Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

[Sallow]

Me? no not at all, your stupidity is tiresome but you're entitled to it and you do it well.

don't try that shit one me either with that "why did it have to be ignored", "why did it expire". it expired, bush was not end running the law, so your point is poopy.

pelosi and obama were and are end running it. period. suck it up, now if you had read and digested this the past 4-5 times I told you this very same thing, you would not have put your shoe in your mouth again.

what first are you even talking about, you're not even making sense.


so again, where are the cuts obama promised and said he would provide ala deficit reduction and 'balance', he got the revenue, concentrate now becasue thats really the topic, sequester why the gop wants to let it roll and why obama after embracing it, now is shitting his pants 'frothing' at the horror of it all...


so? do you have an answer?

You can deny the history all you want, Trajan..

But the fact still remains..Bush screwed the Pooch so badly..that even with Paygo, congress had to start acting..and acting fast to avert financial cataclysm. And it wasn't even enough..because it wound up going into the next administration.

Hence the initial big spending in 2009 were a result of the big fucking mess left by your hero.

But take a look at the numbers..spending has been going DOWN..along with the DEFICIT, dude.

So it seems, Obama has been KEEPING HIS PROMISE, even though the numbers given out by the Bush administration WERE WRONG.

That's NOT ENOUGH for you folks. Your boys in Congress want to crash the economy to fulfill Grover Norquist's fantasy. And it's funny you guys didn't trot him out at ALL during the Bush administration.

you're babbling, stop posting drunk

When it doubt roll that out Trajan..

Works every time.

 

[percysunshine]

Booooooosssssshhhhhh....

 

[IlarMeilyr]

What's the date on that, Rebecca?

Bitch are you saying the left leaning politifact is lying? Are you calling Woodward a liar?

I'm saying that July 25 comes before July 27.

Are you disputing that?

Holy fuck.

July comes just before August. The fucking crap passed in August. EARLY August. August 2, in fact.

Are you REALLY claiming that an inchoate idea was first thought up by Boehner in LATE fucking July but crammed through Congress in August?

The origination of the notion of using SOME kind of "sequester" obviously preceded late July.

The original SENATE bill passed in February, by the way. The HOUSE amended it. The Senate had to confirm the bill as amended by the House. History of Bills, Volume 157 (2011) - S. 365: An original bill to make a technical amendment to the...

So if you imagine that Boehner and the GOP came up with the thing on 7/25 and got it passed "snap" just like that, then you are just plain silly.

 

[percysunshine]

Roooooovvvveeee

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The House, on passing the Senate bill WITH an Amendment, took the bill from about 1 paragraph to about 74 PDF pages: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s365eah/pdf/BILLS-112s365eah.pdf

It is dated August 1. So the question is: Did somebody draft all that gibberish and get it calendared and voted on by the House then by the Senate in roughly just a week?

Or can we acknowledge that the concepts put forward in the House Amendment (including sequester) had been something being worked on for more than just that one week?

 

[Sallow]

Is irrelevant to hard too understand retard?

Well no..it's not irrelevant. Liberals really have no history of pulling this type of shit.

Conservatives do.

Reagan wanted to spend? No problem. Liberals did some horse trading in congress and he got what he wanted.

Clinton? Conservatives shut down the government..not once..but twice.

Bush? With the exception of the first tax cut, because Bush threw paygo out the window with that one..same thing. Little horse trading..and he got what he wanted.

Obama? Conservatives are pulling the same old shit.

That's funny decades of failed democratic freebies finally caught up with the economy
Oh and freebies are only good when it's a democrat doing, but if a republican does it you whine and bitch.
Who signed the bill into law?

What freebies are you talking about?

The GI Bill?
Social Security?
Medicare?

Those are things that actually benefit the citizens of the this country. Unlike what Republicans like to roll out. More and more "defense" spending. And big give back to huge corporations.

 

[percysunshine]

Cheeeeneeeeeyyyyy...

 

[Trajan]

obama and the dems have painted themselves into their own corner, over that ten year window , the 1.2 trillion he alludes to above, is still short as the sequester only cuts 850 Bn, if he and the dems cannot even stomach 850 bn, there is no way they are coming up with another 350 bn either, and, remember when he made this speech he didn't have his tax revenues either.

I am sure this will all make Eds head explode, but theres no way out.

For a Know-it-all you don't even know what is happening around you!!!!

If you remember, to delay the sequester from January to March cuts were agreed upon to offset more than what would have been cut by the sequester for those two months. the $85 billion that remains is for the remaining 10 months of 2013, it is not $85 billion a year for the remaining 9 years.

very good, you ARE paying attention, the original number was 600 Bn, so that makes 1.8 trillion, what the size of the hole you've talked yourself into as changed? The problem is you guys won't cut, you got the taxes, ( an old story) and now?

where are the cuts, you're own dem. committee chairman, here ya go-

Feb 8 2013.....

The Senate Finance Committee has jurisdiction over tax issues, but Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mt.), the panel’s chairman, said he wasn’t sure who would lead the bill through the Senate.

Asked if he would be the senator shepherding the bill, he responded: “Good question.”


wheres obama? oh wait, hes on the road, no plan ( the CBO chief said he couldn't score anything because "We don't estimate speeches," said Elmendorf.).....and hes still ding bis shtick, the day after he signed the tax increases, here ya go;


jan 3 2013-

"I’m willing to do more, as long as we do it in a balanced way that doesn't put all the burden on seniors or students or middle class burdens but also asks the wealthiest Americans to contribute and pay their fair share.”

and hes going to beat that drum again and you don't have an answer, DO YOU???????

thats what tis sequester etc. is all about. time for him and harry to sept up to te plate.

 

[Trajan]

Did twice as many Republicans vote for it?

Yes or no?

the gop aren't the ones trotting out police and fireman ( state employees btw ) telling us the sky is falling, they appear to be content to let it hit, so the point is moot.

and speaking of content in the other context- wheres the cuts? you know, the 'balance'? he got his tax cuts, well?

The increased tax revenue is due to the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts.

It has nothing to do with the sequester deal, which was agreed to in exchange for the Republicans not getting our credit downgraded again.

right so the taxs went up he got his revenue and now you want to vaporize the argument ala 3-1 revenue for cuts so you don't have to address it.....get dafugoutahere...you're not that stupid , stop being dishonest.

 

[Erand7899]

There is a great deal of talk about how Republican senators have gone off the rails in their opposition to the nomination of former Senator Chuck Hagel to serve as secretary of defense. And there have been some bizarre deviations, with senators making pronouncements based on internet rumors and unfounded speculation.

But none of the fantastical filibustering of the Hagel fight can compare with the delusional dialogue regarding the federal budget.

To hear the billionaire proponents of austerity tell it, America is teetering on the brink of economic ruin. America, we are told, is broke. And the only answer is to “Fix the Debt” with deep spending cuts followed by the radical reordering of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

But America is not broke.

America has broken priorities.

That’s what the billionaire proponents of cuts-at-any-cost economics won’t acknowledge as they advance a “Fix the Debt” agenda that imposes austerity on everyone else, while stacking the deck in their favor.

It is vital to understand that there is an economically and socially viable alternative to austerity cuts. It’s a growth agenda that addresses waste, fraud and abuse while finding new revenues to invest in job creation, education and expansion of access to healthcare.

The growth agenda, as proposed in the “Balancing Act” advanced by leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, asks billionaires to pay their fair share in order to expand employment and opportunities.

The austerity agenda asks everyone but the billionaires to pay: via cuts not just to benefits and services but to jobs.

The anticipated March 1 sequestration, which proposes across-the-board cuts, is an example of austerity.

It continues a two-year-long process of slashing federal programs that are of value to Americans.

But it demands nothing new of billionaires and corporations that are on the winning end of rapidly expanding income inequality.

Sequestration Sacrifices Jobs to Save Billionaire Tax Breaks | The Nation

And there it is.

All the stimulus money that flooded into government programs during the economic emergency. Now they want to make that astronomical spending permanent after the emergency has passed.

Totally saw that coming.

Please stop the hyperbole here talking about the government's astronomical spending. That is so false I can't even begin with, do a simple search. This administration is spending less than any other administration in the past DECADES...

But you've been sold this LIE so much and for so long, you don't even know any better. Wise up and lean to stop being fed bullshit and think for yourself.

You wouldn't recognize a LIE if it stood up and shouted at you. Government is not spending less than it did in the past. Government is spending less on the discretionary side of the budget, but the entitlement programs are growing out of control and are fueling this massive debt. Way past time to take your head out of the sand and confront reality.

 

[Trajan]

You can deny the history all you want, Trajan..

But the fact still remains..Bush screwed the Pooch so badly..that even with Paygo, congress had to start acting..and acting fast to avert financial cataclysm. And it wasn't even enough..because it wound up going into the next administration.

Hence the initial big spending in 2009 were a result of the big fucking mess left by your hero.

But take a look at the numbers..spending has been going DOWN..along with the DEFICIT, dude.

So it seems, Obama has been KEEPING HIS PROMISE, even though the numbers given out by the Bush administration WERE WRONG.

That's NOT ENOUGH for you folks. Your boys in Congress want to crash the economy to fulfill Grover Norquist's fantasy. And it's funny you guys didn't trot him out at ALL during the Bush administration.

Bush has been long gone wise up this is all obama, and the democratic policies from the past .

Yep.

And both SPENDING and the DEFICIT have gone down..since 2009.

It's not like Conservatives will ever admit that.

And the ones we have in congress are oblivious to that..and many have taken on a brand shiny "new" austerity meme..which is pretty surprising..since many of them were rubber stamping Bush's spending.

right....hey honey we are only borrowing 38% of what we need to live every month not 40%, yea!!!!!!! gosh your just , well dumb.


you do know what debt is....? Right Oh thats nothing to worry about, you know the debt is still going up, you do know that interests rates cannot stay where they are waaaaaaaay below the average norm of 5%...right? you know what happens when they start to inch it up? try thinking with both sides of your brain for a change. thats the real bomb....and why do we need the debt ceiling increased again?

and you have some nerve mentioning bushs spending, obama has ran over a trillion $ deficit every year, a record, so whining about BOOOOOOOOOOOOSH here is a loser. either you care, or you don't, I do, so let the sequester roll, you wanted defense cut, its going to get cut, man up and put on your big boy undies....

Unless of curse you have obama and harrys plan to cut the budget, oh wait there is no budget, we have not had one for what , 4 years? Oops..


so here ya go, stop whining and tell harry and obama to step up-

 

[Erand7899]

You got a link for any of that 'sequestration will not damage any government department"? Because I sure have some hours of testimony form the horse's mouth that it will.

You shouldn't believe everything you hear from a horse. The $87 Billion cut is less that 2% of the individual budgets, and more than they had to spend last year. Common sense and basic math is all the links you need. The only entity that will be heavily impacted will be the Defense Department, which also took a hefty cut last year. But, $47.5 Billion is less than the cost overruns that they experience on some of their major contracts.

I realize it sounded great when you heard it and reaffirmed all your beliefs but you care to say where you heard that or a link to where you read that?

I know that the concept may shock some of you, but you are allowed to think for yourself. You do not require some "smart" person to tell you what to think. Especially, when many of those "smart" people are miseducated and dumber than a box of rocks.

These horrific cuts are less than 2% of the budgets of the departments and agencies affected, and leaves them with more than they had to spend last year. The world did not end last year. Thousands of people were not laid off last year because of government budget shortfalls.

The only real loser here would be the Department of Defense, which also took a hit in the last continuing resolution. Perhaps they could make it up by finding those hundreds of billions of dollars that they have lost over the years and cannot account for.

God forbid, but the horror of the possibility that parents might have to find alternative day care for their children that attend federally financed preschool. How will they ever cope?

 

[bripat9643]

What freebies are you talking about?

The GI Bill?
Social Security?
Medicare?

Those are things that actually benefit the citizens of the this country. Unlike what Republicans like to roll out. More and more "defense" spending. And big give back to huge corporations.

No, they don't benefit all Americans. They benefit some at the expense of others. Overall they are a net negative. Veterans have earned their GI benefits, but everyone under 50 is going to get a royal screwing from Social Security and Medicare.

 

[Erand7899]

Industry analysis: FAA cuts under sequester would be costly | Federal Times | federaltimes.com

The report, released Monday by the Aerospace Industries Association, presumes that the cuts would force the layoff of almost 1,500 air traffic controllers — nearly 10 percent of the total — and the closing of more than 240 airport control towers around the country. Coupled with projected layoffs of almost 12,000 customs inspectors and Transportation Security Administration screeners, “these cuts would hobble the air transportation system, and leave it unable to support today’s level of civil air travel,” the report says.

Sequester will cost the FAA $1 billion dollars next year. The majority of FAA's expense is personal and a majority of that is flight controllers. You cut the FAA $1 billion there are not going to be as many air traffic controllers. This isn't just whining and crying. This is hard numbers. You do one you get the other. It really is just that simple.

The FAA is a part of the Department of Transportation, and has about 47,000 employees. A little simple math will tell you that the personnel costs for the FAA are less than $1 Billion out of a budget of a little over $9 Billion.

The Department of Transportation has assigned half of the $1.1 Billion that they have to absorb to the FAA, even though the FAA budget is only about a tenth of the DOT budget. Why? For the reason of inflicting the maximum punishment possible to the people who fly.

Part of the FAA budget are grants to airports of over $2.4 Billion. Now, where do you think they should do the $600 Million cuts?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

"Obama has said he wants Congress to end tax loopholes enjoyed mainly by the wealthy to buy lawmakers enough time to pass a budget but Republicans are insisting on deeper spending cuts to reduce the $16 trillion national debt."

What is wrong with closing loopholes for the wealthy? Fair or not, it only makes it look like (or for some people it validates the argument), the GOP is shilling for the wealthy elites.

If the GOP wants cuts to programs let them name the cuts? Obama wanted taxes raise and he named the taxes he wanted raised. Why won't the GOP just be honest and open with the American people, and name the cuts they would hold America hostage for?

The latest game makes it look like they really want to force sequestration, while denying it is what they want to do. This way they get cuts without naming which ones they wanted. They are hedging bets -- betting against the American people, and betting that both parties and the President will share blame with the GOP.

This isn't governing, it's electioneering.

Dante

dD

The blame goes to the GOP in its reckless adherence to an extreme and radical fiscal policy that seeks to balance the budget on the backs of the disabled, the retired, children, and working Americans; and its moronic and untenable ‘no tax increase’ position, where every economist from one side of the political spectrum to the other agree any serious debt reduction must include an increase in taxes.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

"Obama has said he wants Congress to end tax loopholes enjoyed mainly by the wealthy to buy lawmakers enough time to pass a budget but Republicans are insisting on deeper spending cuts to reduce the $16 trillion national debt."

What is wrong with closing loopholes for the wealthy? Fair or not, it only makes it look like (or for some people it validates the argument), the GOP is shilling for the wealthy elites.

If the GOP wants cuts to programs let them name the cuts? Obama wanted taxes raise and he named the taxes he wanted raised. Why won't the GOP just be honest and open with the American people, and name the cuts they would hold America hostage for?

The latest game makes it look like they really want to force sequestration, while denying it is what they want to do. This way they get cuts without naming which ones they wanted. They are hedging bets -- betting against the American people, and betting that both parties and the President will share blame with the GOP.

This isn't governing, it's electioneering.

Dante

dD

The blame goes to the GOP in its reckless adherence to an extreme and radical fiscal policy that seeks to balance the budget on the backs of the disabled, the retired, children, and working Americans; and its moronic and untenable ‘no tax increase’ position, where every economist from one side of the political spectrum to the other agree any serious debt reduction must include an increase in taxes.

Wrong. the blame goes to the democrats and them making a safety net into a hammock.

 

[Trajan]

look, this is all political BS, domestic agencies whose budgets have increased 17 percent under President Obama are now up for a 5% cut and the golden calf of Defense which every single dem I can think of ( or lets say 99% of them) on this site consistently has called bloated or useless or a waste is now in a sate of uproar.(The navy says it cannot afford to send the Harry S Truman to the gulf, yet- the Defense Department’s civilian employment has grown 17 percent since 2002. In 2012, defense spending on civilian personnel was 21 percent higher than in 2002 ( hat tip- george will). Give me a break.


they [have] accused the gop and the evil rich of having no skin in the game, well? here it is. defense under gates cut 16Bn, under panetta, 41 Bn and they will cut again via the sequester.

and they cannot even give up just under half the sequester 85 bn......according to them- it will rain fire.






This is all a set up for 2014 mid terms, he doesn't want to govern he wants to win and if African amercian unemployment stays above 14% and for his young supporters,who turned out in droves for him, heres a gem-


Employment Rate For Young Adults Lowest In 60 Years, Study Says

an unimpeachable source Huffpo via Pew research:rolleyes;

Employment Rate For Young Adults Lowest In 60 Years, Study Says
Employment Rate For Young Adults Lowest In 60 Years, Study Says

well no matter , they are cannon fodder for the obama legacy, he wants to be loved by as many as possible even if he is a complete failure when ti comes to the economy and governing, thats the only legacy open to him , (obamacare? just wait, its a fiscal disaster in the making but he'll be gone before even his acolytes realize it if they ever do)?

Anything that appeals to a community organizer, fawning sycophantic adulation, thats what he wants......he'll tell us in 2015 with +7% unemployment thats its still bushs economy and you know what? The dolts will still believe it.

 

[Trajan]

Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

"Obama has said he wants Congress to end tax loopholes enjoyed mainly by the wealthy to buy lawmakers enough time to pass a budget but Republicans are insisting on deeper spending cuts to reduce the $16 trillion national debt."

What is wrong with closing loopholes for the wealthy? Fair or not, it only makes it look like (or for some people it validates the argument), the GOP is shilling for the wealthy elites.

If the GOP wants cuts to programs let them name the cuts? Obama wanted taxes raise and he named the taxes he wanted raised. Why won't the GOP just be honest and open with the American people, and name the cuts they would hold America hostage for?

The latest game makes it look like they really want to force sequestration, while denying it is what they want to do. This way they get cuts without naming which ones they wanted. They are hedging bets -- betting against the American people, and betting that both parties and the President will share blame with the GOP.

This isn't governing, it's electioneering.

Dante

dD

The blame goes to the GOP in its reckless adherence to an extreme and radical fiscal policy that seeks to balance the budget on the backs of the disabled, the retired, children, and working Americans; and its moronic and untenable ‘no tax increase’ position, where every economist from one side of the political spectrum to the other agree any serious debt reduction must include an increase in taxes.

you must have slept under a rock for the last 3 months, he got tax revenue, its time for some 'balance', ( his words too), cuts, so where are they?

 

[Wiseacre]

Exactly, I didn't see much balance in the fiscal cliff deal. Can't believe all the doomsday crap over spending less than they intended. It's not really cuts, just less of an increase. And I'm supposed to believe everything will go to hell in a handbasket if the sequester goes through? Here's an idea, why don't we chop the money from funding for high speed rail and the wind and solar projects that seem to fail every other week or so? I hear the repubs are willing to give the president authority to do that but he doesn't want it, he'd rather politicize the situation instead even though it hurts the country.

 

[Sallow]

Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

"Obama has said he wants Congress to end tax loopholes enjoyed mainly by the wealthy to buy lawmakers enough time to pass a budget but Republicans are insisting on deeper spending cuts to reduce the $16 trillion national debt."

What is wrong with closing loopholes for the wealthy? Fair or not, it only makes it look like (or for some people it validates the argument), the GOP is shilling for the wealthy elites.

If the GOP wants cuts to programs let them name the cuts? Obama wanted taxes raise and he named the taxes he wanted raised. Why won't the GOP just be honest and open with the American people, and name the cuts they would hold America hostage for?

The latest game makes it look like they really want to force sequestration, while denying it is what they want to do. This way they get cuts without naming which ones they wanted. They are hedging bets -- betting against the American people, and betting that both parties and the President will share blame with the GOP.

This isn't governing, it's electioneering.

Dante

dD

The blame goes to the GOP in its reckless adherence to an extreme and radical fiscal policy that seeks to balance the budget on the backs of the disabled, the retired, children, and working Americans; and its moronic and untenable ‘no tax increase’ position, where every economist from one side of the political spectrum to the other agree any serious debt reduction must include an increase in taxes.

you must have slept under a rock for the last 3 months, he got tax revenue, its time for some 'balance', ( his words too), cuts, so where are they?

Oh malarkey.

What he "got" was something that should have sunsetted ages ago. And he had to compromise on that.

Revenue to the government is WAY DOWN.

That really shouldn't be the case..considering the two wars and the medicaid drug benefit.