Republicans vote against vets

[Dad2three]

Yes, Playtex, we understand you scumbags have a hard time with reality, especially when it comes to OTHER PEOPLES money!...And YET the obamanation CAPS the military raises that were CUT because of him, and you say NOTHING.... You dear, are a fucking HYPOCRITE!!!

Fucking liar........put your links where your mouth is. You must be part of the Trump base.......dumber than rocks.


But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

There's more to this. You might disagree with Obama's priorities, but Cheney's claim is based entirely on the notion that Hagel and Obama are proposing military cuts. But they aren't. Hagel proposed a change in force structure that would lead to a smaller Army, but his overall budget proposal is $115 billion more than the current sequester levels demanded by Republicans. Hagel is going to have plenty of fights on his hands, but mainly because he wants more money, not less.

President Obama is fighting cuts to the military, not demanding them

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

 

[eagle1462010]

Strange Bedfellows at the Bank | National Review Online

Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, and some very cooked books. EDITOR’S NOTE — The impending federal bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has shed light not only on the seriousness of current housing market conditions but also on the mismanagement and corruption that helped cripple the mortgage giants. Although political figures from both parties have profited mightily from Fannie Mae, it has been a particular favorite of former officials of Democratic administrations, as NR’s Byron York found out when he looked into the situation in the summer of 2006. On May 23, 2006, as a jury in Houston deliberated the case against top Enron executives Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, a little-known regulatory agency in Washington, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), released a study with the dryly bureaucratic title “Report of the Special Examination of Fannie Mae.” The document received far less attention than the news from Enron, but its conclusions were stunning. In meticulous detail, it outlined a culture of corruption at the Federal National Mortgage Association — better known as Fannie Mae — that rivals the most serious corporate scandals in recent years. In this case, however, the main players are Washington insiders — some of them prominent veterans of the Clinton administration — and the scandal’s effects could ripple through Congress for years. Fannie Mae is the biggest single source of money for mortgages in the United States. From 1998 to 2004, the years covered by the OFHEO investigation, it was headed by former Clinton budget director Franklin Raines, whose top management team included former Clinton Justice Department official Jamie Gorelick, sometimes mentioned as a future attorney general in a Democratic administration. During that period, the report says, Raines and his team grossly overstated Fannie Mae’s earnings — to the tune of $10.6 billion — for the purpose of paying themselves big bonuses. “By deliberately and intentionally manipulating accounting to hit earnings targets,” the report says, “senior management maximized the bonuses and other executive compensation they received, at the expense of shareholders.”

 

[Vigilante]

Yes, Playtex, we understand you scumbags have a hard time with reality, especially when it comes to OTHER PEOPLES money!...And YET the obamanation CAPS the military raises that were CUT because of him, and you say NOTHING.... You dear, are a fucking HYPOCRITE!!!

Fucking liar........put your links where your mouth is. You must be part of the Trump base.......dumber than rocks.


But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

There's more to this. You might disagree with Obama's priorities, but Cheney's claim is based entirely on the notion that Hagel and Obama are proposing military cuts. But they aren't. Hagel proposed a change in force structure that would lead to a smaller Army, but his overall budget proposal is $115 billion more than the current sequester levels demanded by Republicans. Hagel is going to have plenty of fights on his hands, but mainly because he wants more money, not less.

President Obama is fighting cuts to the military, not demanding them

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

 

[eagle1462010]

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=56922
Today I am pleased to sign into law S. 900, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This historic legislation will modernize our financial services laws, stimulating greater innovation and competition in the financial services industry. America's consumers, our communities, and the economy will reap the benefits of this Act.

Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America's underserved communities. Passage of this legislation by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the Congress suggests that we have met that goal.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes the most important legislative changes to the structure of the U.S. financial system since the 1930s. Financial services firms will be authorized to conduct a wide range of financial activities, allowing them freedom to innovate in the new economy. The Act repeals provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the Great Depression, have restricted affiliations between banks and securities firms. It also amends the Bank Holding Company Act to remove restrictions on affiliations between banks and insurance companies. It grants banks significant new authority to conduct most newly authorized activities through financial subsidiaries.

Removal of barriers to competition will enhance the stability of our financial services system. Financial services firms will be able to diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue. They will also be better equipped to compete in global financial markets.

Although the Act grants financial services firms greater latitude to innovate, it also contains important safety and soundness protections. While the Act allows common ownership of banking, securities, and insurance firms, it still requires those activities to be conducted separately within an organization, subject to functional regulation and funding limitations.

Both the Vice President and I have insisted that any financial services modernization legislation must benefit American communities by preserving and strengthening community reinvestment. I am very pleased that the Act accomplishes this goal. The Act establishes an important prospective principle: banking organizations seeking to conduct new nonbanking activities must first demonstrate a satisfactory record of meeting the credit needs of all the communities they serve, including low- and moderate-income communities. Thus, the law will for the first time prohibit expansion into activities such as securities and insurance underwriting unless all of the organization's banks and thrifts maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA will continue to apply to all banks and thrifts, and any application to acquire or merge with a bank or thrift will continue to be reviewed under CRA, with full opportunity for public comment. The bill offers further support for community development in the form of a new Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs (PRIME), to provide technical help to low- and moderate income microentrepreneurs.

The Act includes a limited extension of the CRA examination cycle for small banks and thrifts with outstanding or satisfactory CRA records, but expressly preserves the ability of regulators to examine these institutions at any time for reasonable cause, and does not affect regulators' authority in connection with an application. The bill also includes a requirement for disclosure and reporting of CRA agreements. The Act and its legislative history have been crafted to alleviate burdens on banks and thrifts and those working to stimulate investment in underserved communities. It is critical that depository institutions and their community partners continue efforts that have led to the highest home ownership rate in our history, including a particularly dramatic increase in recent years in minority and low-income home ownership. My Administration remains committed to ensuring that implementation of these provisions does not in any way diminish community reinvestment, and stands ready to remedy any problems that may arise.

 

[eagle1462010]

I know how to C & P too DAD...........

 

[Dad2three]

One law of Dems COMPLAINING the GOP would NOT assist with getting more revenues from those "job creators" AND? lol

TRY to grow a brain Bubs

The deal was to get rid of loop holes in the tax system..............asshat.

NO IT WASN'T YOU DUMBFUK, ALTHOUGH OBAMA PROPOSED THAT IN HIS CORP TAX OVERHAUL NEARLY 3 YEARS AGO,, THE GOP REFUSED!

Obama said cut Corp tax rate to 28% and get rid of loopholes and use revenues to create jobs via infrastructure, of course the GOP said FUKKK NO we will not help AMERICANS!

BTW..............the stimulus plan was to fix the infrastructure and create SHOVEL READY JOBS............Do you really wanna go there bubba............

and Obama wanted to SPEND AGAIN.............INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING...................

Yeah that's HONORING BUDGET CUTS ISN'T IT.............

Did you sniff glue as a kid........................

NO YOU DUMBFUKK, The stimulus was ONLY to keep US out of ANOTHER GOP great depression. It was 40% tax cuts, 20% aid to states and 20% projects, it worked as promised, though as the PROGRESSIVE economists said at the time, way to small after Dubya's policies shrunk GDP 9%+ the last quarter of 2008!

Should have put the whole amount into the infrastructure then under the stimyulus...............100% of it................and then those getting jobs out of the deal would have paid taxes on it...................some of it back.........but your side was too damned busy lining the pockets of your favorite corp sponsors..............

Tell me about the cooked books and who was in charge.................Housing problem.........
Tell me about the committees where dems said nothing is wrong to try and reverse course.............

and then tell me the President that allowed too big to fail to SELF REGULATE.................

Tell me TARP TO SAVE US ALL.............as the fed gave back door loans to the tune of 16.1 TRILLION bubba.............

Then tell me who was in charge of the House and Senate at the time...............

Selective memory again or are you still sniffing glue.

Weird YOU keep getting slapped down, now you want to pivot? lol

OBAMA HAD TO HAVE 40% TAX CUTS TO EVEN GET THE GOP TO VOTE ON IT DUMMY

Housing problem? You mean Dubya's cheering on the Banksters WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE as Dubya GUTTED regulators AFTER warnings from the FBI in 2004 of an "EPIDEMIC OF MORTGAGE FRAUD THAT COULD RIVAL THE S&L (RONNIE'S) CRISIS"?

TARP? Yep, either that or let the US fall back into GOP great depression 2.0 thanks to their "beliefs" in the "free markets" lol

BUT PLEASE, GIVE ME A LAW THAT PASSED THE DEM HOUSE/SENATE 2007-2008THAT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH DUBYA'S PONZI SCHEME?


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

FACTS on Dubya's great recession | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Dad2three]

The Vets are fucked because of democrat policies. Republicans have only been in the majority in congress for six months.

Yeah, policies under Dubya don't matter, like UNFUNDED TAX CUTS, UNFUNDED WARS AND UNFUNDED MEDICARE EXPANSION

Not even mentioning their cheering on Dubya's "home ownership society" that allowed the Bankster to create ANOTHER GOP great depression!

 

[Dad2three]

On December 10, 2013, Senate Budget Committee chairman Patty Murray (D-WA) and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) announced that they have reached a two-year budget agreement in advance of the budget conference’s December 13th deadline.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 would set overall discretionary spending for the current fiscal year at $1.012 trillion—about halfway between the Senate budget level of $1.058 trillion and the House budget level of $967 billion. The agreement would provide $63 billion in sequester relief over two years, split evenly between defense and non-defense programs. In fiscal year 2014, defense discretionary spending would be set at $520.5 billion, and non-defense discretionary spending would be set at $491.8 billion.

The sequester relief is fully offset by savings elsewhere in the budget. The agreement includes dozens of specific deficit-reduction provisions, with mandatory savings and non-tax revenue totaling $85 billion. The agreement would reduce the deficit by $23 billion.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 | Budget.House.Gov


WEIRD? lol

Weird.............we hit the ceiling back in March yet again.....................

Weird huh..............

You mean AGAIN? What was that about 40 times since Ronnie gutted taxes for the rich? Horrible right? Perhaps Dubya/GOP should've left the fiscal policies of Clinton alone after 4 straight surpluses? lol

AND NOPE, Clinton received 3 of them AFTER he vetoed the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut from the CONservatives/GOPers, lol

Selective memory........................Clinton was forced to do the shit your side takes credit for.................Military downsizing, and welfare reform................

In the middle of .............OH MY FUCKING GOD............GOV'T SHUT DOWNS.................did the sky fall back then because the gov't got shut down 3 times...........................

According to you and your ilk the sky would fall and the old would have to eat dog food.................didn't happen in the 90's now did it.............

You got to go back to Reagan and Clinton to defend your Liar N Chief................

REALLY? It was the GOP huh? What happened then? lol

Clinton was forced to do military downsizing? lol

HINT WELFARE REFORM DIDN'T EFFECT HIS BUDGETS BY ONE PENNY. Look it up dumbfukk

Clinton/Dems set the stage by increasing taxes on those "job creators" in 1993 without a single GOP vote remember?

They created 3 new brackets, and took the top rate from 31% to 39.6% (the half trillion dollar deficit reduction bill that also cut spending)

THE ONE THE GOP SAID WOULD LEAD TO A RECESSION AND LARGER DEFICITS? LOL

Y2k and DOT COM bubbles at the end of his term..............

Pawn to knights 3 Moron.

AND? What exactly happened there Bubs? PLEASE be specific?? lol

 

[Dad2three]

I know how to C & P too DAD...........

You should try to use more credible sources that actually prove your posit Bubs, THAT'S how it works!

 

[Dad2three]

Strange Bedfellows at the Bank | National Review Online

Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, and some very cooked books. EDITOR’S NOTE — The impending federal bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has shed light not only on the seriousness of current housing market conditions but also on the mismanagement and corruption that helped cripple the mortgage giants. Although political figures from both parties have profited mightily from Fannie Mae, it has been a particular favorite of former officials of Democratic administrations, as NR’s Byron York found out when he looked into the situation in the summer of 2006. On May 23, 2006, as a jury in Houston deliberated the case against top Enron executives Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, a little-known regulatory agency in Washington, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), released a study with the dryly bureaucratic title “Report of the Special Examination of Fannie Mae.” The document received far less attention than the news from Enron, but its conclusions were stunning. In meticulous detail, it outlined a culture of corruption at the Federal National Mortgage Association — better known as Fannie Mae — that rivals the most serious corporate scandals in recent years. In this case, however, the main players are Washington insiders — some of them prominent veterans of the Clinton administration — and the scandal’s effects could ripple through Congress for years. Fannie Mae is the biggest single source of money for mortgages in the United States. From 1998 to 2004, the years covered by the OFHEO investigation, it was headed by former Clinton budget director Franklin Raines, whose top management team included former Clinton Justice Department official Jamie Gorelick, sometimes mentioned as a future attorney general in a Democratic administration. During that period, the report says, Raines and his team grossly overstated Fannie Mae’s earnings — to the tune of $10.6 billion — for the purpose of paying themselves big bonuses. “By deliberately and intentionally manipulating accounting to hit earnings targets,” the report says, “senior management maximized the bonuses and other executive compensation they received, at the expense of shareholders.”

Oh goodie, MORE out of context Vids THEN conflating their accounting scandal that was $4 billion dollars, to Dubya's REGULATOR FAILURE AS HE FORCED F/F TO PURCHASE $440 BILLION IN MBS'S TO MEET HIS "GOALS"

ADD TO THAT DUBYA FORCING F/F TO INCREASE THEIR MANDATE FROM 50% TO 56% AND USE "HIGH COST" (SEE SUBPRIME LOANS) AND GETTING RID OF CLINTON'S 2000 RULE THAT F/F COULDN'T USE SUBPRIMES TO MEET THEIR GOALS, AND YOU HAVE DUBYA SINGLE HANDILY DESTROYING THEM (ADDED IN WITH HIS REGULATOR FAILURE DEALING WITH THEM!!!)


Another Conservative Myth Busted -- Did Fannie and Freddie Really Cause the Financial Sector Meltdown?

Subprime lending surged from 2004 to 2006 during the height of the housing bubble. According to Kimberly Amadeo in an article titled "Did Freddie and Fannie Cause the Housing Crisis":

"Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. Even so, by 2007 only 17 percent of their total portfolio was either either subprime or Alt-A loans. Due to regulations, their percentage of these loans are actually better than many banks."

As David Goldstein and Kevin G. Hall write in the McClatchy Newspapers:

"During those same explosive three years, private investment banks -- not Fannie and Freddie -- dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie, according to a number of specialty publications that track this data."

According to David M. Abromowitz and David Min writing for the Center of American Progress:

"If the conservative view was correct, one would expect to see mortgages originated for Fannie and Freddie securitization, as well as those originated for purposes of CRA, to default at higher rates, since these were the loans directly subject to affordable housing policies. In fact, we see quite the opposite, as these loans have performed exponentially better than those originated for private securitization, which the FCIC Republicans ignore."

The fact that the housing bubble occurred contemporaneously in other countries such as Iceland, Ireland, and the United Kingdom also dispels the conservative myth.

In another example of historical revisionism, conservatives blame Democratic Rep. Barney Frank for derailing Bush's attempts to reform Freddie and Fannie. After all, Rep. Frank told The New York Times in September of 2003 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's problems were "exaggerated." However, Republicans controlled the House in that year with the infamous Tom "the Hammer" Delay the majority leader. Rep. Frank had one vote and lacked the power to block any such reform. Republicans could have passed any bill they liked with a simple majority. They held the committee chairs, as well:

"In 2003 neither Fannie or Freddie looked like they were in much trouble. AIG, Goldman-Sachs and Merrill-Lynch all looked like they were in good shape too."

Rep. Frank wrote:


"Under Republican President George W. Bush, many federal agencies turned a blind eye to activities which would later precipitate the global financial meltdown. The Securities and Exchange Commission decided to allow the nation's largest financial institutions to "self-regulate;" the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan declined to use its power to regulate subprime mortgages; the Comptroller of the Currency decided to preempt state consumer laws on subprime mortgages."

This last point referencing the obscure Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is important because President Bush actually made it illegal for state attorneys general to crackdown on predatory lending by mortgage lenders.


Another Conservative Myth Busted -- Did Fannie and Freddie Really Cause the Financial Sector Meltdown?

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, Playtex, we understand you scumbags have a hard time with reality, especially when it comes to OTHER PEOPLES money!...And YET the obamanation CAPS the military raises that were CUT because of him, and you say NOTHING.... You dear, are a fucking HYPOCRITE!!!

Fucking liar........put your links where your mouth is. You must be part of the Trump base.......dumber than rocks.


But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

There's more to this. You might disagree with Obama's priorities, but Cheney's claim is based entirely on the notion that Hagel and Obama are proposing military cuts. But they aren't. Hagel proposed a change in force structure that would lead to a smaller Army, but his overall budget proposal is $115 billion more than the current sequester levels demanded by Republicans. Hagel is going to have plenty of fights on his hands, but mainly because he wants more money, not less.

President Obama is fighting cuts to the military, not demanding them

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

 

[Dad2three]

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=56922
Today I am pleased to sign into law S. 900, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This historic legislation will modernize our financial services laws, stimulating greater innovation and competition in the financial services industry. America's consumers, our communities, and the economy will reap the benefits of this Act.

Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America's underserved communities. Passage of this legislation by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the Congress suggests that we have met that goal.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes the most important legislative changes to the structure of the U.S. financial system since the 1930s. Financial services firms will be authorized to conduct a wide range of financial activities, allowing them freedom to innovate in the new economy. The Act repeals provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the Great Depression, have restricted affiliations between banks and securities firms. It also amends the Bank Holding Company Act to remove restrictions on affiliations between banks and insurance companies. It grants banks significant new authority to conduct most newly authorized activities through financial subsidiaries.

Removal of barriers to competition will enhance the stability of our financial services system. Financial services firms will be able to diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue. They will also be better equipped to compete in global financial markets.

Although the Act grants financial services firms greater latitude to innovate, it also contains important safety and soundness protections. While the Act allows common ownership of banking, securities, and insurance firms, it still requires those activities to be conducted separately within an organization, subject to functional regulation and funding limitations.

Both the Vice President and I have insisted that any financial services modernization legislation must benefit American communities by preserving and strengthening community reinvestment. I am very pleased that the Act accomplishes this goal. The Act establishes an important prospective principle: banking organizations seeking to conduct new nonbanking activities must first demonstrate a satisfactory record of meeting the credit needs of all the communities they serve, including low- and moderate-income communities. Thus, the law will for the first time prohibit expansion into activities such as securities and insurance underwriting unless all of the organization's banks and thrifts maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA will continue to apply to all banks and thrifts, and any application to acquire or merge with a bank or thrift will continue to be reviewed under CRA, with full opportunity for public comment. The bill offers further support for community development in the form of a new Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs (PRIME), to provide technical help to low- and moderate income microentrepreneurs.

The Act includes a limited extension of the CRA examination cycle for small banks and thrifts with outstanding or satisfactory CRA records, but expressly preserves the ability of regulators to examine these institutions at any time for reasonable cause, and does not affect regulators' authority in connection with an application. The bill also includes a requirement for disclosure and reporting of CRA agreements. The Act and its legislative history have been crafted to alleviate burdens on banks and thrifts and those working to stimulate investment in underserved communities. It is critical that depository institutions and their community partners continue efforts that have led to the highest home ownership rate in our history, including a particularly dramatic increase in recent years in minority and low-income home ownership. My Administration remains committed to ensuring that implementation of these provisions does not in any way diminish community reinvestment, and stands ready to remedy any problems that may arise.

THAT GOP BILL BJ BILL SIGNED?

DUBYA'S REGULATOR FAILURE (NOT REGULATIONS!!!)




Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions.



As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

GLB didn’t cause the financial crisis—and, when push comes to shove, the regulatory evangelists must admit as much. Stiglitz, in the same Vanity Fair article, concedes that Glass-Steagall did nothing to “directly” cause the crisis.

FROM A COUPLE OF AYN RAND CULTISTS BUBS

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists

 

[Vigilante]

Yes, Playtex, we understand you scumbags have a hard time with reality, especially when it comes to OTHER PEOPLES money!...And YET the obamanation CAPS the military raises that were CUT because of him, and you say NOTHING.... You dear, are a fucking HYPOCRITE!!!

Fucking liar........put your links where your mouth is. You must be part of the Trump base.......dumber than rocks.


But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

There's more to this. You might disagree with Obama's priorities, but Cheney's claim is based entirely on the notion that Hagel and Obama are proposing military cuts. But they aren't. Hagel proposed a change in force structure that would lead to a smaller Army, but his overall budget proposal is $115 billion more than the current sequester levels demanded by Republicans. Hagel is going to have plenty of fights on his hands, but mainly because he wants more money, not less.

President Obama is fighting cuts to the military, not demanding them

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

You really like being made a fucking fool of.... You are one dumbass Commie/subversive.....

• Obama failed green energy companies list ... - Divided States
  www.dividedstates.com/lis
  Obama failed green energy companies list ... $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter ... in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially ...
  dailycaller.com/2012/...fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies...
  Oct 30, 2012 · ... to green energy companies, half of which he said had failed, ... Obama green-energy failure” list contains ... for clean energy loans, grants, ...

• Obama's alternative energy bankruptcies - Oct. 22, 2012
  money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies
  Oct 22, 2012 · President Obama has faced a barrage of criticism for a handful of energy companies ... energy companies have failed? ... Energy stimulus grant to ...

• List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar Companies | IGN ...
  www.ign.com › Boards › The Vault › Outpost
  • Last updated: Mar 29, 2013 ·
  
  List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies ... List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar ... million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail - ABC News
  abcnews.go.com/Blotter/green-firms-fed-cash-give-execs-bonuses...
  Mar 06, 2012 · President Obama's Department of Energy helped finance several green energy companies that ... energy grant in ... Obama's Green Car Program Under ...

• President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
  dailysignal.com/2012/10/18/p
  President Obama and Congress's foray into subsidizing green energy companies is an ... clean energy loans, grants, ... these failed/failing companies donated to Obama.

• GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama …
  www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/green-scam-80-of-green-energy-loans-
  80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX News analyst says 70% in the video but actually 80% of DOE dollars went to Obama backers. 19 of these green ...

• List: 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures
  nation.foxnews.com/obama/.../20/list-36-obama...green-energy-failures
  Oct 20, 2012 · ... 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy ... This list includes only those companies ... The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy ...

 

[Vigilante]

Oh, on sequester,,, the president can....

• Marc Thiessen: Make Obama decide which sequester cuts ...
  www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-make-obama-decide...
  Feb 25, 2013 · Barack Obama wants to blame ... He had his chance to include tax hikes as part of the sequester when he ... while there is no offramp for the spending cuts ...

• Can GOP blame Obama for the sequester?
  blogs.reuters.com/.../2013/02/19/can-gop-blame-obama-for-the-sequester
  Feb 19, 2013 · They want to demonstrate that government spending is so out of control ... We can blame Obama for the sequester. ... Congress has been spending money …

• Obama Tells Veterans Sequester Puts Their Benefits in ...
  conservativebyte.com/2013/08/obama-tells-veterans-sequester-puts...
  OBAMA IS SPENDING MONEY LEFT ... Why can’t a genuine sequester, put Obama and ... Obama could care less about the elderly.. but he does want their money, one way ...

• Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts ...
  www.politifact.com/.../obama-says-congress-owns-sequestration-cuts
  Oct 24, 2012 · ... "There would be no chance the Republicans would want ... sequestration at Obama's feet, because he ... spending under sequestration as ‘Obama ...

• New GOP sequester plan: Let Obama decide what to cut - Hot …

Dabbler 2 three
hotair.com/archives/2013/02/21/new-gop-sequester-plan-let-obama...
Feb 21, 2013 · ... Obama keeps complaining that the sequester is a blunt ... to start cutting whatever he wants. Either way, ... spending). can_con ...

• Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We ...
  cnsnews.com/news/...obama-uses-sequester-flexibility-we-plan-give-him
  Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We Plan to Give Him. By Susan Jones | March 1, 2013 | 6:20 AM EST

• The Sequester - The President's Plan | The White House
  www.whitehouse.gov/issues/sequester/the-presidents-plan
  the White House President Barack Obama. ... plan that will avoid sequestration's harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way — by cutting spending, ...

• How will he pay for it? Fiscal realities put Obama agenda ...
  nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/11/16901926-how-will-he-pay...
  ... the president telegraphed several initiatives he wants ... Panetta explained that the Pentagon has been spending money at ... Disaster spending And yet Obama ...

Dabbler2three is running OCDPogo, and OCDToro a good race for seeing which one is truly the MOST DERANGED!

 

[Dad2three]

Fucking liar........put your links where your mouth is. You must be part of the Trump base.......dumber than rocks.


But he decided to accuse the commander-in-chief of not supporting the troops and actually wanting to keep people in poverty. There is this belief out there that Republican extremism comes from the base and not the elites. But Cheney proves otherwise.

There's more to this. You might disagree with Obama's priorities, but Cheney's claim is based entirely on the notion that Hagel and Obama are proposing military cuts. But they aren't. Hagel proposed a change in force structure that would lead to a smaller Army, but his overall budget proposal is $115 billion more than the current sequester levels demanded by Republicans. Hagel is going to have plenty of fights on his hands, but mainly because he wants more money, not less.

President Obama is fighting cuts to the military, not demanding them

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

You really like being made a fucking fool of.... You are one dumbass Commie/subversive.....

• Obama failed green energy companies list ... - Divided States
  www.dividedstates.com/lis
  Obama failed green energy companies list ... $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter ... in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially ...
  dailycaller.com/2012/...fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies...
  Oct 30, 2012 · ... to green energy companies, half of which he said had failed, ... Obama green-energy failure” list contains ... for clean energy loans, grants, ...

• Obama's alternative energy bankruptcies - Oct. 22, 2012
  money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies
  Oct 22, 2012 · President Obama has faced a barrage of criticism for a handful of energy companies ... energy companies have failed? ... Energy stimulus grant to ...

• List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar Companies | IGN ...
  www.ign.com › Boards › The Vault › Outpost
  • Last updated: Mar 29, 2013 ·
  
  List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies ... List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar ... million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail - ABC News
  abcnews.go.com/Blotter/green-firms-fed-cash-give-execs-bonuses...
  Mar 06, 2012 · President Obama's Department of Energy helped finance several green energy companies that ... energy grant in ... Obama's Green Car Program Under ...

• President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
  dailysignal.com/2012/10/18/p
  President Obama and Congress's foray into subsidizing green energy companies is an ... clean energy loans, grants, ... these failed/failing companies donated to Obama.

• GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama …
  www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/green-scam-80-of-green-energy-loans-
  80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX News analyst says 70% in the video but actually 80% of DOE dollars went to Obama backers. 19 of these green ...

• List: 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures
  nation.foxnews.com/obama/.../20/list-36-obama...green-energy-failures
  Oct 20, 2012 · ... 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy ... This list includes only those companies ... The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy ...

Weird, why did Dubyas/GOP Congress start that program then? How much did they budget to "lose"? Hint they've done MUCH better than expected actually

"When Congress created the loan program under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it was never designed to be a moneymaker. In fact, Congress imagined there would be losses and set aside $10 billion to cover them"

.
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers : Greentech Media

LMAOROG

 

[Vigilante]

Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for Troops Serving in ...
nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/02/obama-administration-cuts-hot-meals...
Jun 02, 2013 · Obama Administration CUTS HOT MEALS for ... are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military ...

Report: Obama Supports Military Retirement Pay Cuts
www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/military-retirement-pay-reducing/2015/03/...
President Barack Obama said Monday that he supports the idea of reducing military retirement pay by about 20 percent. According to the Washington Times, Obama …

Military Cuts Under Obama 2015 | 2015 Scholarship A to Z
scholarshipupdates.org/tags/military-cuts-under-obama.html
Obama Gets Slammed On Military Cuts By His Own Ex-NATO Chief Updated on 08/17/2015 at 01:08:41 Shrinking Military: NATO's ex-commander charges President Obama …

US military plans steep cutbacks, roils ranks — RT USA
www.rt.com/usa/us-military-cuts-budget-423
In an effort to adhere to President Obama’s pledge of scaling back military ... will not be affected by the cuts. ... billion for fiscal year 2015. ...

Need MORE Playtex?

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

You really like being made a fucking fool of.... You are one dumbass Commie/subversive.....

• Obama failed green energy companies list ... - Divided States
  www.dividedstates.com/lis
  Obama failed green energy companies list ... $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter ... in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially ...
  dailycaller.com/2012/...fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies...
  Oct 30, 2012 · ... to green energy companies, half of which he said had failed, ... Obama green-energy failure” list contains ... for clean energy loans, grants, ...

• Obama's alternative energy bankruptcies - Oct. 22, 2012
  money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies
  Oct 22, 2012 · President Obama has faced a barrage of criticism for a handful of energy companies ... energy companies have failed? ... Energy stimulus grant to ...

• List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar Companies | IGN ...
  www.ign.com › Boards › The Vault › Outpost
  • Last updated: Mar 29, 2013 ·
  
  List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies ... List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar ... million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail - ABC News
  abcnews.go.com/Blotter/green-firms-fed-cash-give-execs-bonuses...
  Mar 06, 2012 · President Obama's Department of Energy helped finance several green energy companies that ... energy grant in ... Obama's Green Car Program Under ...

• President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
  dailysignal.com/2012/10/18/p
  President Obama and Congress's foray into subsidizing green energy companies is an ... clean energy loans, grants, ... these failed/failing companies donated to Obama.

• GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama …
  www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/green-scam-80-of-green-energy-loans-
  80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX News analyst says 70% in the video but actually 80% of DOE dollars went to Obama backers. 19 of these green ...

• List: 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures
  nation.foxnews.com/obama/.../20/list-36-obama...green-energy-failures
  Oct 20, 2012 · ... 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy ... This list includes only those companies ... The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy ...

Weird, why did Dubyas/GOP Congress start that program then? How much did they budget to "lose"? Hint they've done MUCH better than expected actually

"When Congress created the loan program under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it was never designed to be a moneymaker. In fact, Congress imagined there would be losses and set aside $10 billion to cover them"

.
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers : Greentech Media

LMAOROG

More DIVERSION after you've been slapped down, what is it 5 or more times in this thread, and not only by me you idiot that claims I wrote about the sequester!

 

[Dad2three]

Oh, on sequester,,, the president can....

• Marc Thiessen: Make Obama decide which sequester cuts ...
  www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-make-obama-decide...
  Feb 25, 2013 · Barack Obama wants to blame ... He had his chance to include tax hikes as part of the sequester when he ... while there is no offramp for the spending cuts ...

• Can GOP blame Obama for the sequester?
  blogs.reuters.com/.../2013/02/19/can-gop-blame-obama-for-the-sequester
  Feb 19, 2013 · They want to demonstrate that government spending is so out of control ... We can blame Obama for the sequester. ... Congress has been spending money …

• Obama Tells Veterans Sequester Puts Their Benefits in ...
  conservativebyte.com/2013/08/obama-tells-veterans-sequester-puts...
  OBAMA IS SPENDING MONEY LEFT ... Why can’t a genuine sequester, put Obama and ... Obama could care less about the elderly.. but he does want their money, one way ...

• Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts ...
  www.politifact.com/.../obama-says-congress-owns-sequestration-cuts
  Oct 24, 2012 · ... "There would be no chance the Republicans would want ... sequestration at Obama's feet, because he ... spending under sequestration as ‘Obama ...

• New GOP sequester plan: Let Obama decide what to cut - Hot …

Dabbler 2 three
hotair.com/archives/2013/02/21/new-gop-sequester-plan-let-obama...
Feb 21, 2013 · ... Obama keeps complaining that the sequester is a blunt ... to start cutting whatever he wants. Either way, ... spending). can_con ...

• Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We ...
  cnsnews.com/news/...obama-uses-sequester-flexibility-we-plan-give-him
  Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We Plan to Give Him. By Susan Jones | March 1, 2013 | 6:20 AM EST

• The Sequester - The President's Plan | The White House
  www.whitehouse.gov/issues/sequester/the-presidents-plan
  the White House President Barack Obama. ... plan that will avoid sequestration's harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way — by cutting spending, ...

• How will he pay for it? Fiscal realities put Obama agenda ...
  nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/11/16901926-how-will-he-pay...
  ... the president telegraphed several initiatives he wants ... Panetta explained that the Pentagon has been spending money at ... Disaster spending And yet Obama ...

Dabbler2three is running OCDPogo, and OCDToro a good race for seeing which one is truly the MOST DERANGED!

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

A disturbing number of GOP representatives have publicly cheered for the sequester’s spending cuts. Here’s just a few:

[T]here are way more Republicans than just Paul Ryan cheering it on. They can’t wait for sequester! They want it so badly they can taste it. They don’t care that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office warn it could push our economy back into recession.

Here’s a round up of quotes from the DCCC, which will give you a good sense of the real reason Speaker John Boehner is not proposing a sequester replacement bill (hint: he doesn’t have the votes):

Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.


It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, thank the GOP sequester dummy

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted


Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.

It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

[P]ointing out Republican-caused harms to millions of people — many of them Republicans — does not sway the ultra-right. Why? Democratic pundits say that Republicans want to hurt the president, to show government doesn’t work by making it not work, and to protect “special interests” from higher taxes. All true. But there is an additional and deeper reason. Ultra-conservatives believe that the sequester is moral, that it is the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

You really like being made a fucking fool of.... You are one dumbass Commie/subversive.....

• Obama failed green energy companies list ... - Divided States
  www.dividedstates.com/lis
  Obama failed green energy companies list ... $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter ... in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially ...
  dailycaller.com/2012/...fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies...
  Oct 30, 2012 · ... to green energy companies, half of which he said had failed, ... Obama green-energy failure” list contains ... for clean energy loans, grants, ...

• Obama's alternative energy bankruptcies - Oct. 22, 2012
  money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies
  Oct 22, 2012 · President Obama has faced a barrage of criticism for a handful of energy companies ... energy companies have failed? ... Energy stimulus grant to ...

• List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar Companies | IGN ...
  www.ign.com › Boards › The Vault › Outpost
  • Last updated: Mar 29, 2013 ·
  
  List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies ... List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar ... million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail - ABC News
  abcnews.go.com/Blotter/green-firms-fed-cash-give-execs-bonuses...
  Mar 06, 2012 · President Obama's Department of Energy helped finance several green energy companies that ... energy grant in ... Obama's Green Car Program Under ...

• President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
  dailysignal.com/2012/10/18/p
  President Obama and Congress's foray into subsidizing green energy companies is an ... clean energy loans, grants, ... these failed/failing companies donated to Obama.

• GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama …
  www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/green-scam-80-of-green-energy-loans-
  80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX News analyst says 70% in the video but actually 80% of DOE dollars went to Obama backers. 19 of these green ...

• List: 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures
  nation.foxnews.com/obama/.../20/list-36-obama...green-energy-failures
  Oct 20, 2012 · ... 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy ... This list includes only those companies ... The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy ...

Weird, why did Dubyas/GOP Congress start that program then? How much did they budget to "lose"? Hint they've done MUCH better than expected actually

"When Congress created the loan program under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it was never designed to be a moneymaker. In fact, Congress imagined there would be losses and set aside $10 billion to cover them"

.
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers : Greentech Media

LMAOROG

More DIVERSION after you've been slapped down, what is it 5 or more times in this thread, and not only by me you idiot that claims I wrote about the sequester!

More right wing delusion from you. Audios dumfukk,

 

[Vigilante]

Oh, on sequester,,, the president can....

• Marc Thiessen: Make Obama decide which sequester cuts ...
  www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-make-obama-decide...
  Feb 25, 2013 · Barack Obama wants to blame ... He had his chance to include tax hikes as part of the sequester when he ... while there is no offramp for the spending cuts ...

• Can GOP blame Obama for the sequester?
  blogs.reuters.com/.../2013/02/19/can-gop-blame-obama-for-the-sequester
  Feb 19, 2013 · They want to demonstrate that government spending is so out of control ... We can blame Obama for the sequester. ... Congress has been spending money …

• Obama Tells Veterans Sequester Puts Their Benefits in ...
  conservativebyte.com/2013/08/obama-tells-veterans-sequester-puts...
  OBAMA IS SPENDING MONEY LEFT ... Why can’t a genuine sequester, put Obama and ... Obama could care less about the elderly.. but he does want their money, one way ...

• Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts ...
  www.politifact.com/.../obama-says-congress-owns-sequestration-cuts
  Oct 24, 2012 · ... "There would be no chance the Republicans would want ... sequestration at Obama's feet, because he ... spending under sequestration as ‘Obama ...

• New GOP sequester plan: Let Obama decide what to cut - Hot …

Dabbler 2 three
hotair.com/archives/2013/02/21/new-gop-sequester-plan-let-obama...
Feb 21, 2013 · ... Obama keeps complaining that the sequester is a blunt ... to start cutting whatever he wants. Either way, ... spending). can_con ...

• Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We ...
  cnsnews.com/news/...obama-uses-sequester-flexibility-we-plan-give-him
  Ryan: We'll See If Obama Uses the Sequester Flexibility We Plan to Give Him. By Susan Jones | March 1, 2013 | 6:20 AM EST

• The Sequester - The President's Plan | The White House
  www.whitehouse.gov/issues/sequester/the-presidents-plan
  the White House President Barack Obama. ... plan that will avoid sequestration's harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way — by cutting spending, ...

• How will he pay for it? Fiscal realities put Obama agenda ...
  nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/11/16901926-how-will-he-pay...
  ... the president telegraphed several initiatives he wants ... Panetta explained that the Pentagon has been spending money at ... Disaster spending And yet Obama ...

Dabbler2three is running OCDPogo, and OCDToro a good race for seeing which one is truly the MOST DERANGED!

Boehner: I got 98 percent of what I wanted

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

A disturbing number of GOP representatives have publicly cheered for the sequester’s spending cuts. Here’s just a few:

[T]here are way more Republicans than just Paul Ryan cheering it on. They can’t wait for sequester! They want it so badly they can taste it. They don’t care that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office warn it could push our economy back into recession.

Here’s a round up of quotes from the DCCC, which will give you a good sense of the real reason Speaker John Boehner is not proposing a sequester replacement bill (hint: he doesn’t have the votes):

Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9]

Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (R-CO). “I don’t think going over the fiscal cliff would have been a huge deal” [kdvr.com, 1/02/13]

… Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN). “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1]

Republican Congressman John Fleming (R-LA). “The sequester is law. Those cuts happen no matter what. We’re willing to hang in there and insist that those cuts go into place…” [NHPR, 1/30/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY. “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11]

… Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC). “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS). “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13]

Outside of Congress, conservative organizations like Americans For Prosperity have three words for the sequester’s deep cuts: “Bring it on.”

Mark Lucas wouldn’t mind seeing America’s defense budget cut by billions.

“There’s quite a bit of waste within the military,” Lucas, who serves as Iowa state director for the conservative group Americans for Prosperity (AFP), told ABC News. “Being in there for 10 years, I’ve seen quite a bit of it.”

… Lucas cited duplicative equipment purchases, military-run golf courses and lavish food on larger bases — unlike the chow he endured at a combat operations post in Afghanistan with about 120 other soldiers.

“These guys would have very good food, and I’m talking almost like a buffet style, shrimp and steak once a week, ice cream, all this stuff,” Lucas said. “They had Burger Kings and Pizza Huts and McDonald’s. And I said to myself, ‘Do we really need this?'”

As I pointed out in a post last week, the sequester’s brutal, automatic, across-the-board cuts were never supposed to take effect. No, they were designed to be so damaging and stupid that both parties would be forced to come up with a compromise on spending cuts and revenue. Letting such draconian, damaging cuts take effect was supposed to be the last thing any member of Congress wanted to happen.


It’ turns out that Republicans see the sequester as an opportunity to inflict painful cuts that Americans don’t want and didn’t vote for, and the GOP’s ultra-conservatives want it to happen because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

The GOP’s “Sequester Cheerleaders” Greatest Hits … So Far

You're not really worth the time, I can repost also!

More DIVERSION after you've been slapped down, what is it 5 or more times in this thread, and not only by me you idiot that claims I wrote about the sequester!

 

[Vigilante]

The Obomazoid has the privilege as to seeing where the money is spent.... think we need more FAILED SOLAR COMPANIES, and MMGW grants, perhaps more money for ILLEGAL ALIEN CHILDREN???

Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
Obama’s Solar Bets May Avoid Solyndra’s Fate With Low Costs

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
Hearings and Votes | Energy & Commerce Committee

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
Exclusive Timeline: Bush Administration Advanced Solyndra Loan Guarantee for Two Years, Media Blow the Story

You really like being made a fucking fool of.... You are one dumbass Commie/subversive.....

• Obama failed green energy companies list ... - Divided States
  www.dividedstates.com/lis
  Obama failed green energy companies list ... $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter ... in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially ...
  dailycaller.com/2012/...fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies...
  Oct 30, 2012 · ... to green energy companies, half of which he said had failed, ... Obama green-energy failure” list contains ... for clean energy loans, grants, ...

• Obama's alternative energy bankruptcies - Oct. 22, 2012
  money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies
  Oct 22, 2012 · President Obama has faced a barrage of criticism for a handful of energy companies ... energy companies have failed? ... Energy stimulus grant to ...

• List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar Companies | IGN ...
  www.ign.com › Boards › The Vault › Outpost
  • Last updated: Mar 29, 2013 ·
  
  List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies ... List of Failed Obama Green Energy & Solar ... million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama ...

• Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail - ABC News
  abcnews.go.com/Blotter/green-firms-fed-cash-give-execs-bonuses...
  Mar 06, 2012 · President Obama's Department of Energy helped finance several green energy companies that ... energy grant in ... Obama's Green Car Program Under ...

• President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
  dailysignal.com/2012/10/18/p
  President Obama and Congress's foray into subsidizing green energy companies is an ... clean energy loans, grants, ... these failed/failing companies donated to Obama.

• GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama …
  www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/green-scam-80-of-green-energy-loans-
  80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX News analyst says 70% in the video but actually 80% of DOE dollars went to Obama backers. 19 of these green ...

• List: 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures
  nation.foxnews.com/obama/.../20/list-36-obama...green-energy-failures
  Oct 20, 2012 · ... 36 Of Obama’s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy ... This list includes only those companies ... The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy ...

Weird, why did Dubyas/GOP Congress start that program then? How much did they budget to "lose"? Hint they've done MUCH better than expected actually

"When Congress created the loan program under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it was never designed to be a moneymaker. In fact, Congress imagined there would be losses and set aside $10 billion to cover them"

.
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers
DOE: The Clean Energy Loan Program Is Already Making a Profit for Taxpayers : Greentech Media

LMAOROG

More DIVERSION after you've been slapped down, what is it 5 or more times in this thread, and not only by me you idiot that claims I wrote about the sequester!

More right wing delusion from you. Audios dumfukk,

I guess I WON!