Another budget drop, another round on the Tilt-A-Whirl of political spin. On CNBC this morning, New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg did not hold back. “I think it was Einstein who said that the definition of insanity was doing the wrong thing over and over again and expecting change,” says Gregg, who almost became Obama’s Commerce Secretary. “Eight years out the president is projecting a trillion dollar deficit. that’s not acceptable.”

The White House, meanwhile, is proclaiming a continuation of “responsibility.” “This is a budget that makes tough choices while investing in initiatives to create jobs and eliminate — and help reduce the economic pressures facing the middle class,” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer.

Don’t get dizzy. Just look for the details. Here is one summary version of them, laid out in 7 easy-to-scan bullet points:

1. Obama is embracing a continuation of historically big short-term budget deficits, which result from a combination of the poor economic planning by George W. Bush (and Obama last year), two costly wars, stimulus spending and a huge reduction in tax revenues as a result of the recession: $1.413 trillion in 2009; $1.556 trillion in 2010; $1.267 trillion in 2011; $828 billion in 2012.

2. Economists and U.S. creditors care much less about the short-term deficits (which are excusable as a way of restarting the economy) than the middle-term deficits (from roughly 2013 to 2017), when the nation should be out of the recessionary woods and should be living within its means. Except the Obama budget does not live within its means during this period, according to the president’s own top accountant, Peter Orszag. He has said deficits should run at about 3 percent of GDP to be sustainable. In the new budget, the deficit is nearly a third larger than that, bottoming at 3.9 percent of GDP from 2014 to 2016.