Politico’s Improbable Look at History
Politico reports that the Obama Administration will “focus extensively on cutting the federal deficit in 2010.” Politico then lazily writes:
The big question for Obama – and the country – is whether the sudden concern about deficits will be more rhetoric than reality once his first State of the Union address concludes.
Hmm, let’s use the WABAC Machine to journey back to March 2009 where President Obama said:
The budget I submitted to Congress will build our economic recovery on a stronger foundation, so that we don’t face another crisis like this 10 or 20 years from now. We invest in the renewable sources of energy that will lead to new jobs, new businesses, and less dependence on foreign oil. We invest in our schools and our teachers so that our children have the skills they need to compete with any workers in the world. We invest in reform that will bring down the cost of health care for families, businesses and our government. And in this budget, we have — we have to make the tough choices necessary to cut our deficit in half by the end of my first term — even under the most pessimistic estimates.
At the end of the day, the best way to bring our deficit down in the long run is not with a budget that continues the very same policies that have led to a narrow prosperity and massive debt. It’s with a budget that leads to broad economic growth by moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest.
You don’t have to be Mr. Peabody to write a good news article, but it might help.
Tags: Journalism, President Obama
We posted about this item two days ago and I am still laughing. For Obama to say he is worried and will act on the deficit is pure idiocy. Kind of like Michael Jackson saying he will work on his substance abuse and endless plastic surgery.
http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/cut-spending/
Obama will give you a few teleprompter remarks and do nothing except talk. The debt he has thrown on us is obscene.
For liberals, please name one thing he will cut.
Mike Protack
The only sure way to end up in a “crisis like this 10 or 20 years from now” is to elect more borrow and spend Republicans. As a country, we are dumb enough to do just that. So I put the odds at 60/40.
Brace yourselp…more taxes coming.
If BO is focusing on deficit in 2010 to appear conservative for the elections, will he have made a decision on Afghanistan by then or will that wait until 2011?
Seriously, does the S stand for Stoopid?
no, but keep name-calling. It adds credibility to your comments.
That would be the pot calling the kettle black.
now that it’s legal, it’s ok.
medicinally anyway
Tom S, your first comment shows that you didn’t even read the post.
If BO is focusing on deficit in 2010 to appear conservative for the elections, will he have made a decision on Afghanistan by then or will that wait until 2011?
If you read the post, you would see that President Obama has already started a plan for budget deficit reduction — publicly in March 2009. And yes it probably means more taxes. You got to pay for services, just ask the peeps in Sussex County.
And your Afghan comment . . . well, that in combination with you not understanding the post led me to ask my question.
Kennedy & Johnson did this in the 60s…inflation follows.
I have no clue why I am asking, but Kennedy and Johnson did what?
I’m sorry Tom if you want to talk about who blew up the deficit you need to look at Reagan, Bush I and Bush II.
Inflation under Kennedy did not top 2%. Under Johnson, it hit a high of 4.27% and under Nixon it hit 11% in ’74.
nemski, c’mon, you know the 11% inflation was all Clinton’s fault.
Nemski — thanks for asking. I was wondering too.
C’mon, Mikey, the question is still out there: How will you balance the NCCo without raising taxes? Your vast constituency (which includes me; I live in the district) awaits your answer. Stop talking about Obama; he has nothing to do with the office you are running for.
By the way, will you vote to turn down any stimulus funds slated for the county? I realize that would just be grandstanding, since even if you’re elected you’ll be one of only two Republicans on council, but c’mon, show your stuff, Einstein.
MV = PT
Obama and his team of charlatans should review this formula to evaluate how bad they have wrecked the economy.
Mike Protack
Wow. Well, we’ve established at least one thing. “All those guys look alike” to Mr. Protack.
Nothing else explains the jump from Obama/deficit to Jackson/drugs quite as well as a mental map of racist prejudice.
Nice going, Mr. Candidate. @@
One of the most successful frames the Republicans have hung around our necks is that we are tax-and-spend-liberals who run up deficits. There are many responses to this, including the surplus that Clinton passed on to Bush II. But let’s look at Delaware since January 20, 2009.
We were faced with an $800 million shortfall. Yes, there were some tax increases required, but they were targeted to hit those most able to pay, unlike the Republican proposal for tax increases across the board, hitting the middle class the hardest.
But more importantly, the largest part of that shortfall was made up with cuts to government programs. Again, the programs that would have the least impact on those in need. The Democrats did that. Since January over 1000 government jobs have been cut. These are jobs that will never be filled again and come off the budget. These were not jobs in education, but government administration jobs. The Democrats did that. And Governor Markell is committed to continue to shrink our state government, making it leaner and more efficient in FY 2011.
As President Clinton said the other night, we’re the party the American people hire to come in and clean up the mess the Republicans make. As President Obama said recently, grab a mop. We are the party of fiscal responsibility. And the American people are aware of that fact.
If the Republican strategy for 2010 depends on voters throwing out Democratic incumbents then they have a losing strategy. If they are counting on teh stoopid they’re not going to make it this time. The meltdown was too dramatic, widespread, and lingering for Americans to forget who brought it. Main Street knows they have been living with class warfare for a long time and they know the Republicans brought it. They aren’t going back to that brand anytime soon.
I think we should worry that the Obama team is hiding that time machine they used to go back in time and ruin the economy more than a year before he became president.
Does anything Mike Protack says have any intellectual content at all? He’s like a broken record.
“Does anything Mike Protack says have any intellectual content at all? He’s like a broken record.”
And he should be forced to back up his empty campaign rhetoric about NCCo taxes. What would you do instead of raise taxes, Mike? We’re still waiting.
Mike,
As a candidate, I think it’s a good idea that you take this criticism: When asked a fair, valid question (say, for instance, the one posed to you by Geezer re: NCC taxes), responding with an ad hominem, canned, anti-Obama response is not the best way to endear yourself to potential voters.
Consider that some free political advice from a guy who won’t bitch and moan for you not paying a consultant fee!
responding with an ad hominem, canned, anti-Obama response is not the best way to endear yourself to potential voters.
If we didn’t get a canned, ad-hominem response, I’d have to think it wasn’t really Mike Protack making the comment.
“But more importantly, the largest part of that shortfall was made up with cuts to government programs. Again, the programs that would have the least impact on those in need. The Democrats did that. Since January over 1000 government jobs have been cut. These are jobs that will never be filled again and come off the budget. These were not jobs in education, but government administration jobs. The Democrats did that. And Governor Markell is committed to continue to shrink our state government, making it leaner and more efficient in FY 2011.”
Fiction.
The attrition numbers come from a deal struck between Markell and House Republicans. Not only that, but attrition is a terrible way to shed jobs. A position’s vacancy should not be a determinant over whether it gets cut. Cut the jobs that need to be cut, not the jobs that are open.
The “cuts” were to programs that were then funded by stimulus money. So the overall level of spending did not go down nearly as high as they say. The cost burden simply shifted from the state to the federal government, largely in Medicaid and unemployment insurance.
The only significant Democrat-created cut came at the expense of state employees’ paychecks.
So please, PLEASE, spare me the “Delaware Democrats are heroes” speech.
And there were legitimate “progressive” ideas like John Kowalko’s ideas on revenue that the hero Democrats didn’t even bring for consideration. Not that I would have supported them, but your heroes didn’t even bother with ideas in their own party.
“not that I would have supported them”
In fact, the R caucus did manage to come up with the one vote needed on each of the revenue bills to get them passed. But only one. They did the minimum to keep the whole thing from blowing up, knowing where the finger would be pointed. But mainly, they kept their ideology intact for most of their members. They can stand back and throw stones and that was the strategy. There were no sleeves rolled up and no pitching in, just whining and complaining from the basement.
This is the sort of craven behavior we witness from R’s at all levels. No cooperation, no responsibility, just political posturing. Screw the state, screw the country, but save the GOP. Good luck with that.
“There were no sleeves rolled up and no pitching in, just whining and complaining from the basement.”
Rebecca has a future as a fiction writer. In fact, BECAUSE of the “pitching in” by the Republicans, we got reductions in staff through atrrition (which by the way, you thought was plenty heroic when you attributed it to Democrats). We also got sunset clauses on all of the tax hikes, and reductions in those hikes.
Had they not give that one vote to pass all of the legislation, you would have been right here damning them for being intransigent and shutting down the government.
Keep pretending, Rebecca. Keep ignoring the facts (I’ll note here that you didn’t challenge one of my facts). Whatever you have to do to make Democrats look good and Republicans look bad, right?
And I suppose it’s somehow the Republicans’ fault that John Kowalko’s revenue concepts got tossed.
Come on, Rebecca. You’re supposed to be “progressive.” Tell me how the Republicans killed the “progressive” taxation plans.
Atrition good when done by R’s, bad when done by D’s. If I can’t have it both ways then neither can you Dave. And, yes, John’s own caucus killed his revenue measure. I heard something about unintended consequences at the time, but heaven knows since it was such a mad scramble to get to a budget. The thing is we’ve both got to get over the “purity” issues and do what’s right for Delaware. And Dave, the R’s are much more hung-up on purity, in all it’s various forms, than the D’s have ever been. Because your gang is in this for power not service and purity is a heavy club.
“Atrition good when done by R’s, bad when done by D’s. If I can’t have it both ways then neither can you Dave.”
I never intended to have it both ways. I gave my opinion on attrition in my first comment. It’s a lazy and inefficient way to achieve reductions in force. However, it is a reduction in force, so at least it’s moving in the right way.
The House Republicans started us down that path with their demands in budget negotiations. And Markell has exceeded that number on his own. So they’re both responsible to some degree.
I’m not afraid to give Democrats credit for positive developments. In fact, I enjoy it, because in the end we’re not going to fix our problems unless we come together. Which is why Markell’s secret, unilateral budget meetings with Democrats trouble me so much.
And don’t talk to me about purity. The Dover Dems have plenty of purity, it’s just not the kind you want. And if the R’s have so much purity, why did they publish an editorial in the middle of session calling for tax increases and protecting state employees from any reduction in payroll? They did that as a concession to a disastrous budget situation, and they were criticized for it.
“Because your gang is in this for power not service and purity is a heavy club.”
What a petty, stupid and insulting thing to say.