CBS Hypes: Obama on Same Side as Tea Party on Budget Cuts
On Thursday's CBS Early Show, senior White House correspondent Bill Plante seized on a rare instance in which the Obama administration and conservative members of Congress happened to agree on a single budget cut: "It's not very often that the Obama administration finds itself on the same side as Tea Party Republicans when it comes to spending."
The spending in question was funding for the production of jet engines for F-35 fighter aircraft. As Plante described it: "Defense Secretary Gates and the President say it's not necessary. And so do fiscal conservatives." He also noted that cancelling the project was "a defeat for House Speaker John Boehner....Part of it would have been made in his district." The on-screen headline read: "Budget Battle; GOP Fiscal Hawks Torpedo Boehner Pet Project."
News reader Jeff Glor introduced Plante's report by claiming the cut was "a budget win for the President." Neither Glor nor Plante described it as win for the Tea Party or conservatives.
Instead, Plante went on to tout liberal criticism of other cuts proposed by the GOP: "Republicans are trying to cut as much as $100 billion, targeting everything from funding for public broadcasting....to funding for the new health care law." A clip was played of Democratic Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey declaring: "Republicans have tilted the fiscal scales in favor of big oil at the expense of Big Bird." That was followed by a clip of new White House Press Secretary Jay Carney proclaiming: "...we cannot support arbitrary or irresponsible or deep cuts that undermine our ability to grow the economy."
The only Republican sound bite in the story was that of Florida Congressman Tom Rooney speaking out against the F-35 engine project in Boehner's district, no Republicans were featured criticizing the President's budget proposal.
Here is a full transcript of the February 17 segment:
7:13AM ET
JEFF GLOR: On Capitol Hill, another budget battle. The House begins its third day of debate on this year's federal spending bill. Yesterday, a budget win for the President, with some unlikely help. CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante has details on that. Bill, good morning.
BILL PLANTE: Good morning to you, Jeff. That's right. It's not very often that the Obama administration finds itself on the same side as Tea Party Republicans when it comes to spending.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Budget Battle; GOP Fiscal Hawks Torpedo Boehner Pet Project]
The battle over this year's $1.2 trillion budget included a defeat for House Speaker John Boehner. He backed the F-35 engine program. Part of it would have been made in his district. But Defense Secretary Gates and the President say it's not necessary. And so do fiscal conservatives.
TOM ROONEY [REP. R-FL]: This isn't about parochial interests. For us standing here, this is about what we can afford, and what we cannot afford anymore.
PLANTE: It was one of a series of votes as the House tries to wrap up the spending bill to fund the government for the rest of this fiscal year. Republicans are trying to cut as much as $100 billion, targeting everything from funding for public broadcasting-
ED MARKEY [REP. D-MA]: Republicans have tilted the fiscal scales in favor of big oil at the expense of Big Bird.
PLANTE: To funding for the new health care law. Jay Carney, Mr. Obama's new press secretary, giving his first White House briefing, echoed the White House line.
JAY CARNEY: Without getting into specifics, I think that the President has made clear that he doesn't, you know, we cannot support arbitrary or irresponsible or deep cuts that undermine our ability to grow the economy.
PLANTE: The House could vote today on that spending bill, which keeps the government running through early March, but the Senate isn't likely to take it up until next month, and not likely to go along anyway. That means the government could shut down unless, of course, they agree to put temporary funds in there to keep it going. It's what you could call business as usual. Jeff.
GLOR: Okay, Bill, thank you very much.
— Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.
- Kyle Drennen's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Bwahaha!
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:03pm.
The Chairman on the same side as the TEA Party?? BWAHA!
Why are they pushing so hard for that F-35, I thought that was loaded with problems and a poor substitute for the F-22. I get some serious misgivings and bad feelings about that plane.
-Jon
Actually, jon, he's more TEA
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:37pm.
Actually, jon, he's more TEA Party than the TEA party!!
It's now a trifecta: More Catholic than the Pope, More conservative than Reagan, and more spending-conscious than the TEA party!!
You hadn't noticed???
Kinda hard to
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 5:18pm.
It's kinda hard to notice when a lot of times he's always talking about himself(When has he not?), I just kinda tune him out. Actually, I tune him out and just look at the transcripts and the breaking downs of what he says by people made of sterner stuff than me to do that without screaming in rage.
So yeah...... ;-)
-Jon
Ouch.
Submitted by Ashrak on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:08pm.
And we were worried about the Republican Party trying to co-opt the Tea Party. As the union thugs make the (D) brand look like the thugs they are, MSM attempts to make Obama on the side of the Tea Party. I love it. The waffling is becoming hilarious.
"...we cannot support arbitrary or irresponsible or deep cuts that undermine our ability to grow the economy."
He actually means government, not economy. He just doesn't have the guts to say it.
Only 73
Submitted by libBuster on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:18pm.
It's hard to believe that Bill Plante is only 73 years old.
Is this appropriate language in our new era of civility?
Submitted by wedapeople on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:31pm.
"Torpedo Boehner"
Boy that didn't take long. CBS producers must also be writing the sandwich boards in Wisconsin.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/
Walker = Hitler
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:37pm.
Yeah, I saw that earlier from Drudge.
I hope this idiot isn't a teacher, declaring "The first thing Hitler did was take over the unions"
The unions ran to Hitler fawningly, just as they have to Obama.
But alas, my money would be on her being a Wisconsin teacher.
I think we have another CBS
Submitted by Thoreau on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:32pm.
I think we have another CBS correspondent that needs to visit Egypt for a dose of reality.
Say what?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:39pm.
The humor escapes me, just as it does when those ever-so-liberal "Law and Order" shows throw in the obligatory "You're going to get the same treatment when you meet Bubba in prison"
I agree; there's no call for
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:43pm.
I agree; there's no call for that.
Moronic jibberish uttered by
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:35pm.
Moronic jibberish uttered by a drooling useful idiot. Obama is on obama's side, no one elses.
Stupid!!!
Submitted by Phryj1 on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 5:35pm.
"...we cannot support arbitrary or irresponsible or deep cuts that undermine our ability to grow the economy."
EXCEPT, military spending actually can grow the economy and generate wealth. In this particular case, the alternate engine program has numerous side benefits. It directly lowers the overall long term costs of the F-35 program, ESPECIALLY down the road when the aging first run engines need to be replaced. Competition drives prices down. Second, in addition to operating the F-35 ourselves, we are also exporting it. Which means we could actually bring more money into the country with engines and parts, and that means more jobs AND reducing the trade deficit. Unlike infrastructure improvements, which can't be exported for obvious reasons, defense spending can actually create jobs and wealth through exporting weapons and parts to our allies. If it wasn't for the fact that Obama's budget is massively laden with enormous amounts of pork, in the name of investment and stimulus, it would be so much of an issue. Keep in mind that they were only asking about $450 million to continue the program. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the TRILLIONS of dollars of waste in Obama's budget. And these cuts DO undermine our ability to grow our economy.
While they claim Boehner was in the pocket of the developers of the second engine, you could just as easily suggest that the opponents of the program are getting kickbacks from the manufacturer of the primary engine. Once again, politics screws our military of having access to the best possible equipment.
As always, ineptitude, incompetence, and corruption have proven to be synonymous with politics as usual. The fact that Gates sees eye to eye with Obama proves how completely worthless and useless Gates actually is. The fact that fiscal conservatives in the GOP went along with it sickens me to no end. Unbelievable.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
(C)ertainly BS
Submitted by m1xram on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:43pm.
Excellent propaganda from one of the Administration's tools.
The opposite of Left is Freedom.
Wow. Over the past two weeks
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 4:52pm.
Wow. Over the past two weeks the president has been touted in the MSM as a down the center ( blue dog democrat ), Ronald Reagan and now a card carrying member of the Tea Party.
I wonder what outlandish false claims will be next ....he was born in Hawaii, or maybe he's really a christian.....really...he swears to al, oops, I means god.
How is it possible so many of them could really be so dumb as to continue to perpetuate this scam, that is Barack Obama, on the American people?
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
Bullsqueeze
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 5:03pm.
Heck, even the republicans aren't on the same side as the TEA Party when it comes to budget cuts, as the miniscule cuts they have proposed to this point are utterly meaningless.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
If CBS will Claim Anything Even the Couter-factual
Submitted by Avitar on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 5:52pm.
.
LBJ was elected by a "solid South" that was all Democratic with Jim Crow Laws and KKK meetings. If CBS can ignore that they can pretend anything that suits them.
Dan Rather must have been very surprised when they would not go along with the George Bush draft dodging that his people documented with Microsoft word documents
→ Dan Rather exhumed
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 5:55pm.
Why can't we let him rest in peace? Hasn't it been nice to go a whole day without Olbermann?
OOPS!
I feel insulted. This twit
Submitted by danbo on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 7:23pm.
I feel insulted. This twit thinks we're going to fall for this BS.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Can someone clear up a couple
Submitted by stratman on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 3:35am.
Can someone clear up a couple of questions I have about this post?
Strat, 1) Yes. This
Submitted by JoeBob on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 4:58pm.
Strat,
1) Yes. This would cancel the finalizing of development of the F136, the GE/Rolls engine for the F-35. This will result in a short-term savings of between $1.8b-$3.0b dollars (depending on whether you believe GE's or Gate's numbers - the CBO has already said that Gate's numbers are incorrect). It would mean that in the future, 90% of our fighter platforms will be powered by P&W engines to the potential tune of $100b over the next 30 years. It is unclear whether GE will get anything in return (it seems that it won't be fighter engine contracts, since the F-35 will be the air platform for the next 30 years).
2) Any cancelling of P&W engines, primarily because of decisions not to purchase as many F-35 airframes, has been because of a rising per-unit cost of the F-35. The government decides not to purchase as many to save money as development costs over-run, which in turn raises the per-unit cost even more, since the per-unit cost covers not just the production cost of the unit, but the amortized development cost of the program. As the cost rises higher, potential foreign buyers may drop out.
3) I do not believe Israel's order will be affected by the cancellation of the F136, although it may be affected by the rising per-unit cost of the JSF. Other foreign clients, however, particularly F-35 building partners like the UK, Netherlands, and Italy, have expressed dissatisfaction with work share, tech transfer, and maintenance issues for the F-35, which could affect their participation and platform buys. The UK, as the US's only tier-1 partner for the F-35, was very critical of the US's unilateral decision to cancel the F136 (while Rolls has a share in the P&W venture, specifically the STOVL portion for the F-35B Marine version, it does not approach the 60/40 split they have with GE on the F136).
JoeBob
Thank you for the
Submitted by stratman on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 9:52pm.
Thank you for the clarifications, JoeBob. I wasn't sure I was enamoured with GE trying to force their way into the process anyways. Still, competition can be a very good thing... depending on who's paying for it.
My thought is either GE couldn't get it together and was going to bow out, or it was becoming too expensive and time-consuming to continue for the DoD. Regardless of the reason(s), it all came down to what would make Obama look good. In the end, Obama chose the public disclosure of fiscal responsibility. Whether or not GE gets anything in return for being good soldiers in the Obama Corps(e), it will be interesting what happens with GE CEO Jeff Immelt as the new leader of Obama's President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. Maybe this was the price for Immelts' fealty to Lord Obama. The timing fits.
I would think that the stealth characteristics of the F-35 will be desirable for the israelis even if they have to pay more as long as they are satisfied with what custom systems can be implemented. I also expect Obama to mess with the Israeli's over their purchase.
Lastly, anyone else think a single air platform for all purposes isn't the best solution? I don't think we've done that since the days of the hot air balloon, and for good reason.
Strat, I agree with
Submitted by JoeBob on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 2:11am.
Strat,
I agree with you on the single platform issue. A platform that was extremely versatile was the F-16, but it wasn't by any means an air superiority fighter. That was what the F-15 was for. My thought is that the F-35 will be a similar platform (only stealthy), leaving the air superiority mission to the F-22.
What I have a bit of a heartache about is the fact that we've got a big bunch of foreign client/co-sponsers of this fifth-generation aircraft. Remember the big stink a few weeks ago when the Chinese J-20 rolled out with reverse-engineered tech from a stealth figher downed in Bosnia? So twenty year old tech is a danger, but we're just going to hand out current tech willy-nilly 'cause we didn't want to pay for it all ourselves? Some of our partners in this venture are the UK, Netherlands, Italy, Australia, and Turkey. Turkey? Remember how that worked out during the Iraq invasion?
JoeBob
You are preaching to the
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 5:21am.
You are preaching to the choir, my friend.
I am not thrilled about it either. I did read that certain systems/aspects, such as satellite tracking of the aircraft?, will remain American proprietary info and be controlled by America. Still, giving stealth and the most advanced systems to the increasingly Islamifying Turkey??? Aren't they starting to cozy up with the Russians again?