Home / Culture and Society / Obama’s 2013 Budget Proposal

Obama’s 2013 Budget Proposal

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Do we hear yet another “thud?”  In 2011, when Democrats in the Senate forced a vote on President Barack Hussein Obama’s 2012 budget, it was defeated 97-0. Earlier this week, on March 28, in a rare show of bipartisanship, Obama’s $3.6 trillion proposed 2013 budget was defeated 414-0 in the House of Representatives. Try as they may, this rejection is going to be very difficult for the White House and the Democrats to spin positively.

Eschewing curtailing government growth, Obama unveiled a record $3.8 trillion election year budget plan on March 26, calling for stimulus-style spending on roads and schools, and tax hikes on the wealthy to help pay the costs. The vote came as the House worked its way through its own fiscal year 2013 budget proposal, written by Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan (R-WI). Republicans wrote an amendment into that bill that contained Obama’s budget proposal and offered it on the floor, daring Democrats to back the plan, which calls for major tax increases and yet still adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade But not even one Democrat accepted the dare.

Obama and the White House brushed off the resounding defeat as a “gimmick,” saying that a vote in the House on an amendment based on Obama’s 2013 budget is a “gimmick.” The comments appear designed to head off any embarrassment from a strong vote against the amendment that Obama knew was coming. White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage said, “But let’s be very clear: A vote on Congressman Mulvaney’s resolution is not a vote on the president’s budget. This is just a gimmick the Republicans are putting forward to distract from what the Ryan budget does: protects massive tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires while making the middle class and seniors pay.” But Brundage failed to explain how Mulvaney’s amendment, which included Obama’s budget in full, is/was not a resolution on Obama’s proposed budget.

Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) said, “It’s not a charade. It’s not a gimmick – unless what the president sent us is the same. I would encourage the Democrats to embrace this landmark Democrat document and support it. Personally, I will be voting against it.”

Obama unveiled a record $3.8 trillion budget proposal, calling for a $901 billion deficit. Though defense spending would be cut, Obama would leave the spiraling growth of health care programs for the elderly and the poor largely unchanged or increased. For example, according to his proposed budget, military procurement would be cut by $108.5 billion, or 10%, while Medicare and Medicaid Services spending would increase by $1.18 trillion, or 8.4%. Again, I have to ask, what good will Medicare and Medicaid Services be if we don’t have a country?

Democrats still have no plans to even introduce a budget, much less pass one.

As I have opined previously, besides being clueless on international affairs, he remains steadfast on domestic policies as well, even though they, too, don’t work. How many more times must we hear a thud before Obama the ideologue gets the message?

But that’s just my opinion.

Powered by


  • Kyle Hussein Hunter

    It is now time to retitle the Blog Critics politics section “Fox News Annex” and be done with it.

    This is clearly an editorial/opinion piece instead of factual reporting, and needs to be CLEARLY marked as such SOMEWHERE on this page so that the unitiated and unwarned aren’t taken in.

    The “thud” you heard Warren, was your credibility as a political anal-ist hitting the floor.

  • Blogcritics articles all used to be labelled as “Opinion”, “News”, “Review” etc, Kyle. I don’t know why that feature was removed.

    As far as the budget is concerned, everybody who pays any attention to US politics, Warren included, knows exactly why it was unanimously voted down, so I’m mystified as to who he thinks he’s kidding.

  • RE: coment # 1, Kyle, you are correct – the “thud” comment, as well as the last paragraph, were my edirtioial contributions. Can you suggest a better word for a 414-0 showing/drubbing/shellacking? EVERYTHNING else in the article is factual. You say, “… aren’t taken in.” Just what (specifically) would you say aren’t facts so we aren’t taken in? Can you tell me what facts you dispute, where I editoralized? The question becomes, “At what point does a factual article become an editorial/opinion piece?” And can the the author’s opinion be swayed or formed by the facts?

    RE: comment # 2, Dr. Dreadful, you say, “As far as the budget is concerned, everybody who pays any attention to US politics, Warren included, knows exactly why it was unanimously voted down, so I’m mystified as to who he thinks he’s kidding.” Two comments here: (1) Obama’s proposed budget was, at best, a farce, including the $910 billion deficit. So even the Democrats voted against it. (2) Not kidding anyone, just presenting facts (with, BTW, links).

    And for both of you, have y’all seen that Paul Ryan’s FY 2013 budget passed? We’re still waiting for the Democrat controlled Senate to pass one for 2013, or 2012, or even 2011.

  • Obama’s proposed budget was, at best, a farce, including the $910 billion deficit. So even the Democrats voted against it.

    It wasn’t Obama’s budget. It was a proposal based on the budget, deliberately fashioned by House Republicans so as to be unacceptable to Democrats. It was a GOP ploy to try to embarrass the opposition and the President: neither side ever had any intention of voting in favour of it in that form.

    Not kidding anyone, just presenting facts (with, BTW, links).

    You’re presenting selective facts in order to frame the story in the light you want it interpreted in, leaving out those that tell the full story. That’s deception.

    And for both of you, have y’all seen that Paul Ryan’s FY 2013 budget passed? We’re still waiting for the Democrat controlled Senate to pass one for 2013, or 2012, or even 2011.

    Wonder if that’s because Senate Democrats don’t like what House Republicans put in them? Nah. There’s absolutely no reason why a party ideologically opposed to the GOP shouldn’t accept GOP ideology, is there?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    And yet again Warren shows not the least hint of journalistic integrity – nor does he see the need for such, more’s the pity.

  • Glenn Contrarian
  • Igor

    It’s easy to balance the budget: revoke the Bush tax cuts (didn’t do any good anyhow), and cut the defense budget in half (all we need are a few thousand Predators).


    Then we can do something for the American people, like pass Universal Healthcare, which will save millions of Americans from ruin AND cut total USA medical expenses.

  • Zingzing

    Have you ever heard of yellow journalism, Warren? It went out of style a century ago.

  • American

    Not long ago, on a blog page not far away, an unknown spectator emerged from the dark shadows of the deep web. This stranger identified only by the title on his short remarks, caused disruption in the comments section of reports written by the sites seeminingly lone conservative, Obi-Warren Beatty. Beatty’s opposition was made up of elder’s blindly loyal to the Empire’s new mismanagement. Yet with a few vulgar assaults the loyalist’s would become confused. Unsure of the physical identity of the assailing knight, the formal debunking they had become comfortable with was now visible as a simple dodge and redirect defense. Upon the young rebels exit, the area officer would declare himself a happy idiot. A promise of HOPE brought ONLY CHANGE to the Empire. The Emporer, remaining in the power as the driving force, unknown to most under his rule, had been using his darkest apprentice yet for the ruthless treason he had planned for the disolving of the once great Republic for which the Rebels stand. This Darth Sotoro was the new face of the assault. A master in the dark arts he led the corrupted left under the title of the Progressive. A deception intended to disguise the ushering in of a proven failed form of government, all the while making the change sound fresh and new. Also known as Lord Bärräq, the Sith moved quickly. Soon he had traveled to all 56 of the 50 states and he only had 2 more to go, he thought. Yes number 49 and the 50th and final state wich was home to the two hospitals he declared he was born in. Not to be confused with Selma that had birthed him when he was 5. So yeah, 56 states. Don’t tell him words don’t mean thing’s. While the Sith paraded about what was left of corrupt governing body for different reasons appeared to have had a moment of clarity that would align itself with the simple prophecy laced question/statement that would be the young rebels parting gift to the elders, before his return stop on his way to the Degoba system. Where he would continue the training his natural born parents had begun at their birth’s in hopes that he earn the privilege to hold the title. Or win an election first and then anyone who said they want proof could be written of as loony because “He’s president, duh.” “HE WOULDN’T HAVE BECOME PRESIDENT IF HE WASNT AMERICAN DUMMY. GOSH. WHAT MORE PROOF DO YOU NEED THAN THAT? BIGGOT.”
    “C’mon 3-G” the rebel said to his android. “We’ll have plenty of time to determine if there’s any logic to that on the way to the Daygobah system. Now, leave the comment and other text at blogcritics and lets go. I want to be able to be called an American ya know.” Silly Droid.” Keep it up and I’ll trade you and this blaster in on an i4s””
    The vote would come in 0-414. The question posed to the elders that seemed to echo through the Republic READ SIMPLY: “Solyndra, Beacon Power, Ener1. Tell me this man should be left in power considering the state of our economy. And I don’t care whose fault it is that its in this condition. I just want to know why he should be trusted with the money if this is what he’s done with

  • Glenn Contrarian

    “American” –

    Dude, you’ve got a real problem. You don’t even attempt to hold yourself (or Fox or any other right-wing site) to the somewhat loose sense of journalistic integrity practiced by the other conservatives on BC.

    That’s why you’re going to find that by and large, most on BC will ignore you – your arguments are goofy and contain not the least shred of proof to back them up. Good night, birther.

  • American

    Forgive me Miss Courick, unlike yourself, I realize the difference between blogging and commenting on one. Maybe you are confused because some comment’s are left by other blogger’s. I don’t consider the remarks I make while loitering to be “journalism”. Since I couldn’t find any articles here written by you, Jane Pauly, I guess you have allready started ignoring me. Just like Kieth obermann did. I guess its only a matter of time before Rev. Sharpton does the same. I guess your right Barbara Walter’s, my journalism has nothing on NBC’s 911 call editing dept.
    One more comment from my BIRTHER BAG. Did you see the video from 08 when Obama says he been to all 56 states? Did you watch it? Please do if you haven’t. Seriously. I understand that campaigning can be tiring. But what I don’t understand is how an American who’s gone through college, which requires graduating first grade, which requires you to know how many stars are on the flag and what they stand for, and if you were born and had lived in the state that was represented by the very last of those stars, I don’t understand how you could make a mistake like this. I don’t understand how he could havemade that statement and then repeated it, and be born in Hawaii as he claims. That mistake would be the equivalent of any American mistaking Lincoln for the first president. NO. It would be more like a presidential candidates stating that Benjamin Franklin was the first president of the United States. Seriously, watch the footage and hear his words. Maybe it would help you to be more analytical if you just listen rather than look at him?

  • You’re arguing from incredulity, American. Just because you can’t understand how Obama could have made such a mistake doesn’t mean that he couldn’t.

    Have you ever campaigned for the presidency? If not, then how do you know tiredness and/or stress cannot account for his flub?

    Or does this also mean that Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry are not really Americans either?

  • Can’t tell what’s worse: American’s obsession with Obama, Star Wars, or improperly using apostrophes.

  • Igor

    EB: it’s the apostrophe crisis that’s getting me down.

  • Glenn Contrarian


    What Obama said was “57 states”…and if he had said “57 states, territories, and protectorates” (such as Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, etc.), he would have been RIGHT. But of course you don’t want to consider those Americans, do you?

  • Actually, Glenn, it’s fairly obvious that he meant to say forty-seven states. (50 states plus DC, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands only gets you to 56 *.)

    In the video, notice how he hesitates after saying “fifty”… as if he’s aware that he’s misspoken somehow but can’t quite retrieve the correction from his brain.

    He talks about how he’s been criss-crossing the country, wanted to visit Hawaii and Alaska but his staff vetoed it, and only has one more state to go on his itinerary.

    So: 50 – 2 – 1 = 47.

    * You could include the minor territories such as Midway, Wake, Howland etc to bring it up to 57 but no-one lives on any of them, so why would he bother campaigning there?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Plus the District of Columbia, perhaps? That’s not exactly a minor place….

  • I listed DC, Glenn.

  • You guys are forgetting an important factor. Warren doesn’t consider Hawaii a state; because if it were Hussein Unbourne Obama would be a legal president of the U.S.

    You silly

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Doc –

    In that case, DC plus the territories would equal 57 states and territories.

  • As I said, Glenn, in order to get to 57 you need to include the minor outlying islands, none of which are permanently inhabited. Plus, Obama specifically said “states”. It’s a bit of a reach, to put it mildly.

    Especially considering the way in which he said it, don’t you think my explanation is more likely?

    (Plus, I’m sure there is a record of Obama’s 2008 campaign stops somewhere. It should be fairly easy to verify how many states he’d visited up to the date of that speech.)

  • zingzing

    i think the “record” would be the 4 years some people like to pretend that it was anything other than a misspoken phrase. no one really thinks he doesn’t know there are 50 states. and if they really do think so, they’re idiots.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Doc –

    Either way, what zing said.