Imaginary Budgets Don't Count, Claire

Depending on the opponent, dismantling liberal logic and talking points can be a challenge. Sometimes it can be a game. But when it's this easy, it almost stops being fun. Almost.

Claire talks about how the Senate "passed a budget" last fall. I can only assume she refers to the "Budget Control Act of 2011," which is not, in fact, an actual budget. It is simply a law designed to rein in any and all budgets that may (or in this particular Senate's case, may not) be passed in the future. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad to have laws that rein in the budget. But if there is no budget, how much good can we really expect such a law to actually do?

Claire also references the "appropriators" and the fact that they are following this imaginary "budget" and cutting government spending. What she utterly fails to mention is the fact that the "appropriators" are mostly Republicans, and all attempts they have made to rein in government spending have been fought tooth and nail by Claire herself (among others) in spite of the Budget Control Act she touts here.

She sounds a bit like the die-hard Clinton fans who swear that he fixed the economy all by his lonesome. They always forget that he had a Republican Congress who dragged him, kicking and screaming, into financial stability.

So congrats, Claire, on passing a budget that isn't a budget. And on claiming responsibility for a success that would have been much greater had you not been there to help thwart it.

I know, I know. Logic is hard.