Reid Says "We don't need a budget!"

[Gaspar]

So Harry Reid feels that the US does not even need a budget, and to "qualify" that outrageous comment the new white house chief of staff went on CNN and told Candy Crawley this:

CROWLEY: "I want to read for our viewers something that Sen. Harry Reid, the Democrat Majority Leader in the U.S. Senate, who said, 'We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year. It's done, we don't need to do it'...."

LEW: ".....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. So unless... unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=aNxzQUyZu_U

Can anyone spot anything distinctly wrong with Lew's statement? 
(This is an opportunity for bonus points!)

This guy is chief of staff to the President, and even worse he's the former OMB director.  Either he really is incompetent, or he is using CNN to be deceptive.

[Red Arrow]

So Harry Reid feels that the US does not even need a budget, and to "qualify" that outrageous comment the new white house chief of staff went on CNN and told Candy Crawley this:

CROWLEY: "I want to read for our viewers something that Sen. Harry Reid, the Democrat Majority Leader in the U.S. Senate, who said, 'We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year. It's done, we don't need to do it'...."

LEW: ".....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. So unless... unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=aNxzQUyZu_U

Can anyone spot anything distinctly wrong with Lew's statement? 
(This is an opportunity for bonus points!)

This guy is chief of staff to the President, and even worse he's the former OMB director.  Either he really is incompetent, or he is using CNN to be deceptive.

I heard that only 51 votes are needed to pass a budget.

[Hoss]

Here come the blue fonts..

[Gaspar]

I heard that only 51 votes are needed to pass a budget.

+1  We have a winner!

Reid could easily pass a budget in the Senate.

Lew is either one of the most ignorant people ever appointed by a president or he is purposefully using CNN as a platform for deception.  I'm not sure which is worse.

[Conan71]

+1  We have a winner!

Reid could easily pass a budget in the Senate.

Lew is either one of the most ignorant people ever appointed by a president or he is purposefully using CNN as a platform for deception.  I'm not sure which is worse.

Where's the "You're just being a partisan hack" chorus?

The GOP minority in the Senate is a great foil for Reid who time and time again shows he's such an impotent leader.

[Hoss]

Where's the "You're just being a partisan hack" chorus?

The GOP minority in the Senate is a great foil for Reid who time and time again shows he's such an impotent leader.

Why should it be any different than that goofball leader in the other chamber?

[heironymouspasparagus]

I heard that only 51 votes are needed to pass a budget.

Except when filibustered.  And you both know that - it is how nothing happened last year.

[Gaspar]

Except when filibustered.  And you both know that - it is how nothing happened last year.

The filibuster does not apply in this case. In accordance with the Congressional Budget Control Act of 1974, a budget, under law, requires only 51 votes to pass the Senate.  The use of filibuster is not allowed.

Thanks for playing.

[Red Arrow]

The filibuster does not apply in this case. In accordance with the Congressional Budget Control Act of 1974, a budget, under law, requires only 51 votes to pass the Senate.  The use of filibuster is not allowed.

Thanks for playing.

You don't play fair though.  You knew he couldn't leave that one alone.

[Gaspar]

You don't play fair though.  You knew he couldn't leave that one alone.

Set em up. . .

[Townsend]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/13/jack-lew/white-house-chief-staff-jack-lew-says-budget-requi/

Our ruling

On the specific question he was asked -- about the congressional budget resolution -- Lew said you need 60 votes to pass it. That's flatly wrong. On the larger question of putting together what we think most people would call the "federal budget," a majority party may be able to get its budget resolution passed, but that's not the same thing as actually enacting spending bills to implement it. In all likelihood, these bills would require 60 votes in the Senate. Still, Lew's specific claim was False.

[Gaspar]

The Democrats don't dare propose a budget because it can be used against them in an election cycle.  Same reason they never proposed one in 2010.

The President issues a budget that is worth only the recycling value of paper it is printed on.  It is obvious he intends to use congress as a scapegoat for his continued failure.  Meanwhile, the Senate and the White House defend democrats by making the totally fraudulent statement that it's no use for them to present a budget proposal because they could never pass it.

Here is the truth.  Any real budget bill proposed must contain deep budget cuts.  Democrats pay for votes with programs.  If they were to pass any budget proposal they would lose support.  Failure to perform this function of their job offers them the only advantage available. . .blame.  

Because the vast majority of their base constituents don't have the civic knowledge to understand anything beyond what they see on the Daily Show, they have a very good chance of success.  

. . .That is unless people start to weigh leadership as a more important issue than blame.  We will have to see how the continuation of a blame campaign holds up.  

[Townsend]

The $4 trillion in cuts in the proposal is probably as real as anything the anti-Obama has to offer.

Your Daily Show reference is a step above any FOX news reference.  The Daily Show admits that it is just a show.

If you're looking at blame placement, the current field of GOP contenders aren't pretty.  That's a whole load of blame over there.

[Hoss]

The $4 trillion in cuts in the proposal is probably as real as anything the anti-Obama has to offer.

Your Daily Show reference is a step above any FOX news reference.  The Daily Show admits that it is just a show.

If you're looking at blame placement, the current field of GOP contenders aren't pretty.  That's a whole load of blame over there.

But, but, but....it only counts when the OTHER side does the blame, not my side...

[Conan71]

If you're looking at blame placement, the current field of GOP contenders aren't pretty.  That's a whole load of blame over there.

None of them are currently charged with presenting a responsible budget.

President Obama and Senator Reid have both been charged with that task.  They are abdicating a basic responsibility expected out of them by the voters who put them in office.

Sorry guys, I can't accept mediocrity, stupidity, and shirking of duties when another administration or opposing party's incompetence is used as some sort of justification.