New White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew– who was director of the Office of Management and Budget under both Presidents Clinton and Obama – made statements yesterday that were flat out false and (more problematically) ones he had to know were false.
To be specific: On CNN yesterday, Lew was asked about the fact that Majority Leader Harry Reid said he does not need to bring a budget to the floor this year. In response, the White House chief of staff said this: “Well, let’s be clear. What Senator Reid is talking about is a fairly narrow point. In order for the Senate to do its annual work on appropriation bills, they need to pass a certain piece of legislation which sets a limit. They did that last year. That’s what he’s talking about. He’s not saying that they shouldn’t pass a budget. But we also need to be honest. You can’t pass a budget in the Senate of the United States without 60 votes, and you can’t get 60 votes without bipartisan support.” Lew added, “Unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed. And I think he was reflecting the reality that that could be a challenge.”
Everyone from ABC’s Jake Tapper to the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler have pointed out this is simply false; that a budget requires a simple majority, not 60 votes in the Senate, to pass. And Kessler added this observation: “We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution… the former budget director twice chose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.”
Lew’s statement was so transparently untrue that the best the White House could offer up as an explanation to Tapper was “the chief of staff was clearly referencing the general gridlock in Congress that makes accomplishing even the most basic tasks nearly impossible given the Senate Republicans’ insistence on blocking an up or down vote on nearly every issue.”
Except that Lew was clearly not referencing general gridlock; he was making a specific, false claim which he repeated and has yet to back away from. In Washington, what Lew said is known as spin. In the rest of America, it is known as deception, mendacity, and dishonesty. Having worked for Bill Clinton, one might think Lew would have learned to dissemble with some flair, some skill, and some panache (e.g., “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”) Perhaps in the Obama administration, people like Lew prefer the audacious lie to the too-clever-by-half one.
I'm glad you are realizing this Peter, but some of us have known for a long time that Obama and his administration are flat out liars. And they have questionable motives. Once a Republican is able to articulate these truths in a polite but tough way, we have a chance. But not until then.
And you fell for it! n nI don't mean that you accepted his argument, but rather that you have spent the better part of two days arguing about something 95% of the American people couldn't care less about. Every day spent arguing about wonkish stuff like this is a precious day that isn't being used to attack the underlying flaws and weaknesses of Obama's budget. n nWhich is, you ask? n nPeople don't support budgets per se, they support politicians who push budgets the people think will benefit them in some meaningful way… and the reverse is true, they punish politicians who push budgets that the public thinks will be harmful to their families and economic security. And the public doesn't care or pay attention to the details, all they want to know is the answer to the question: will I benefit or not? n nThus, the key to attacking Obama is to argue that this budget will not only not help America, it will make things worse. Obama's tax hikes and spending will not improve the jobless rate. It will not stop the drop in housing prices. It will not reduce the growth in health care costs or food. It will not make gas any less expensive. It will not remove the fear and uncertainty that is dampening economic growth. n nInstead of GOP politicians talking about issues people don't much follow or care about (the tax rate on dividends, for example), the GOP needs to get a steady drumbeat of regular folks saying they're unimpressed with the budget, that they're not going to add workers or increase investments… and that they wonder why Obama is seeking to spend so much money after so much of the earlier spending was wasted… and why he is spending all his time talking about raising taxes when that doesn't help them find a job or put gas in the tank. n nThat is the way to attack Obama. You have to remember your real audience is the group of voters whose support is critical… and you have to speak to them, not at them. n nMaybe one day you all will learn.
The MSM must be confused, because normally when the White House lies (see the state of the union address, see Obama is the greatest friend Israel ever had, see the line about Obama being the oil drilling President and the Jobs President, etc.) — normally — the MSM certainly must flash each other to get in line behind the new talking point since it is then treated as irrefutable fact and any opposition as obstructionism (you know, like a bill that gives money to already on the job teachers and other state government unionized employees who payoff the Democratic Party through political donations supposedly creates millions of jobs or whatever number the MSM blindly accepts). Here they are noticing a lie — c'mon, what gives? Must be asleep at the wheel. I mean, the one thing that will NEVER happen is that anyone in the MSM will have a pang of conscience or they are not going to suddenly discover integrity!?! C'mon ….