Posted on | February 14, 2011 | 29 Comments
Journalism is a profession woefully infested by math-impaired liberals, which may explain why the media have badly misconstrued the Obama administration’s federal budget plan. Here’s the Washington Post‘s spin:
President Obama will respond to a Republican push for a drastic reduction in government spending by proposing sharp cuts of his own in a fiscal 2012 budget blueprint that aims to trim record federal deficits by $1.1 trillion over the next decade.
In what alternative universe can a reduction of $110 billion per year (the simple math of $1.1 trillion divided by 10) in an annual projected deficit of more than $1.3 trillion be called “sharp cuts”?
Reacting to similarly nonsensical “reporting,” my friend Jim Lakely offers this suggested re-write:
President Barack Obama’s 2012 budget proposal, which the White House described as a “down payment” on fiscal austerity, proposes reducing the deficit over 10 years by less than what the deficit is projected to be in 2011 alone.
Obama’s budget does nothing to rein in entitlements — which represent by far the greatest obligation of the federal budget — and also leaves in place the administration’s cost projections for “Obamacare,” which independent actuaries say are greatly underestimated.