Not Answering The Question

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 6:43 am

Curious how a simple question to Obama's mouth piece gets a Alice in Wonderland reply:

Bret Baier, FOX News: Democrats put forward a budget that failed in the House, a version of the president's budget was voted on in the House and Democrats said it was a stunt, but it fell 414-0. Senate Democrats have not passed a budget resolution in 1,070 days. Why?

Jay Carney, White House: Come on, Bret. You can sight, and I know you often do the statistics that represent, you know gimmickry and stunts --

Baier: Wait, what's gimmickry about not passing a budget in the Senate?

Carney: Look, it is our preference that Congress work and the Senate effectively pass a budget. You know --

Baier: So why doesn't the president call Harry Reid and say, 'Why don't we get a budget on the table and vote on it?'

Carney: Bret, I know that's what you want to make the segment about. The president put forward and laid out his budget proposal which has at its core, a balanced approach, a balance to this day that Congressman Ryan rejects. There is a lot of citation on cable and elsewhere about the Simpson-Bowles commission.

Baier: Jay, listen, the question is about the Senate Democratic Leadership.

Carney: Congressman Ryan and two other ---

Baier: Harry Reid controls the Senate. And he has to have a 51 number to get a Senate budget resolution passed through. Why doesn't he put something close to the president's budget on the table in the Senate and pass it with 51 votes? He has the votes.

Carney: Bret, the president has put forward a budget proposal. He would absolutely be delighted if Republicans were willing to approach our deficit challenges in the same balanced way that every bipartisan commission says we must. And that the Simpson-Bowles commission, which a lot of people like to cite as a high standard which has to be met, included on its membership, Congressman Ryan and two other House Republicans. And guess what? They voted against it.

Baier: I understand that, but you understand the gist of my question?

Carney: There is no -- this is -- its not about Senate budgets --

Baier: It's not 60 votes. It's all Democrats. All Democrats could vote on a budget, they could vote on it tomorrow and they could pass it if they put it on the table. You know that. So why doesn't the president call Harry Reid and say 'do that'?

Carney: Bret, I know that's what you want to make this segment about. You know that the only way in modern day Washington to achieve a significant budget compromise is when both parties are willing to work together. That doesn't mean a unanimous Republican vote in the House or a unanimous Democratic vote in the Senate. It means coming together in a balanced way on a balanced approach. The president and Democratic leaders have demonstrated their willingness to embrace a balanced approach that the American people overwhelmingly support. What the Ryan Republican Budget does is say that we should double down on the same policies that got us into the fiscal mess and economic mess that we're just recovering from. That's a fact.

Baier: Okay, we're not making headway on the point but what we'll come back to it.

So tell me, why does Harry Reid not want a budget brought to the floor of the Senate?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:55 pm

....um, maybe because such legislation is supposed to start in the House. That messy Constitution again!

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:02 pm

callmeslick wrote:....um, maybe because such legislation is supposed to start in the House. That messy Constitution again!

That would be incorrect.

The President Proposes the budget, the Congress authorizes and funds it.

Congress and the Budget

According to the Constitution, all Federal appropriations must be authorized by Congress. This is a source of great power for Congress known as the "power of the purse". Once the President's Budget is received by Congress, the House of Representatives works to create a budget resolution, which sets the base line level of spending for the Federal Government as required by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Once this bottom line is established, Congress acts to decide how this level of funding will be dispersed among Federal activities.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:05 pm

Ummm...you do know the Ryan plan WAS passed in the house and sent to the Senate...where Harry Reid has tabled it (Not allowing it to come up for debate or vote). So what about that pesky Constitution again Slick?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:08 pm

they didn't pass Ryan's budget yet. Hell, it hasn't even gone to committee. Are referring to last years' budget, because I don't think Bret Baer was.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:08 pm

And to clarify on Cuda's post, Obama did submit a budget and it was reject by everyone...even the Democrats

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 6:04 pm

woodchip wrote:And to clarify on Cuda's post, Obama did submit a budget and it was reject by everyone...even the Democrats

once again, not completely true. Obama submitted a budget proposal. It never made it out of House committee. They will no doubt suggest amendments to Ryans eventual final plan, and wate their time doing so in the the House. Ryan's plan will get similar treatment in the Senate, and well, there you have gridlock politics. Ain't it a grand system?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:58 pm

Who,s running that zoo up there?

TechPro · Post by **TechPro** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 4:13 pm

It's all political, so ... nothing new.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:25 pm

As best as I can remember, Ryan's bill pretty much neutered Medicare and SS down the road with massive cuts, so of course it's political. No Democrat wants to tick off the senior vote in an election year, so they're sitting on the ball.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:32 pm

Doesnt matter. Obama neutered medicare to pay for Obama-care anyways

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:48 pm

Little Bushie started neutering it first by turning part of it over to private-for-profit enterprise, ie., big pharma, as in Medicare Part D. Of course, he had the Dems help doing it.

But Republicans would like nothing better than to destroy it outright. However, most seniors are very happy with Medicare and Ryan is playing with fire.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:19 am

You do realize, TC, that the Ryan plan does not affect seniors already eligible for medicare?

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:25 am

woodchip wrote:You do realize, TC, that the Ryan plan does not affect seniors already eligible for medicare?

SSSSHHHHHHHHHH don't confuse her

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:01 am

Heh, I think TC has to stop listening to that blond ditz, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:08 pm

CUDA wrote:Doesnt matter. Obama neutered medicare to pay for Obama-care anyways

how so? The plan is to lower the rate of cost inflation, to the tune of half a trillion over 10 years. Ryan's plan would render it both impossible to pay for Medicare and Social Security and essentially illegal to raise the revenue to do so.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:10 pm

woodchip wrote:You do realize, TC, that the Ryan plan does not affect seniors already eligible for medicare?

sure it does, if they live long enough, at least under the recent proposed budget. See my comment above.

Not Answering The Question

Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question

Re: Not Answering The Question