative?
Then I suppose your able to name one single piece of legislation that included a Republican in the writing phase? What about one single amendment put forth by a republican that was allowed? What about ONE SINGLE BILL REPUBLICANS WERE ALLOWED TO READ?
There isn’t one because they’re a bunch of frauds who talk a big game and then do the opposite.
How do you vote for somthing that you don’t know whats in it?
Obama is as far left as you can possibly get and you blame republicans for not voting for it when the moderates in his own party are now scrambling to distance themselves from him.
Maybe, just maybe, the idiots that voted for this bum didn’t read the fine print and are stuck with his crap for the rest of the term. If the democrats are losing in the blue states then their going to get hosed in the red and swing states come November and they have Obama to thank for it. Between now and then you’ll see the blue dogs start to retire or change parties because they know if they’re associated with Obama they’re going to lose.
I want to know what far left piece of legislation that has been passed that you are so pissed about? Because I haven’t heard of any…
Obama is doing what Bush did and he’s stealing ideas from McCain. Republicans will oppose him just because he’s a democrat, and progressives will abandon him because he’s abandoning us (as illustrated by his support of weak-ass Martha Coakley). Obama actually isn’t that far left, and his centrist policies aren’t satisfying anybody. That’s why November is such a scary proposition for the dems.
The stimulus, the omnibus, and the auto bailout.
FDR presided over some of the biggest spending increases that were known to the U.S., despite the fact that he was a fiscal conservative. Unable to abandon his fiscal instincts, though, FDR cut spending as soon as the economy showed signs of improvement. However, he cut too soon and the country entered a recession in 1937. The country did not pull out of the recession until World War II, that massive public works project funded by the government.
There’s a time to spend and a time to save and political affiliations shouldn’t decide what time is right.
Truer words have never been spoken. Sadly, our system is broken. Divisiveness is dangerously high, with both sides equally childish and responsible. Our political environment has to has devolved into a game of you made it tough for my guy now it is our turn to do the same to you (seems only fair). The reality of the situation is that this is not a playground and we are not children, there is an economy at stake.
I have one simple question, why even bother to care or remain informed if every vote you will ever make has already been cast?
That’s a much more succinct way of saying what I was going for. I suck.
I think Incubus said it best, “I understand why they say high school never ends.”
That is a nice find on the Obama Claus picture. Very cool.
Yeah, that pic is hilarious.
None of those three are overly leftist. Dubbya bailed out the banks, and Obama just extended the program. Bush bailed out someone else too…Oh yeah, AIG. So saying that Obama enacted radical leftist legislation for doing the same thing W Bush did implies Bush enacted radical leftist legislation…do you agree? Or does that change whether or not you believe it was radically left? Or will you choose to skirt the issue?
Regardless, I went back looking at some of the bail-out press from the Bush days and, interestingly enough, the media repeatedly implicated the Fed and Treasury with the moves, not Bush…not saying which perspective is right but the double-standard of attribution certainly is intriguing…