Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

[Procrustes Stretched]

Seems we have been through this before. How did it work out for you guys last time? Did the GOP gain from shutting the government down last time?

They are out of step with the people and as more people vote, as voter suppression fails, the GOP will lose.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Come on, man. Seriously, move on. You claim to know the inner works of the Oval Office? You honest think Obama was sitting at his desk kicked back with his feet up or on the links and all of a sudden he was like, "I know! I am going to write up a sequestration!" Why don't blame the real villain, some underpaid overworked intern try to get through polly sci.

Look, it's not hard to know what obama did when he said what he said during his press conference here's the Video in full shown by CNN
[ame=http://youtu.be/VxegPMvxgEA]President Obama Super Committee Statement (November 21, 2011) - YouTube[/ame]
And here's the text if you want too read it.

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE SUPERCOMMITTEE

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

5:44 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. As you all know, last summer I signed a law that will cut nearly $1 trillion of spending over the next 10 years. Part of that law also required Congress to reduce the deficit by an additional $1.2 trillion by the end of this year.

In September, I sent them a detailed plan that would have gone above and beyond that goal. It's a plan that would reduce the deficit by an additional $3 trillion, by cutting spending, slowing the growth of Medicare and Medicaid, and asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

In addition to my plan, there were a number of other bipartisan plans for them to consider from both Democrats and Republicans, all of which promoted a balanced approach. This kind of balanced approach to reducing our deficit -- an approach where everybody gives a little bit, and everyone does their fair share -- is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans -- Democrats, independents, and Republicans. It’s supported by experts and economists from all across the political spectrum. And to their credit, many Democrats in Congress were willing to put politics aside and commit to reasonable adjustments that would have reduced the cost of Medicare, as long as they were part of a balanced approach.

But despite the broad agreement that exists for such an approach, there's still too many Republicans in Congress who have refused to listen to the voices of reason and compromise that are coming from outside of Washington. They continue to insist on protecting $100 billion worth of tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans at any cost, even if it means reducing the deficit with deep cuts to things like education and medical research. Even if it means deep cuts in Medicare.

So at this point, at least, they simply will not budge from that negotiating position. And so far, that refusal continues to be the main stumbling block that has prevented Congress from reaching an agreement to further reduce our deficit.

Now, we are not in the same situation that we were -- that we were in in August. There is no imminent threat to us defaulting on the debt that we owe. There are already $1 trillion worth of spending cuts that are locked in. And part of the law that I signed this summer stated that if Congress could not reach an agreement on the deficit, there would be another $1.2 trillion of automatic cuts in 2013 -– divided equally between domestic spending and defense spending.

One way or another, we will be trimming the deficit by a total of at least $2.2 trillion over the next 10 years. That's going to happen, one way or another. We've got $1 trillion locked in, and either Congress comes up with $1.2 trillion, which so far they've failed to do, or the sequester kicks in and these automatic spending cuts will occur that bring in an additional $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction.

Now, the question right now is whether we can reduce the deficit in a way that helps the economy grow, that operates with a scalpel, not with a hatchet, and if not, whether Congress is willing to stick to the painful deal that we made in August for the automatic cuts. Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts.

My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.

We need to keep the pressure up to compromise -- not turn off the pressure. The only way these spending cuts will not take place is if Congress gets back to work and agrees on a balanced plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion. That’s exactly what they need to do. That’s the job they promised to do. And they've still got a year to figure it out.

Although Congress has not come to an agreement yet, nothing prevents them from coming up with an agreement in the days ahead. They can still come together around a balanced plan. I believe Democrats are prepared to do so. My expectation is, is that there will be some Republicans who are still interested in preventing the automatic cuts from taking place. And, as I have from the beginning, I stand ready and willing to work with anybody that’s ready to engage in that effort to create a balanced plan for deficit reduction.

Now, in the meantime, we've got a lot of work left to do this year. Before Congress leaves next month, we have to work together to cut taxes for workers and small business owners all across America. If we don’t act, taxes will go up for every single American, starting next year. And I’m not about to let that happen. Middle-class Americans can’t afford to lose $1,000 next year because Congress won’t act. And I can only hope that members of Congress who've been fighting so hard to protect tax breaks for the wealthy will fight just as hard to protect tax breaks for small business owners and middle-class families.

We still need to put construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads and our bridges. We still need to put our teachers back in the classroom educating our kids.

So when everybody gets back from Thanksgiving, it’s time to get some work done for the American people. All around the country, Americans are working hard to live within their means and meet their responsibilities. And I know they expect Washington to do the same.

Thanks.

END 5:50 P.M. EST

Obama Supercommittee Speech Transcript: No Easy Off Ramps to Cutting Deficit

Your not one of those people who says he did not kill bin Laden are you?

You're bat shit crazy and your comment is irrelevant.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

California Republican Sponsored The Sequester Law in US House and then President Obama while Signing the Sequester Bill said "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No."

The GOP had to pass the bill. Obama suggested it.

US House of Representatives: David Dreier (R) California -
No Co-Sponsors

US Senate: Sen. Thomas “Tom” Harkin [D-IA]
No Co-Sponsors

The House passed the Budget Control Act[1] on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it, while 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted against it.

The Senate passed the Act on August 2, 2011 by a vote of 74–26. 6 Democrats and 19 Republicans voted against it

---

Presidential signature

President Obama signed the bill shortly after it was passed by the Senate. In doing so, the president said, "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No. But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need, and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year."

Budget Control Act of 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

H.R.2693: Budget Control Act of 2011 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

Budget Control Act of 2011 (2011; 112th Congress S. 365) - GovTrack.us

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

MARK SHIELDS: No, I think the Republicans, you can see where they are. They are very much behind the political eight ball. And they are now saying -- they're reduced to saying, well, the cuts aren't going to be that serious. They're really -- the Democrats are exaggerating them.

And even though they have warned about these cuts were terrible on defense, now they're not going to be that serious, and now it was also the president's idea to begin with. I mean, that seems to be their fallback position.


MARK SHIELDS: Yes. No, that has been the -- obviously, the administration's position, that this is going to be very serious and it's going to inconvenience people and it's going to inconvenience travelers.

And there is a potential threat to the economy; 800,000 jobs has been predicted as the loss by Congressional Budget Office. I mean, we're talking about serious implications and a downside. But I don't see, Judy -- I mean, I recall in 1990, when George H.W. Bush was president, and we went to Andrews Air Force Base for five weeks with the leadership of the Congress and the leadership of the White House and Dick Darman and John Sununu and -- who was chief of staff for President Bush -- and the president was involved and Bob Dole.

And ,you know, it was just really a major thing. I don't see anything approaching that sense of urgency, engagement or involvement at this -- at this point.

Shields and Brooks on Sequester Blame Game, Immigration Reform | PBS NewsHour | Feb. 22, 2013 | PBS

 

[bigrebnc1775]

California Republican Sponsored The Sequester Law in US House and then President Obama while Signing the Sequester Bill said "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No."

The GOP had to pass the bill. Obama suggested it.

US House of Representatives: David Dreier (R) California -
No Co-Sponsors

US Senate: Sen. Thomas “Tom” Harkin [D-IA]
No Co-Sponsors

The House passed the Budget Control Act[1] on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it, while 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted against it.

The Senate passed the Act on August 2, 2011 by a vote of 74–26. 6 Democrats and 19 Republicans voted against it

---

Presidential signature

President Obama signed the bill shortly after it was passed by the Senate. In doing so, the president said, "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No. But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need, and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year."

Budget Control Act of 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

H.R.2693: Budget Control Act of 2011 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

Budget Control Act of 2011 (2011; 112th Congress S. 365) - GovTrack.us

S. 365 (112th): Budget Control Act of 2011
Introduced:
Feb 16, 2011 (112th Congress, 2011–2013)
Sponsor:
Sen. Thomas “Tom” Harkin [D-IA]
Status:
Signed by the President
COSPONSORS: NONE
Budget Control Act of 2011 (2011; 112th Congress S. 365) - GovTrack.us

 

[emptystep]

Look, it's not hard to know what obama did when he said what he said during his press conference here's the Video in full shown by CNN
President Obama Super Committee Statement (November 21, 2011) - YouTube
And here's the text if you want too read it.

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE SUPERCOMMITTEE

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

5:44 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. As you all know, last summer I signed a law that will cut nearly $1 trillion of spending over the next 10 years. Part of that law also required Congress to reduce the deficit by an additional $1.2 trillion by the end of this year.

In September, I sent them a detailed plan that would have gone above and beyond that goal. It's a plan that would reduce the deficit by an additional $3 trillion, by cutting spending, slowing the growth of Medicare and Medicaid, and asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

In addition to my plan, there were a number of other bipartisan plans for them to consider from both Democrats and Republicans, all of which promoted a balanced approach. This kind of balanced approach to reducing our deficit -- an approach where everybody gives a little bit, and everyone does their fair share -- is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans -- Democrats, independents, and Republicans. It’s supported by experts and economists from all across the political spectrum. And to their credit, many Democrats in Congress were willing to put politics aside and commit to reasonable adjustments that would have reduced the cost of Medicare, as long as they were part of a balanced approach.

But despite the broad agreement that exists for such an approach, there's still too many Republicans in Congress who have refused to listen to the voices of reason and compromise that are coming from outside of Washington. They continue to insist on protecting $100 billion worth of tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans at any cost, even if it means reducing the deficit with deep cuts to things like education and medical research. Even if it means deep cuts in Medicare.

So at this point, at least, they simply will not budge from that negotiating position. And so far, that refusal continues to be the main stumbling block that has prevented Congress from reaching an agreement to further reduce our deficit.

Now, we are not in the same situation that we were -- that we were in in August. There is no imminent threat to us defaulting on the debt that we owe. There are already $1 trillion worth of spending cuts that are locked in. And part of the law that I signed this summer stated that if Congress could not reach an agreement on the deficit, there would be another $1.2 trillion of automatic cuts in 2013 -– divided equally between domestic spending and defense spending.

One way or another, we will be trimming the deficit by a total of at least $2.2 trillion over the next 10 years. That's going to happen, one way or another. We've got $1 trillion locked in, and either Congress comes up with $1.2 trillion, which so far they've failed to do, or the sequester kicks in and these automatic spending cuts will occur that bring in an additional $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction.

Now, the question right now is whether we can reduce the deficit in a way that helps the economy grow, that operates with a scalpel, not with a hatchet, and if not, whether Congress is willing to stick to the painful deal that we made in August for the automatic cuts. Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts.

My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.

We need to keep the pressure up to compromise -- not turn off the pressure. The only way these spending cuts will not take place is if Congress gets back to work and agrees on a balanced plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion. That’s exactly what they need to do. That’s the job they promised to do. And they've still got a year to figure it out.

Although Congress has not come to an agreement yet, nothing prevents them from coming up with an agreement in the days ahead. They can still come together around a balanced plan. I believe Democrats are prepared to do so. My expectation is, is that there will be some Republicans who are still interested in preventing the automatic cuts from taking place. And, as I have from the beginning, I stand ready and willing to work with anybody that’s ready to engage in that effort to create a balanced plan for deficit reduction.

Now, in the meantime, we've got a lot of work left to do this year. Before Congress leaves next month, we have to work together to cut taxes for workers and small business owners all across America. If we don’t act, taxes will go up for every single American, starting next year. And I’m not about to let that happen. Middle-class Americans can’t afford to lose $1,000 next year because Congress won’t act. And I can only hope that members of Congress who've been fighting so hard to protect tax breaks for the wealthy will fight just as hard to protect tax breaks for small business owners and middle-class families.

We still need to put construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads and our bridges. We still need to put our teachers back in the classroom educating our kids.

So when everybody gets back from Thanksgiving, it’s time to get some work done for the American people. All around the country, Americans are working hard to live within their means and meet their responsibilities. And I know they expect Washington to do the same.

Thanks.

END 5:50 P.M. EST

Obama Supercommittee Speech Transcript: No Easy Off Ramps to Cutting Deficit

Your not one of those people who says he did not kill bin Laden are you?

You're bat shit crazy and your comment is irrelevant.

Zing, that sounded like the twang of a 50 lb recurve.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Your not one of those people who says he did not kill bin Laden are you?

You're bat shit crazy and your comment is irrelevant.

Zing, that sounded like the twang of a 50 lb recurve.

Do I take that as your concession speech?

 

[c95]

I've been thinking about how gov't spending could be drastically cut. I think I've found a rational solution that I've never heard before. I apologize in advance for the long read.

Propose legislation requiring that all new laws that spend or re-allocate funds be typed, single-spaced, 12pt Times New Roman or Calibri font, 1 in. margins, single-sided, on one sheet of 8.5in. x11 in standard printer paper. Why?
1. It's really specific, good luck finding loopholes in it.
2. People would support it, I honestly can't think of any rational counter-point.
3. Assuming the petition got enough signatures to be voted on by Congress, one of two things would happen.
a. They pass it, which would force them to separate out all the earmarked/unrelated spending they add in, which would show the people exactly what their money is going to (and then be voted out) or cut out said spending and in doing so, severely reduce gov't spending.
b. They reject it, and because this would basically be tell the general population to go suck eggs, the population would make some changes, regardless of Congressional opinion. (i.e. revolution, a white-wash of new people in gov't in the next election, etc...)

I thought of this the other day, what do you guys think?
Would it help and if it was put to petition, would you sign it?
Do you see any possible truly negative effects/repercussions?

 

[Trajan]

MARK SHIELDS: No, I think the Republicans, you can see where they are. They are very much behind the political eight ball. And they are now saying -- they're reduced to saying, well, the cuts aren't going to be that serious. They're really -- the Democrats are exaggerating them.

And even though they have warned about these cuts were terrible on defense, now they're not going to be that serious, and now it was also the president's idea to begin with. I mean, that seems to be their fallback position.


MARK SHIELDS: Yes. No, that has been the -- obviously, the administration's position, that this is going to be very serious and it's going to inconvenience people and it's going to inconvenience travelers.

And there is a potential threat to the economy; 800,000 jobs has been predicted as the loss by Congressional Budget Office. I mean, we're talking about serious implications and a downside. But I don't see, Judy -- I mean, I recall in 1990, when George H.W. Bush was president, and we went to Andrews Air Force Base for five weeks with the leadership of the Congress and the leadership of the White House and Dick Darman and John Sununu and -- who was chief of staff for President Bush -- and the president was involved and Bob Dole.

And ,you know, it was just really a major thing. I don't see anything approaching that sense of urgency, engagement or involvement at this -- at this point.

Shields and Brooks on Sequester Blame Game, Immigration Reform | PBS NewsHour | Feb. 22, 2013 | PBS

wow, the ministry of truth....mark me not impressed.


obama got hat he wanted, so dante, were are the cuts obama spoke of to reach tis balance he mentioned?Did the dolts on npr mention any of that? the 3-1 tax/revenue to spending cuts?



I haven't seen obamas plan, have not seen his report out on Medicare thats been due since year one either, every year, no budget either.....

 

[Trajan]

California Republican Sponsored The Sequester Law in US House and then President Obama while Signing the Sequester Bill said "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No."

The GOP had to pass the bill. Obama suggested it.

US House of Representatives: David Dreier (R) California -
No Co-Sponsors

US Senate: Sen. Thomas “Tom” Harkin [D-IA]
No Co-Sponsors

The House passed the Budget Control Act[1] on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it, while 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted against it.

The Senate passed the Act on August 2, 2011 by a vote of 74–26. 6 Democrats and 19 Republicans voted against it

---

Presidential signature

President Obama signed the bill shortly after it was passed by the Senate. In doing so, the president said, "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No. But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need, and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year."

Budget Control Act of 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

H.R.2693: Budget Control Act of 2011 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

Budget Control Act of 2011 (2011; 112th Congress S. 365) - GovTrack.us

why did you not include the part where obama says he would veto any effort to lift/circumvent the sequester?

 

[edthecynic]

I haven't seen obamas plan,....

That is simply a testament to your complete ignorance as a know-it-all as well as your laziness in researching anything for yourself. I'll give you a hint, he gave it to Boner in December of 2012 and recently had it posted it on his blog to expose the GOP lie that he never submitted a plan. Let's see if a Misinformation Voter can figure out anything for themselves.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

California Republican Sponsored The Sequester Law in US House and then President Obama while Signing the Sequester Bill said "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No."

The GOP had to pass the bill. Obama suggested it.

US House of Representatives: David Dreier (R) California -
No Co-Sponsors

US Senate: Sen. Thomas “Tom” Harkin [D-IA]
No Co-Sponsors

The House passed the Budget Control Act[1] on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it, while 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted against it.

The Senate passed the Act on August 2, 2011 by a vote of 74–26. 6 Democrats and 19 Republicans voted against it

---

Presidential signature

President Obama signed the bill shortly after it was passed by the Senate. In doing so, the president said, "Is this the deal I would have preferred? No. But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need, and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year."

Budget Control Act of 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

H.R.2693: Budget Control Act of 2011 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

Budget Control Act of 2011 (2011; 112th Congress S. 365) - GovTrack.us

why did you not include the part where obama says he would veto any effort to lift/circumvent the sequester?

When did the GOP start listening to and following what Obama wants? They will call him on things now, why not before?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Sequestration and Cognitive Dissonance on the Right

"It's Obama's sequester" = don't blame for the terrible results

"It's only a small percentage of the federal budget" = it isn't really all that bad

At first I gave them the benefit of the doubt, maybe one message for their looney base, and another for the rest of the world. But like the President used to do, I'm overestimating their ability be honest and open in dealings with him. Now it's about their ability to bounce back after the arse-whooping they took in 2012.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If the sequester goes through, the GOP is gonna see an even worse ass kicking in 2014, because people aren't going to forget that it was the GOP that started all this crap in the first place.

 

[CaGOPatriot]

If liberals could think they would see that Obama raising taxes every chance he gets is why the country got in trouble in the first place. Lets go back to the way things were while President bush was in office and everything will be much better.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If liberals could think they would see that Obama raising taxes every chance he gets is why the country got in trouble in the first place. Lets go back to the way things were while President bush was in office and everything will be much better.

Riiiiiiiiiight..................you conservative idiots are saying that budget cuts are the way to go, and you bitch all the time that Obama is going to take us down the same road Europe is going.

Well..................might wanna check the news sometime. Europe is going into a recession because of their austerity measures (in 2012 their economy went down by 0.5 percent), while here in the US we haven't done any of those measures, and have actually tried to grow the economy, and our growth last year in 2012 was 2 percent.

Try again...................austerity won't work.

 

[CaGOPatriot]

If liberals could think they would see that Obama raising taxes every chance he gets is why the country got in trouble in the first place. Lets go back to the way things were while President bush was in office and everything will be much better.

Riiiiiiiiiight..................you conservative idiots are saying that budget cuts are the way to go, and you bitch all the time that Obama is going to take us down the same road Europe is going.

Well..................might wanna check the news sometime. Europe is going into a recession because of their austerity measures (in 2012 their economy went down by 0.5 percent), while here in the US we haven't done any of those measures, and have actually tried to grow the economy, and our growth last year in 2012 was 2 percent.

Try again...................austerity won't work.

This country needs to take care of itself and not worry about what is happening in europe. We need to cut taxes and stop spending money to keep people mooching off hard working conservatives with welfare and social security and all of the other government giveaways that keep these lazy people living like kings. It would save the country most of are budget. You liberals are to stupid to see this no matter how many times we tell you.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If liberals could think they would see that Obama raising taxes every chance he gets is why the country got in trouble in the first place. Lets go back to the way things were while President bush was in office and everything will be much better.

9 August 2007 began with the seizure in the banking system precipitated by BNP Paribas announcing that it was ceasing activity in three hedge funds that specialised in US mortgage debt. This was the moment it became clear that there were tens of trillions of dollars worth of dodgy derivatives swilling round which were worth a lot less than the bankers had previously imagined.

on 15 September 2008 when the US government allowed the investment bank Lehman Brothers to go bankrupt.

the recession began in December 2007



and we are still paying for the Bush years

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

This country needs to take care of itself and not worry about what is happening in europe.

please allow the adults to speak

 

[ABikerSailor]

If liberals could think they would see that Obama raising taxes every chance he gets is why the country got in trouble in the first place. Lets go back to the way things were while President bush was in office and everything will be much better.

Riiiiiiiiiight..................you conservative idiots are saying that budget cuts are the way to go, and you bitch all the time that Obama is going to take us down the same road Europe is going.

Well..................might wanna check the news sometime. Europe is going into a recession because of their austerity measures (in 2012 their economy went down by 0.5 percent), while here in the US we haven't done any of those measures, and have actually tried to grow the economy, and our growth last year in 2012 was 2 percent.

Try again...................austerity won't work.

This country needs to take care of itself and not worry about what is happening in europe. We need to cut taxes and stop spending money to keep people mooching off hard working conservatives with welfare and social security and all of the other government giveaways that keep these lazy people living like kings. It would save the country most of are budget. You liberals are to stupid to see this no matter how many times we tell you.

Unfortunately, because the economy has been globalized, yeah........we DO need to see what other countries are doing and what does and doesn't work.

Austerity doesn't work. Europe and Greece have proven this.

Besides...............if you give a tax cut to a rich person, every dollar spent for the tax cut generates only 1.03 in the economy.

If you give a tax cut to a middle class or poor person? Every dollar spent on them generates 1.63.

Giving money to those less fortunate works, because a rising tide lifts ALL boats. If you give a poor person money in the form of tax cuts, they will spend most of it to buy things they need, thus stimulating the economy. If you give that same tax cut to a rich person, they will only stick it in the bank and sit on it, doing nothing for the economy.

And yeah..................."trickle down economics" doesn't work. That is a myth.

Want proof? Look at the water wars between ranchers and farmers. Trickle down is a bad way to go.