No, I know he is planning another vacation to Martha's Vinyard, and I am certain he plans to use AF1 to make the trip --- and I know that he is trying to make the sequester as media obnoxious as possible.
My question is --- do you think the GOP would oppose him if he said "I want to skip my vacation and use the tax payers money to avoid furlows rather than spending money to take AF1 on a joyride."
The sequester law is already in effect. The GOP can't do anything about that other than passing a bi-partisan spending bill, which clearly isn't going to happen.
So it doesn't matter if the GOP would "oppose" him or not, it wouldn't change anything.
You guys don't seem to understand how the sequester works.
Dude you are nuts!!
If the senate passed a bill allowing O to take money from discressionary (of any type) funds and use them to avoid furlows - it would go to the House where the GOP run house could then approve the measure.
Obama could have THAT deal done TOMORROW!!!
Spending bills must originate in the House.
And again - you don't seem to be understanding the sequester.
Obama didn't "chose" to furlough anyone - the heads of the various programs being cut are the ones who make those decisions. Obama has NO control over where the cuts happen - nor does he have control of any "discretionary funding" that he could "give" the Republicans.
The President does not have direct control of ANY spending. This is basic civics.