How is a 41:1 ratio a "balanced approach"? I'd expect media to ask this if they hadn't been attesting to the strength of Obama's snake oil.
—
Jonathan Ellis (@JHartEllis) January 01, 2013
President Barack Obama has repeatedly said in recent months that deficit reduction must be achieved in a “balanced” way, meaning a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. Here he was just yesterday, calling for the Balanced Approach™ on Twitter:
"We've got to do this in a balanced and responsible way." —President Obama on fiscal cliff negotiations—
Barack Obama (@BarackObama) December 31, 2012
Now the US Senate has passed a fiscal cliff bill that raises tax revenue by $41 for every dollar in spending cuts. Did Obama slam the bill for reducing the deficit in an unbalanced manner? No. He praised it and specifically cited its so-called “balance”:
MORE: Obama praises the "fiscal cliff" agreement reached by the Senate for taking a balanced approach: apne.ws/WhIpP3 -BW—
The Associated Press (@AP) January 01, 2013
So a 41:1 ratio is what Obama means by “balanced.” No surprise there. We are a little surprised, however, that so many Republican Senators seem to agree.
Related:
Hugh Hewitt calls crap sandwich bill ‘a big win’
Brit Hume: C’mon conservatives, that fiscal cliff bill cuts taxes
After voting for crap sandwich, Sen. Pat Roberts vows to fight for spending cuts
Mitch McConnell – Joe Biden alliance was key to Senate deal on fiscal cliff




















