Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

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.

Actually it comes from Obama refusing to deal with any serious reforms or cuts on entitlements, which DO account for a greater portion to the government budget than defense spending (which the Pentagon has already had to work around budget cuts, and restructure with what it can afford). Obama will always put party and its base before tackling any serious spending cuts to reduce the 6 Trillion additional debt that was accrued under his administration. How many excuses DOES Obama have to avoid reductions in government spending? Is all this Drama he is cooking up worth seeing a greater increase to the size of our debt?

Naw.

"Entitlements" aren't greater than defense spending..well the "defense spending" we know about.

Especially when you factor the "entitlements" of the troops BACK into defense spending.

According to the 2012 figures: Defense spending makes up 25% of the Federal Budget. Health care alone (Medicare Medicaid) takes up 23 %, with Pensions at 21% and welfare spending making up 13%. Do the simple math.

 

[healthmyths]

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.

"Sequestration:Obama first proposed in 2011 per Politifact.org"
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m.../obama-says-congress-owns-sequestration-cuts/

 

[IlarMeilyr]

In "finding" funds to "cut" as per the sequester part of the law, why is President Obama not looking to go after the hundreds of billions of identified WASTE instead of the "services" that will cause the people inconvenience and delays?

Why do liberals passively accept his cold-hearted cynical manipulation so readily?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Wow you are all falling for this particular bit of political theater aren't you?

Do you realize how miniscule the "spending cuts" are going to be?

Then the GOP should be happy to let them go through...

totally bask in the credit when people can't get their services.

Oh, I don't think that's going to work out too well for them. Didn't work for them in 1995, won't work now.

If all that spending, bigger government, and further entitlements worked for the Democrats in Congress .... Nancy Pelosi would still have her job along with her expensive taxpayer private jet.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wow you are all falling for this particular bit of political theater aren't you?

Do you realize how miniscule the "spending cuts" are going to be?

Then the GOP should be happy to let them go through...

totally bask in the credit when people can't get their services.

Oh, I don't think that's going to work out too well for them. Didn't work for them in 1995, won't work now.

It's less than 2% of the fucking budget.

My fucking god would you starve to death if you had 98 dollars instead of 100?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The roughly 85 billion to be sequestered (eventually) come to like 1/2 of 1% of the year's deficit.

The law which created the fucking "sequester" would spread the "savings" around. But President Obama is trying to focus it like a laser beam on the things that will CAUSE as much discomfort as he can generate in that manner. All the better to make the sequester a "heartless Republican created problem."

Nobody can ever honestly accuse Obama of being honest of reasonable.

 

[edthecynic]

The roughly 85 billion to be sequestered (eventually) come to like 1/2 of 1% of the year's deficit.

The law which created the fucking "sequester" would spread the "savings" around. But President Obama is trying to focus it like a laser beam on the things that will CAUSE as much discomfort as he can generate in that manner. All the better to make the sequester a "heartless Republican created problem."

Nobody can ever honestly accuse Obama of being honest of reasonable.

Don't you CON$ ever get tired of lying about Obama????

As you well know, Boner's sequester requires ACROSS THE BOARD cuts, no one can "focus" anything!!!

 

[healthmyths]

THIS THREAD IS SIMILAR to other SEQUESTRATION THREADS and if this thread..
"Sequestration:Obama first proposed in 2011 per Politifact.org" was moved which showed the proof Obama not GOP offered Sequestration FIRST...
and Politifact.org said Obama's blaming GOP mostly false!

SO why not bring "Sequestration:Obama first proposed in 2011 per Politifact.org" back to politic page to BALANCE at least the perception that the board is not BIASED?

 

[kwc57]

Are you speaking of the Obama Sequestration? The one he suggested and signed into law? That one?

 

[edthecynic]

THIS THREAD IS SIMILAR to other SEQUESTRATION THREADS and if this thread..
"Sequestration:Obama first proposed in 2011 per Politifact.org" was moved which showed the proof Obama not GOP offered Sequestration FIRST...
and Politifact.org said Obama's blaming GOP mostly false!

SO why not bring "Sequestration:Obama first proposed in 2011 per Politifact.org" back to politic page to BALANCE at least the perception that the board is not BIASED?

As you well know, Politifact based their claim on the completely discredited Woodward book. It's Boner and the GOP's sequester.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama bin Lying

Republicans presented an adult plan to address spending cuts Obama wanted sequester

It's Obama's Sequester

 

[Katzndogz]

obama said he would veto anything but sequestration.

It's amusing seeing the democrats squirm over this one.

 

[DiamondDave]

Tea part controlled GOP?? Hardly.. if it were conservative or tea party controlled, we would have MUCH different behavior, bills, and approach to negotiations on things (especially spending)

OP is an idiot

 

[whitehall]

Didn't you see the video? Hussein supported the sequester before he said it was evil. Only fools and Saul Alinsky would blame the Tea Party.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama: I voted for the Sequester before I voted against it

 

[Erand7899]

The blame over who supported the sequester is a diversion from the fact that the sequester exists, and can be easily fixed. All Obama has to do is recognize that he has already received all the tax increases that he is going to get, and that he needs to compromise with Republicans on real spending cuts.

Not really that hard to figure out.

Otherwise, let the sequester begin.

 

[emptystep]

The roughly 85 billion to be sequestered (eventually) come to like 1/2 of 1% of the year's deficit.

The law which created the fucking "sequester" would spread the "savings" around. But President Obama is trying to focus it like a laser beam on the things that will CAUSE as much discomfort as he can generate in that manner. All the better to make the sequester a "heartless Republican created problem."

Nobody can ever honestly accuse Obama of being honest of reasonable.

Here's a little mental exercise for ya: If the sequester is such a small, insignificant thing why is there so much complication with just walking around it? Perhaps you are not seeing the whole picture. hhmmmmm....

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Both parties voted for it, and the president signed it into law. It's both side's sequester, and trying to lay blame on one side or the other is the sign of a true partisan hack.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

The roughly 85 billion to be sequestered (eventually) come to like 1/2 of 1% of the year's deficit.

The law which created the fucking "sequester" would spread the "savings" around. But President Obama is trying to focus it like a laser beam on the things that will CAUSE as much discomfort as he can generate in that manner. All the better to make the sequester a "heartless Republican created problem."

Nobody can ever honestly accuse Obama of being honest of reasonable.

Here's a little mental exercise for ya: If the sequester is such a small, insignificant thing why is there so much complication with just walking around it? Perhaps you are not seeing the whole picture. hhmmmmm....

Because our current government can't compromise their way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[emptystep]

The roughly 85 billion to be sequestered (eventually) come to like 1/2 of 1% of the year's deficit.

The law which created the fucking "sequester" would spread the "savings" around. But President Obama is trying to focus it like a laser beam on the things that will CAUSE as much discomfort as he can generate in that manner. All the better to make the sequester a "heartless Republican created problem."

Nobody can ever honestly accuse Obama of being honest of reasonable.

Here's a little mental exercise for ya: If the sequester is such a small, insignificant thing why is there so much complication with just walking around it? Perhaps you are not seeing the whole picture. hhmmmmm....

Because our current government can't compromise their way out of a wet paper bag.

Yeah, well that too.