Topic: Budget "deal" passes Congress, enroute to president

[Pandora]

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/14/house-passes-budget-deal-easily-260-167/

Update: Commenters are noting that Paul Ryan also voted yes. Indeed, but there’s no way he was voting against Boehner after the leadership gave him carte blanche on the 2012 budget. That’s not to make excuses for him — maybe he thinks the budget deal is just fab — but if you were expecting a no from him on this just a day before the House votes on his own plan, you’re kidding yourself.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/14/rejected-bill-to-defund-planned-parenthood-fails-in-senate-4258/

As for the budget deal, it passed the Senate the same way it did the House — overwhelmingly, but with an unusual ideological mix in the minority. The roll will be here eventually but it isn’t up as I’m writing this; according to the Examiner’s Philip Klein, though, the no votes were Coburn, Crapo, DeMint, Ensign, Graham(!), Hatch, Inhofe, Johnson, Leahy, Lee, Levin, Paul, Risch, Rubio, Sanders, Shelby, Toomey, Vitter, and Wyden. Hatch is obviously looking to earn some tea-party cred ahead of next year; Grahamnesty hasn’t cared much about that in the past, but maybe he’s finally waking up to it. I don’t know how else to explain his vote.

[Pandora]

    A comparison prepared by the CBO shows that the omnibus spending bill, advertised as containing some $38.5 billion in cuts, will only reduce federal outlays by $352 million below 2010 spending rates. The nonpartisan budget agency also projects that total outlays are actually some $3.3 billion more than in 2010, if emergency spending is included in the total.

    The astonishing result, according to CBO, is the result of several factors: increases in spending included in the deal, especially at the Defense Department; decisions to draw over half of the savings from recissions, cuts to reserve funds, and mandatory-spending programs; and writing off cuts from funding that might never have been spent.

And there you have it. Instead of cuts, we get accounting gimmicks.

Link

[LadyVirginia]

   And there you have it. Instead of cuts, we get accounting gimmicks.

Yeap, sounds like the government hard at work

[Pandora]

I don't know what pisses me off more, the fact that they're playing us or that they're lying about playing us.

Ultimately, it is of no consequence.  We either get them by the throats or we're done.

[charlesoakwood]

I think they know they are only playing a complicit few.

Ultimately, it is of no consequence.  We either get them by the throats or we're done.

[Alphabet Soup]

And there you have it. Instead of cuts, we get accounting gimmicks.

What, you think all that gimmickry is easy?!!

[Libertas]

And there you have it. Instead of cuts, we get accounting gimmicks.

What, you think all that gimmickry is easy?!!

Wait till they face re-election...or the mob...whichever comes first.  I'm getting to the point where soon I won't give a damn!