Obama no longer has a press operation.
Instead he holds high mass. On attendance are a bunch of progressive divines and shamans. They peer into the tea leaves or the scattered entrails of the sacrificial special interests du jour that the president has spread out for the jackals to eat.
The liberal high priests are then necessary to interpret for the rest of us what the tea leaves and smeared guts actually mean.
Apparently, we have reached the point where we can’t actually have the Word of the Messiah without the high priests interposing on our behalf.
The latest case of divination comes courtesy of the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of Obama’s budget-that-shall-not-be-passed Version: 2013.
Last week the CBO admitted that, yes, what we all knew all along is really true.
The reason why Obama hasn’t been able to muster a single vote in two years on a budget, even from within his own party- yet alone pass an actual budget while president- is that his budget proposals, if passed, would do more harm than good.
“The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Friday that President Obama’s 2013 budget will hurt the economy in the long term,” reported the Hill on April 20th, “arguing the larger deficits it would produce would reduce the amount of capital available to businesses.”
No. And. Duh.
But that hasn’t stopped the assorted right-reverends from the left-wing from peering into the last Book of Obama and interpreting it for us.
In piece entitled “What the CBO Really Said About Obama's Budget,” chief economist Chad Stone of the so-far-left-wing-that-they-crawled-out-the-hallway-window think tank, the “non-partisan, wink, wink,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, made like the End-Times spiritualist to tell us, no, it’s not what you think. When the CBO says Obama’s budget would hurt the economy in the long term, they don’t REALLY mean that.
In Other News: Can We Ask Al Qaeda for a Refund on the Bowe Bergdahl Prisoner Swap? | Michael Schaus