GLENN: Barack Obama, yesterday he comes out, he is demanding $100 million in cuts. Whoa, look at this tough guy coming out swinging. And they better find it in the next 90 days. We had to sign trillions of dollars worth of stuff and we had to have it done by Friday. They've got 90 days to find $100 million? I got news for you. You ready? Department of Homeland Security, just over $50 million, they just decided to buy their office supplies differently, not to cut back. Just to buy them differently, and the Department of Homeland Security has they've saved over $50 million. Hmmm, they are halfway there. That's fantastic. They have got another 90 days to figure you got 89 days to figure out the rest of it, gang. $100 million. That's, of course, a lot of money. That's what my daughter said to me last night: Dad, $100 million is a lot to me. Yeah, yeah, me, too. $100 million, that's a lot. It might even be a lot to Warren Buffett. Not as much to Warren Buffett as it is to me.
Press secretary Robert Gibbs tried to downplay the fact that $100 million is only a tiny portion. .0029% of the budget. None of the deficit. Of the budget. Gibbs said this play this audio, please. This is press secretary Robert Gibbs yesterday.
VOICE: Why not target a bigger number?
GIBBS: Well, I think only in Washington D.C. does $100 million
VOICE: This is not a joke. The deficit's giant. $100 million really is only
GIBBS: No joke? I'm not making a joke about it. I'm being completely sincere that only in Washington D.C. is $100 million not a lot of money. It is where I'm from. It is where I grew up. And I think it is for hundreds of millions of Americans.
VOICE: But the point is it's not a
[ OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ]
VOICE: $8 billion being minuscule, $8 billion in earmarks. We were talking about that and you said that
VOICE: $100 million is a lot but $8 billion is small?
GIBBS: I think it all adds up, just as the president said, just as Jennifer was good enough to do in her question. If you think we're going to get rid of $1.3 trillion deficit by eliminating one thing, I'd be and the administration would be innumerably happy for you to let us know what that is.
GLENN: So why don't you just get rid of the $8 billion in earmarks? Why don't you just do that? Because it all adds up. No, no, no, the earmarks, that's such a minuscule amount. And by the way, I mean, let's just go through what he's talking about here. The typical family, the typical American family, this is the equivalent of you cutting out a latte per year. A latte per year. Do you think you could convince anyone on planet Earth with a straight face if you came home and you said, "Okay, we are spending out of control, our deficit is crazy, we're overdrawn at the bank, we're about to lose our house, we only have one thing left of value. That is our children's college fund and we are putting all of our debt into that children's college fund and that's the only thing we have left of value and you sat down at the table and you looked across the table at somebody and you said, yes, but I'm cutting out my latte. The response would be, "What?" Maybe somebody at the table would say, "Okay, it's a start. No latte for you anymore?" No, no, no, I just cut out my latte today. But today and every other day, but today I didn't buy a latte. That is what they are asking you to believe is a good thing.
I actually heard Mike Huckabee on the radio say, "Hey, it's a start." Bullcrap it's a start. It's a con game! A family who earns $100,000 a year and if you're faced with a $34,000 budget gap, so you are spending $134,000 every year but you're only bringing in $100,000, this is the equivalent of them giving up $3. You know what? I'm going to cut back three bucks. Three. It is not a start. It is an insult to the intelligence of the American taxpayer. Even the Associated Press said less than one quarter of the budget increase that congress awarded to itself. 4% of the military aid the United States currently sends to Israel. Less than half the cost of one F 22. 7% of the federal subsidy for the money losing Amtrak passenger rail system. 1/10,000th of the government's operating budgets for cabinet agencies, excluding the Iraq and afghan war and the stimulus bill. Obviously it's pathetic, but our president is counting on you not actually thinking. He just wants you to remember that he's cutting.
According to an article in Time magazine, the Obama administration has been working with behavioral psychologists throughout the campaign and he is still working with psychologists to figure out what his actions mean to you! And the best way to convince you that what he's doing is right! He's not doing what's right! He's doing what appears to be right! And he is talking to experts in behavioral science to figure that out! What will make them believe what I'm doing is right? How do we have a guy who is looking into the psychology of behavior to image himself as doing the right thing?
One of the things that psychology team has noticed is that people mostly aren't able to put big numbers in context. Do you think? It's no coincidence that Robert Gibbs can come out one week and tell you that $8 billion is not a lot of money and the next week play the $100 million is a lot card. They have found that if you propose a bill that is $10 million, $10 billion or $10 trillion, people react the exact same way. Yes, smart people like you will catch it, but the rest that are just hoping for change, those dolts, they don't see it. They are going to be the ones that take away, you know, why are these people protesting taxes at tea parties? Don't they know that 95% of all Americans are getting a tax cut? It's a mind game, and it's a mind game that your tax dollars are paying to be played against you. Who do you think is paying for the behavioral scientists? One of the things that this is Obama in his own words: One of the things that everybody here is mindful of as we move forward is dealing with this extraordinary economic crisis. We have a deficit and a confidence gap. When it comes to the American people, we have got to earn their trust. They have to feel confident that their dollars are being spent wisely. Is it a coincidence that he says they've got to feel confident that their dollars are spent wisely as opposed to "We have to spend their dollars wisely"? These people don't care. They don't look at that dollar that you worked for and sent in and paid somebody to find out how many dollars you need to send in. They don't care. They don't associate that dollar with your time, your energy or your hard work: They should be ashamed of themselves every time they spend a dollar. Every time they spend a dollar, they should ask, this is a sacred trust. Is that the best, most effective way we can spend that dollar? Should we spend that dollar? Why not just earn our trust by actually doing trustworthy things instead of meeting with behavioral scientists to trick us into trusting you. All you have to do is listen to this man's comments. You listen to this man's comments and you realize that the $100 million cut isn't even a cut. Where is anyone in the media explaining this to you? Quote: In the next few weeks we'll expect to cut at least 100 current programs in the federal budget I wish there was a period there so we can free up those dollars in order to put them to use in more critical areas like healthcare, education, energy or foreign policy. They're not cutting this to save money. They are cutting these things and shifting those dollars to foreign policy apparatus? What the hell is a foreign policy apparatus? He's cutting it from one area, turning right around and spending it in another. How is that a cut exactly?