So the petulant President lied. Stooped to new lows, even, in deliberate falsehoods and personal attacks on Paul Ryan.
From the WSJ:
Did someone move the 2012 election to June 1? We ask because President Obama’s extraordinary response to Paul Ryan’s budget yesterday—with its blistering partisanship and multiple distortions—was the kind Presidents usually outsource to some junior lieutenant. Mr. Obama’s fundamentally political document would have been unusual even for a Vice President in the fervor of a campaign.
The immediate political goal was to inoculate the White House from criticism that it is not serious about the fiscal crisis, after ignoring its own deficit commission last year and tossing off a $3.73 trillion budget in February that increased spending amid a record deficit of $1.65 trillion. Mr. Obama was chased to George Washington University yesterday because Mr. Ryan and the Republicans outflanked him on fiscal discipline and are now setting the national political agenda.
Mr. Obama did not deign to propose an alternative to rival Mr. Ryan’s plan, even as he categorically rejected all its reform ideas, repeatedly vilifying them as essentially un-American. “Their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America,” he said, supposedly pitting “children with autism or Down’s syndrome” against “every millionaire and billionaire in our society.” The President was not attempting to join the debate Mr. Ryan has started, but to close it off just as it begins and banish House GOP ideas to political Siberia.
Mr. Obama then packaged his poison in the rhetoric of bipartisanship—which “starts,” he said, “by being honest about what’s causing our deficit.” The speech he chose to deliver was dishonest even by modern political standards.
Hope and Change: dishonest, blistering partisanship and multiple distortions, and vilification.
Pundette on our “temperamentally unfit” POTUS:
Not only is our president unable or unwilling to see the cliff edge approaching; he vilifies anyone who does, as he steps on the gas. Interesting that he deliberately invited Ryan to attend the speech, giving his dishonest attack on him and his plan a personal, vicious, aspect. I didn’t think it was possible, but my opinion of Barack Obama has just dropped even lower. This is a small man. And instead of being elevated by the office, he’s shrinking, and dragging the office and the country down with him.
At this point, the only thing left to say is 2012.
Via Ed Morrissey, 6 in 10 voters want government cut. Let’s ensure that the majority sees the forest for the trees and understands that the President will never deliver fiscal restraint. It’s not in his genes.
How? Thomas Sowell has an idea to cut government and run-around sob-story liberals at the same time:
Trying to reduce the deficit by cutting spending runs into an old familiar counterattack. There will be all kinds of claims by politicians and sad stories in the media about how these cuts will cause the poor to go hungry, the sick to be left to die, etc.
My plan would start by cutting off all government transfer payments to billionaires. Many, if not most, people are probably unaware that the government is handing out the taxpayers’ money to billionaires. But agricultural subsidies go to a number of billionaires. Very little goes to the ordinary farmer.
Big corporations also get big bucks from the government, not only in agricultural subsidies but also in the name of “green” policies, in the name of “alternative energy” policies, and in the name of whatever else will rationalize shoveling the taxpayers’ money out the door to whomever the administration designates — for its own political reasons.
The usual political counterattacks against spending cuts will not work against this new kind of spending-cut approach. How many heart-rending stories can the media run about billionaires who have lost their handouts from the taxpayers? How many tears will be shed if General Motors gets dumped off the gravy train?
It would also be eye-opening to many people to discover how much government money is going into subsidizing all sorts of things that have nothing to do with helping “the poor” or protecting the public. This would include government-subsidized insurance for posh and pricey coastal resorts that are located too dangerously close to the ocean for a private insurance company to risk insuring them.
Sowell points out that cuts like these could come quickly sans a partisan fight a la NPR and Planned Parenthood while delivering more substantial savings. I agree. As much as I want to see both defunded, I want real cuts, not some trifle tossed my way in appeasement by RINOs who can’t be trusted to deliver the goods. More Steyn (because all you can do at this point is laugh):
The news that the $61 billion 38.5 billion 14 billion historic 2011 budget cut actually cuts $352 million from the 2011 budget is in its way kind of impressive. As Congressman Huelskamp pointed out, that’s about what the Government of the United States borrows in two hours. The joke re the original $38.5 billion deal was that, in the time it took to negotiate it, we added as much again in new debt (we’re borrowing about $4 billion a day). We didn’t know the half of it: Never mind negotiating, in the time it takes to type up the bill, we’ve borrowed as much as it “saves”. By the time this thing’s through, the cost of the Secret Service detail lugging the Obamaprompter to whichever grade school he announces the final definitive historic budget “cuts” at will be three times as much as any actual savings.
Our President is unable and unwilling to get the job done. It’s up to us to hold Congress to the fire to ensure we don’t head over the fiscal cliff.