Nick Gillespie | March 9, 2009
Remember back when we all believed in hope and change and the idea that light beer could taste great and be less filling? When President Obama promised to bring fiscal sanity to a Washington that spent too much, saved too little, and yadda yadda yadda?
Well, keep waiting until some time after the gi-freaking-normous omnibus spending bill that will keep the gummint in business through the end of fiscal year 2009 (which ends in September). The bill is coming at around $410 billion and is larded with more fat than a men's softball league.
It was supposed to be done and signed back when George W. Bush was president (big vote coming up in just days) but, you know, back in the fall Congress was too busy destroying the economy to finish its own business. So the bill will be signed by Obama, who is now pleading via spokespeople that hey, he only works here. Actually engaging Congress is apparently above his pay grade.
"[Such bills] will not happen when the president has the full legislative and appropriations process in place," Peter Orszag, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, told CNN's "State of the Union with John King."
He argued that the White House had little choice but to support the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which it inherited from the previous administration. The bill would keep the government running through 2009.
"This is like your relief pitcher coming into the ninth inning and wanting to redo the whole game," Orszag said. "Next year we're going to be the starting pitcher, and the game's going to be completely different."
Geebus H. Christ. Who's writing Orszag's baseball metaphors? Calvin Schiraldi? Mitch Williams? Horacio Ramirez? This isn't at all like coming into the ninth inning, even though it would be great to see Obama take a windbreaker off at the start of his press conferences. It's a freaking spending bill that is plumper than a Ball Park frank that's been soaking in dishwater all day. The president doesn't wanna push back, doesn't want to bring his good stuff, and work to get a save? Get the hook already!
And looking down the road to the budget Obama actually put out, there's no reason for optimism at all on the spending front. His FY2010 budget, comically titled "A New Era of Responsibility," increases total outlays over FY2008 by 19 percent.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
You'd figure Williams reputation would be able to undergo a modest rehabilitation now that the Philles have won the World Series, like Buckner's has vis a vis the Red Sox.
Nick Gillespie's valiant blog posting will surely stop this
travesty!
Go, Nick, go! Don't stop blogging until all in DC heed your clarion
call!
Alternatively, Nick and Reason's crack TV Team could get off their
couches and try to do better than this. I didn't
watch it, but I'm absolutely positive it wasn't Socratic. Surely,
even the dips at Reason can do better than that, right? Right?
I just work here. I just put my signature on the UPS guy's pad. Don't blame me for ordering a trillion dollars worth of collectibles on eBay. It's your fault, because you're greedy; you would've used that money for food and economy-growing investments. Also, you're racist.
His FY2010 budget, comically titled "A New Era of
Responsibility," increases total outlays over FY2008 by 19
percent.
Don't worry about this, because we're going to save a boatload of
money by no longer being in Iraq in the year 2525.
comically titled "A New Era of Responsibility"
What, you expect the government to be responsible for managing your
property without all that money? Where would the bureaucrats get
the funds for their Roman orgies?
Congress passes the bill to Obama, he looks left, fakes right.... And boom goes the dynamite.
There once was a douche from LA,
who lurked on Hit & Run all day,
but when he does post
he shows us the most
retarded clips since Crocker and Zonday.
Where can i go to read the Gillespie/Reason plan for the
economy?
Oh, and FWIW, it goes something like this:
Less government, more liberty, fewer regulations, scaled back
drug-war...
Just think "less".
He argued that the White House had little choice but to
support the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which it inherited
from the previous administration.
At the risk of being unjustly perceived as not thinking George W
Peron was the Worst President Ever, wasn't that the spending Bill W
vowed to throw into the nearest government-issue
trashcan veto if it appeared on his desk?
"Remember back when we all believed in hope and
change...?"
Alles muss anders sein!
Forgot the link...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/how_the_great_depression_broug.html
"Nick Gillespie's valiant blog posting will surely stop this
travesty!
Go, Nick, go! Don't stop blogging until all in DC heed your clarion
call!"
Oh STFU.
The small government,free market, deregulatory policies of the Bush Administration and GOP wrecked the economy,destroyed the middle class and filled the pockets of wealthy looters.We are NOT going in that direction again!Obama will sign last year's BushBudget bill so he can clear the decks and establish real social justice and economic equality for all American Families. Those who benefitted from laissez faire may not be punished by the courts but their ill-gotten gains will be subject to claw back.
The small government,free market, deregulatory policies of
the Bush Administration
You slay me.
And besides, I have it on good authority that it was Reagaan who destroyed the middle class.
"[Such bills] will not happen when the president has the
full legislative and appropriations process in place," Peter
Orszag, director of the White House Office of Management and
Budget,
Err, didn't that happen when he raised his hand and swore on the
Bible? Well, at least one of those times?
He argued that the White House had little choice but to support
the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which it inherited from the
previous administration.
I can't remember any President being such a whining titty-baby
about the previous administration.
The small government,free market, deregulatory policies of the
Bush Administration and GOP
Alright, this is just more Juanita-style performance art.
"I can't remember any President being such a whining titty-baby
about the previous administration."
Because he's still campaigning. It's his only (and fall-back)
skill. It's all he's ever done. He's Rock Hudson in "Man's Favorite
Sport" -- a guy who has written best-selling fishing books, but
never actually fished.
"He argued that the White House had little choice but to support
the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which it inherited from the
previous administration. The bill would keep the government running
through 2009."
"Inhereted" from the previous administration, eh?
Congress controls spending and the Democrats have been in control
of Congress for the last two years.
"I can't remember any President being such a whining titty-baby
about the previous administration."
Bush inherited an economic and stock market downturn precipited by
the bursting of the tech stock bubble.
I don't recall hearing him blaming that on the Clinton
administration.
This is too depressing so lets just throw out our favorite lousy
closer from the 80s-90s. Here's mine:
Ernie Camacho
You know, Congress is a lot of things, and it's full of fools and grandstanders and all, but I don't think you can honestly blame the destruction of the economy on them. It seems to me that the banking industry did that just fine all by themselves.
Alright, this is just more Juanita-style performance
art.
That's what I love about Hit & Run - the laissez-faire attitude
towards identity that permits this kind of high quality
art-trolling.
I don't think you can honestly blame the destruction of the
economy on them
I think you can. Well, on Congress, the regulatory agencies that
failed, and the public/private abominations that Congress funded
and controlled.
Without Fannie and Freddie, with a Congress that passed balanced
budgets, and with regulators who confined themselves to ferreting
out fraud and ensuring real solvency, this wouldn't have
happened.
Remember back when we all believed in hope and change...
No I don't. Or were you talking to the other Reason editors?
R C Dean, and you don't think that the purely private financial entities involved have any blame in the matter? Really?
Bush inherited an economic and stock market downturn precipited by the bursting of the tech stock bubble.
I don't recall hearing him blaming that on the Clinton administration.
Yes, he did. During the 2001-02 recession he and his minions always
went out of their way to note that it started during the Clinton
administration.
Of course, that's an entirely different animal from blaming the
previous administration for a bill that you are about to sign. I'd
like to say he's an imponderable wimp, but since he's going to get
away with it, that makes him a Machiavellian mastermind.
"The small government,free market, deregulatory policies of the
Bush Administration and GOP
Alright, this is just more Juanita-style performance art."
I resent that. I am the best spoof-troll ever.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245