PDA

View Full Version : Obama Dem budget cuts overstated...CBO


HonestChieffan
03-08-2011, 10:43 PM
Embarrassing. Simply embarrassing. Even ABC covered it.

(ABC News)- The Congressional Budget Office this week said that the Senate Democrats’ bill offers $4.7 billion in spending cuts — not the $6.5 billion that President Obama and congressional Democrats said.

After last week’s meeting on Capitol Hill among congressional leaders and Vice President Biden, Senate Democrats wrote legislation and gave it to CBO to be analyzed.

CBO put the cuts at $4.7 billion.

The bottom line: Democrats and Republicans are roughly $52 billion apart in the cuts they want to see.

.

HonestChieffan
03-09-2011, 07:35 AM
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-3jeiS4damT0/TXd0MiFHphI/AAAAAAAAtG4/fXQ1Lca_c0I/s400/theo1.jpg

Amnorix
03-09-2011, 09:53 AM
Don't the CBO and the White House budget people (whether Bush or Obama or whoever) pretty much always disagree, based on different assumptions, etc.?

Actually, let me answer that -- yes, yes they do.

Jaric
03-09-2011, 10:01 AM
Wow, 5 billion in cuts (give or take)

They must have been up all night slashing spending from our trillion+ dollar budget...

:rolleyes:

mlyonsd
03-09-2011, 10:05 AM
Don't the CBO and the White House budget people (whether Bush or Obama or whoever) pretty much always disagree, based on different assumptions, etc.?

Actually, let me answer that -- yes, yes they do.

Too bad they didn't disagree when it came to Obamacare and the fake numbers fed into that assumption.

HonestChieffan
03-09-2011, 10:21 AM
Don't the CBO and the White House budget people (whether Bush or Obama or whoever) pretty much always disagree, based on different assumptions, etc.?

Actually, let me answer that -- yes, yes they do.


Oh heavens thats right. Lets all look the other way.

Amnorix
03-09-2011, 02:28 PM
Oh heavens thats right. Lets all look the other way.

C'mon now. BushCo specifically put in the 10 year sunsetting provisions into his tax cuts specifically to get around the assumption mechanics used by the CBO that would've showed absurd deficit levels.

And 10 years laters what do we have? Shocking! Massive deficits. Not all Bush's fault, of course. Alot is the broader economy. Alot is also Obama's policies. But both parties pick the WH numbers or the CBO numbers when it's to their advantage, so don't act like the CBO is always the voice of reason. It wasn't when the Republicans were pushing their agenda when they controlled the OMB.

Donger
03-09-2011, 02:31 PM
Wait, the Democrats are proposing ~$5 billion in cuts? That's it?

LMAO

mlyonsd
03-09-2011, 02:37 PM
Wait, the Democrats are proposing ~$5 billion in cuts? That's it?

LMAO

Yeah I had to read it twice myself.

Amnorix
03-09-2011, 02:55 PM
Wait, the Democrats are proposing ~$5 billion in cuts? That's it?

LMAO

A complete joke.

HonestChieffan
03-09-2011, 02:57 PM
C'mon now. BushCo specifically put in the 10 year sunsetting provisions into his tax cuts specifically to get around the assumption mechanics used by the CBO that would've showed absurd deficit levels.

And 10 years laters what do we have? Shocking! Massive deficits. Not all Bush's fault, of course. Alot is the broader economy. Alot is also Obama's policies. But both parties pick the WH numbers or the CBO numbers when it's to their advantage, so don't act like the CBO is always the voice of reason. It wasn't when the Republicans were pushing their agenda when they controlled the OMB.


Bush? Really?

F***ing Bush again?

KC Dan
03-09-2011, 03:05 PM
Bush? Really?

F***ing Bush again?It's called deflection - The Ultimate Backup Methodology!

bevischief
03-09-2011, 03:18 PM
Wait, the Democrats are proposing ~$5 billion in cuts? That's it?

LMAO

LMAO

Amnorix
03-09-2011, 03:19 PM
Bush? Really?

F***ing Bush again?


What other President would you prefer I compare Obama to?

Besides, the right seems endlessly fascinated with Jimmy Carter, so how you can say anything about referencing Bush...

mnchiefsguy
03-09-2011, 03:19 PM
Wait, the Democrats are proposing ~$5 billion in cuts? That's it?

LMAO

And that is all Bush's fault too.

Amnorix
03-09-2011, 03:21 PM
It's called deflection - The Ultimate Backup Methodology!

Eh? We're talking about the CBO, and what Presidents and the OMB do that leads to disputes with the CBO. Why wouldn't a reference to Bush and what he did be relevant?

oh right, it IS relevant, but you don't like that fact, so you run around and shout the BEP strawman/deflection boogeyman theories.

The real point here isn't $4 billion versus $6 billion anyway, it's the grossly inadequate amount of the cuts regardless of which number is correct.

KC Dan
03-09-2011, 03:24 PM
Eh? We're talking about the CBO, and what Presidents and the OMB do that leads to disputes with the CBO. Why wouldn't a reference to Bush and what he did be relevant?

oh right, it IS relevant, but you don't like that fact, so you run around and shout the BEP strawman/deflection boogeyman theories.

The real point here isn't $4 billion versus $6 billion anyway, it's the grossly inadequate amount of the cuts regardless of which number is correct.Agreed, I'm just in a mood today to throw bombs for no reason as work sucks right now LMAO

The Mad Crapper
03-10-2011, 03:05 PM
http://www.moonbattery.com/harry-reid-cowboy-poetry-festival.jpg

Jaric
03-10-2011, 03:40 PM
Eh? We're talking about the CBO, and what Presidents and the OMB do that leads to disputes with the CBO. Why wouldn't a reference to Bush and what he did be relevant?

oh right, it IS relevant, but you don't like that fact, so you run around and shout the BEP strawman/deflection boogeyman theories.

The real point here isn't $4 billion versus $6 billion anyway, it's the grossly inadequate amount of the cuts regardless of which number is correct.
Yeah this. I say we split the difference, call it 5 and move on.