Or something like that.  This has to be the most brazen re-write of the Kasich Administration so far, and it comes from the conservative Washington Times:

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a Republican, on Sunday touted the fact that since taking office in January, he has helped the Buckeye State turn its deficit into a surplus.

“In my state, where we faced an $8 billion deficit, we wiped it out. We eliminated it,” he said on “Meet the Press.”

Given that Kasich just passed his first budget a month ago, it would be incredibly remarkable for him to claim a surplus since, you know, we’re only three weeks into the budget.

Still trying to figure out how Kasich gets credit for a surplus from the last budget of Ted Strickland.  In essence, what Kasich is taking credit for is for lying for two years about there being an $8 billion budget deficit, and then taking credit when he’s proven wrong and left with a nearly $1 billion surplus instead.

Of course, the Washington Times completely ignores how the federal stimulus package was able to help States, like Indiana, post surpluses in the first place.  Obama and Strickland deserve the credit for the surplus, not Kasich.

That is unless we actually reward people for being made a fool of when their lies are finally revealed for the fiction they always were.

Tagged with:
  • This is increditably stupid! Do these newspapers not research these things before they write an article on it or do they just take all politicians on their word. That would be even more incredible! I never really read these papers but always thought of them as a creditable paper that researched and could back up what they report. I guess I am wrong. Now I understand how politicians are able to  perpetuate their lies and get the general public to vote for them even when the politician is not what we think they are and not what we want in a politician.

  • stryx

    “… Kasich is taking credit for is for lying for two years
    about there being an $8 billion budget deficit, and then taking credit
    when he’s proven wrong….”

    That’s the way they rolled at Lehman Bros.

  • Anonymous

    Remember, we’re talking about the Washington TIMES, not the Washington Post, here.

  • Anonymous

    Remember, we’re talking about the Washington TIMES, not the Washington Post, here.

  • Anonymous

    So sayeth the Moonies!

  • Rgtmwlly

    Whats so hard to understand? Ted left us with a projected 8billion budget deficit. Kasich restructured the budget to deal with that reality. When all the numbers were finalized, there was only a $7 billion gap to fill, so the extra money he budgeted became a surplus.

    Instead of spending it,he used it to restore the rainy day fund. His budget, he gets to take full credit for how the money gets spent.


  • Recall Kasich

    The =Washington Times= is owned by the far-right Reverend Moon, known for his brain-washing tactics and his cult, the “Moonies”.

    If we would tax churches, people like this would not have the power to tell lies about people like Kasich.

  • Walbridge Rocks

    Who’s paying for all these TV promotions that he is traveling to? Oh the working class of Ohio!

  • Anonymous

    Apparently, you fail to understand.

    First, the fiscal year of Strickland’s budget ended on June 30th.  Meaning, when the fiscal books of Strickland’s last budget were closed (by Kasich’s budget director no less), it showed that the Strickland Administration was leaving a SURPLUS of nearly a billion dollars.  Kasich’s Administration had nothing to do with that surplus except it got to decide how to spend it, and it put a quarter of a billion into the “rainy day” fund, which then prompted Kasich to start promises ways to spend it.  The rest he spent.

    What you wrote is just gibberish, and it bears no relation to reality. 

    If you’re suggesting that because Kasich overestimated the non-existent deficit, that can count as a surplus, then you lack the financial literacy to be involved in this conversation.  (And by that “measure,” Kasich overestimated the “deficit” by nearly $3 billion, then.)  That’s like saying I have a surplus in my checking account until a check I wrote cleared.

    There never was a $8 billion deficit. Never.  If there were, then people could have taken the Strickland Administration to court for passing an unconstitutional budget.  The Strickland budget, which the Kasich Administration has done nothing to impact, left the State with a nearly $1 billion surplus.

    The $7.7 billion figure was based on Tim Keen and Mary Taylor’s projection of “one time revenues” that were in the last budget that, by definition, would not be in this one.  That, however, cannot be called a “deficit” as it is commonly understood.  Regardless, that figure proved to be grossly inaccurate as it failed to consider the growth in revenues caused by the economic recovery that began in 2010 and the nearly billion left over from the Strickland surplus and the fact that Kasich’s budget would call for the creation of at least a billion in “one-time” money created by his privatization schemes. 

    Applying the same standard to Kasich’s budget, then you cannot avoid the conclusion that Kasich’s budget has a billion-dollar “deficit,” too.

    There, now you’ve learned something.

  • Anonymous

    As for Kasich’s “decision” to put money into the rainy day fund, you’d be hard pressed saying he had much of a choice since Ohio law essentially required Kasich to put the surplus into the “rainy day” fund and all.

  • I saw Kasich Lie on MTP.  What a jerk.  He is ruining Ohio, and probably trying to run for President in 2016 at the same time.  We need to keep exposing this jerk, so there is no right wing haven for him to climb into.

  • Rgtmwlly

    You’re either intentionally misleading or it is you, sir, who do not understand.

    If you think there was no structural deficit facing whoever crafted this biennial budget, you’re just simply wrong. Period.

    The fact that revenue projections turned out to be better than thought did not somehow wipe out the deficit that we faced.

    John Kasich made the tough choices to balance the enormous deficit he was left with…and you know it.

    The revisionist history would be Judy wonderful for Ted, if it were only true.

  • BuckeyeBoss

    Aw, it’s adorable when you use a different budgetary year to try and belittle someone who dare uses the number produced by Strickland’s OBM.  If only we could have seen what Strickland’s budget would have looked like… 

  • Kasich is just another in the storied history of snake oil salesmen. Say it’s so long enough and, voila, lies become acceptable.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!