Brave President Obama Promises to Cut Spending Later! But Happy to Give Up Game-Losing Homerun in the Meantime!

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."

More here.

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.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Kolohe||

    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.

  • Orange Line Special||

    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?

  • Anonymous||

    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.

  • Warty||

    Shut the fuck up, Lonewacko.

  • Mike M.||

    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.

  • Anonymous||

    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?

  • zero||

    Congress passes the bill to Obama, he looks left, fakes right.... And boom goes the dynamite.

  • ||

    Where can i go to read the Gillespie/Reason plan for the economy?

  • ||

    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.

  • Paul||

    I think Nick metaphor'd himself into a corner.

  • Paul||

    Where can i go to read the Gillespie/Reason plan for the economy?

    Reason.com

  • Paul||

    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?

  • Hambone||

    "Remember back when we all believed in hope and change...?"

    Alles muss anders sein!

  • Hambone||

    Forgot the link...

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/how_the_great_depression_broug.html

  • Hambone||

    "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.

  • Rosa Luxemborg||

    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.

  • Less Ismore||

    "Just think "less"."

    Yup

  • ||

    The small government,free market, deregulatory policies of the Bush Administration

    You slay me.

  • Morris Less||

    "Yup"

    Roger that.

  • ||

    And besides, I have it on good authority that it was Reagaan who destroyed the middle class.

  • Morris Less||

    "You slay me."

    Roger that.

  • ||

    "[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.

  • ||

    Reagaan, of course.

    stupid keyboard

  • Civil Discourse||

    "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.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "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.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "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

  • Taktix®||

    Shut the fuck up, Lonewhacko...

  • ||

    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.

  • ||

    Jose Rijo!

  • ||

    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?

  • PFJ||

    Jose Mesa.

  • ||

    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 Concerned Observer||

    "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.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement