« A Likely Obama Voter Speaks | Main | Moving the Goalposts Caption Contest »

October 15, 2012

An Administration In Denial

"This President has demonstrated his commitment to diplomatic security through his budget priorities."

- WH Spokesman Jay Carney

After being lobbed The World's Biggest Softball by Carney, apparently no one in the room thought to bring up what may well be the defining achievement of the Obama Presidency. For the entire time he's been President, the United States government hasn't had a budget:

President Barack Obama and his administration seem to view budgeting as just one more political maneuver. His efforts have been so completely unserious that the President's 2012 budget was rejected by a vote of 97-0 in the Senate. And three weeks ago, when Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-South Carolina, sponsored a budget proposal based on Obama's 2013 budget plan, it lost in the House by a vote of 414-0.

That's right, not a single member of Congress cast a vote in favor of Obama's last two budgets. That is a stunning repudiation of his leadership. What it really represents is a total abdication of leadership.

How does a President get away with hiding behind a budget that doesn't even exist? Such shameless prevarication can only work when no one will challenge you.

Speaking of which... Via Memeorandum, Jennifer Rubin posts a list of questions that should not be asked under any circumstances.

Posted by Cassandra at October 15, 2012 06:54 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4370

Comments

Seems to me, Carney told the truth. Security Committment = Budget.

It's just that the administration has neither.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at October 15, 2012 09:04 AM

Chris Wallace had an appalling interview yesterday with David Axelrod, who is still complaining about MItt Romney's immediate reaction to the Benghazi attack, instead of answering questions, and simultaneously asserting that it's the Republicans who have politicized this affair.

Meanwhile, the NYT is still burying the story. As Iowahawk said recently, the main job of being a journalist is to run in circles screaming "It's not new! It's not news!"

Posted by: Texan99 at October 15, 2012 09:47 AM

YAG -- Yes, and one shudders to think of the fate of any imperiled overseas staff who are a low budget priority.

Posted by: Texan99 at October 15, 2012 09:48 AM

..."one shudders to think of the fate of any imperiled overseas staff who are a low budget priority."
It might be harder to resolve the question of whether or not there are any overseas staffers who are not considered by THE Ø administration to be a low priority.

And there appears to be a POTUS tour bus out there on the horizon with Hillary's name on it.

All in all, you're just another brick in the wall...

Posted by: bthun at October 15, 2012 10:19 AM

Security Committment = Budget.

Yet in sworn testimony, State's Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Charlene Lamb had this to say to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform:

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R, CA): It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb. You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?

DAS Lamb: No,Sir[.]

It seems to me that Obama lied when he had Carney's mouth say those words.

Eric Hines

Posted by: E Hines at October 15, 2012 11:14 AM

"...David Axelrod, who is still complaining about MItt Romney's immediate reaction to the Benghazi attack..."

Except that Romney was reacting to the Cairo attack, as the Benghazi one had yet to come to full fruition at the time. A point that many seem to want to elide.

Posted by: DL Sly at October 15, 2012 12:52 PM

Technically, what he said was that "his budget priorities," rather than "his budget," were the defense. He has priorities. That they are so far removed from reality that they can't get even a single vote in Congress does not suggest that the Obama's priorities don't exist.

Posted by: Grim at October 15, 2012 01:38 PM

It is quite obvious that Obama's number one priority is Obama. His campaign, his fundraising, his lifestyle, his image are all he seems to be concerned with over the last year. Also vacations and golf, hobnobbing with celebs and entertainment TV appearances are all priorities in conflict with doing the dang job. I cannot wait until early voting begins here and I start my email campaign to get everyone on my email list to get out and vote. Texas may not matter as far as EV but I want us to help boost the popular vote to a landslide for Romney/Ryan so they will have a mandate even Harry Reid will be afraid to go against!

Posted by: TexasMom2012 at October 15, 2012 01:54 PM

Then again, this proves his ability to be a uniter rather than a divider...

Posted by: Joseph W. at October 15, 2012 04:17 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)