null

Something here sounds very familiar…

I ran across the story below over at Weasel Zippers, and ZIP wrote that we’re toast if we have to endure four more years of this. However, I think we’re nearly toast after the first three years.

From the Washington Post:

President Obama will send Congress a 2013 spending plan that would raise taxes on the rich and pump nearly $500 billion into new transportation projects over the next decade, launching an election-year debate over the budget that promises starkly different visions for managing government debt and the sluggish economy.

As they prepare to face voters in November, neither the president nor congressional Republicans are expected to roll out many new or potentially painful prescriptions for slowing the rise of the $15 trillion national debt. After failing repeatedly last year to forge a bipartisan consensus, few in either party see much point in trying again now.

Instead, Obama will on Monday reprise recommendations he unveiled last fall that seek to reduce borrowing by more than $3 trillion over the next decade while spending more in the short term to bring down persistently high unemployment.

They’re still faithfully clinging to the Biden Model, which is to spend money like crazy to keep from going bankrupt. I understand though that it’s an election year and that half trillion pork promise is chum in the water to keep any disgruntled union sharks and assorted cronies following the SS Hope & Change through another voting cycle.

Okay, there may be increased spending — so where’s Obama getting the lion’s share of his deficit reductions from? Phantom numbers from a bookkeeping sleight of hand: wars that weren’t going to be fought anyway:

To achieve his debt-reduction goal, Obama would rely on an accounting maneuver that permits him to claim about $850 billion in savings over the next decade by ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a move Republicans have rejected as a gimmick. Obama would use a portion of those savings to finance new road and rail projects, rather than dedicating the full sum to lower deficits.

Obama is also expected to claim to have reduced the debt by another half trillion by not going to war against Denmark in 2015.

Funny how money “saved” on wars that were going to end anyway is considered debt reduction, but suggesting that they don’t spend a half-trillion on more pork programs and “stimulus” that didn’t work the first time is considered a preposterous notion that will increase the debt.

We must get out of this insane parallel universe and back to reality. Hopefully Election Day in November is a step in that direction. We’ll see.

Comments

9 Responses to “Obama 2013 Budget Proposal: Bringing Down the Deficit and Turning Around the Economy By Raising Taxes and Increasing Spending”

  1. clu seatoe on February 12th, 2012 2:42 pm

    Really!?

    People can’t wrap their brains around this?

    Somebody send it to MYTHBUSTERS, please.

  2. SignPainterGuy on February 12th, 2012 3:28 pm

    Wait a minute here; didn`t Steny Hoyer just announce that the US doesn`t even need a budget ? Why would Capt. Downgrade offer a budget proposal after that ? Would Dingy Harry allow it to see the light of a senate day ?

    I`m with you Doug, we`ve been toast for 3 years already; the only thing left is actually to burn it and I for one HATE that smell ! Let`s just avoid it, OK ? Throw Mr. Hoax and Chains and Co. out this November !

  3. Obama is Borrowing 4 billion per day $4,000,000,000 - Page 20 - Christian Forums on February 12th, 2012 4:04 pm

    [...] Looks like we are getting a sneak peak into Obama's latest budget proposal. The last proposal didn't go over very well, and considered unserious with no one voting for it, Rep. or Dem. Wonder how well this one from the President will be received? "Obama 2013 Budget Proposal: Bringing Down the Deficit and Turning Around the Economy By Raising Taxes and Increasing Spending" Obama 2013 Budget Proposal: Bringing Down the Deficit and Turning Around the Economy By Raising Taxe… [...]

  4. Pasadena Phil on February 12th, 2012 4:54 pm

    Did you find Romney winning CPAC re-assuring? We are toast not so much because of Obama but because there is no opposition party., Yet how many of you are going to be holding your noses to vote fo Rombama (or Jeb Busheif Al Cardenas gets his way in cramming him down our throats in a brokered convention) in November? Over the cliff we go singing the GOP victory song! Freedom is lost to the sound of thunderous applause.

    We are getting screwed by the establishment because we keep voting for the establishment.

    LO3E in 2012. Dare to vote against the problem.

  5. ChapBix on February 12th, 2012 6:16 pm

    Full insanity on display. Losing effort trying to educate the Obamabot zombies.

  6. backwoodsconsr on February 12th, 2012 9:56 pm

    I keep thinking about how many times Obama has railed against the "failed policies of the past." I guess he doesn't mind so much if the failed policies are his own.

  7. clu seatoe on February 12th, 2012 10:58 pm

    Educate the Zero-bot?
    It’s Mission: Impossible 5!!

    What can be done when you’re up against this mentality? The political white man and thinking black man is looking at this all wrong when thinking that facts, figures, stats, and caring about America is going to win the day when dealing with this kind of the black, hateful, bigoted mindset:

    Barack Obama's politics meant nothing to Samuel L. Jackson because the "Pulp Fiction" star only voted for the president for one reason and one reason only … because he's black.

    In an interview with Ebony magazine, Jackson explained, "I voted for Barack because he was black. 'Cuz that's why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them … That's American politics, pure and simple. [Obama's] message didn't mean [bleep] to me."

    http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/11/barack-obama-samuel

    …and Zero has given us no reason to think that he thinks any differently.

  8. clu seatoe on February 12th, 2012 11:26 pm

    If your policies were a failure, would anyone caring about the results continue with them? Open your eyes.

    What does that it mean when the last three years have resulted in the current situation and yet they continue such “damn the Constitution” edicts as we’ve seen in the last week? Your mistake is thinking like a rational person and not the irrational and hateful, mentally defective black man who was already out of work and still receives the welfare money and got another year and a half extended on to his unemployment and who sees “The [white] Man” getting it stuck to him but good.

    In the interview referenced above…:
    Jackson then went on to drop the N-word several times when discussing Obama, telling the mag, "When it comes down to it, they wouldn't have elected a [bleep]. Because, what's a [bleep]? A [bleep] is scary. Obama ain't scary at all. [Bleeps] don't have beers at the White House. [Bleeps] don't let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A [bleep] would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the [bleep] said that?' I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, 'cuz he ain't gotta worry about getting re-elected."

    Smacks of … Obama needs to Black it up.
    Close quote.
    http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/11/barack-obama-samuel

  9. Truesoldier__ on February 13th, 2012 3:19 pm

    Makes me wonder if Obama will be able to get any support for his budget this year. Remember last year? The Senate voted against Obama's budget 97-0.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.