Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

[EriktheRed]

We can argue over who is responsible for the sequester — though between two co-equal branches of government, who passed and signed the legislation, the point of that seems limited. But that doesn’t take away from the clarifying moment we’re witnessing, the scale of which we likely haven’t seen since the government shutdowns of the mid-90s. Republicans have run on big across-the-board spending cuts for literally decades.

As a rhetorical flourish they appeal not only to the base of the GOP but to a wide swathe of the electorate. As actual policy — or perhaps better to say as actual implemented policy — they are far less appealing and only really have traction with one part of the Republican base —after you set aside the military, transfer payments for old people and various other stuff.

But here we are. For the first time I think in our history we are about to go over the precipice of genuine across-the-board spending cuts. And Republicans are completely freaking out. There’s no other way to describe it.

On the Eve of Destruction | TPM Editors Blog

 

[EriktheRed]

Obamaturd has got the sheeple fooled. Your argument stinks as usual. Obamaturd and the LEFT OWN sequestration, period!

Who says?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Obamaturd has got the sheeple fooled. Your argument stinks as usual. Obamaturd and the LEFT OWN sequestration, period!

Who says?

The President's Press Secretary and the White House Communication's Director.

 

[EriktheRed]

Obamaturd has got the sheeple fooled. Your argument stinks as usual. Obamaturd and the LEFT OWN sequestration, period!

Who says?

The President's Press Secretary and the White House Communication's Director.

Oh really? Well gee, you'd think efforts like this would be helping the "loyal oppostion" then...

Doesn't seem to be the case, though, does it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Who says?

The President's Press Secretary and the White House Communication's Director.

Oh really? Well gee, you'd think efforts like this would be helping the "loyal oppostion" then...

Doesn't seem to be the case, though, does it.

Yes. Really.

And no. I don't imagine the photo op stagings of the inept House Speaker has any impact on the people regarding Obama's sequester.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The GOP will shoulder mots of the blame for what they claim will be no big deal. So why are they playing the blame game if it will be no big deal?

 

[EriktheRed]

The GOP will shoulder mots of the blame for what they claim will be no big deal. So why are they playing the blame game if it will be no big deal?

Not to mention they're gonna be getting what they've been campaiging on. You'd think there'd be more celebration on their part.


Just no satisfying some people, eh?

 

[Synthaholic]

The GOP started it as a way to fight for what they thought was right for the debt ceiling.

Sadly........................it's not gonna work.

Hopefully, Boehner, McConnell and Cantor are going to be able to find other work after 2014.

That's a lie that I and others have already debunked.

Paul Ryan Brags about getting the sequester into law (August 2011)

HANNITY: Alright. How much are we getting the first year and how much are we getting the second year? How much is in defense? And how do we hold future congresses accountable to what you're doing today?

RYAN: Right, right, that's a good question. So, $21 billion right away for the first fiscal year. Then it's about $46, I think, that's off the top of my head, for the second fiscal year. How much out of defense in the first fiscal year will be $9 billion from what we call the security accounts. That's not just defense. That's all security. The Homeland Security, National Security. And then $2 billion to $4 billion the next year. So, the cuts on defense are -- were minimized quite a bit by the most recent agreement John Boehner reached. More to the point, how do you bank these cuts? What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money.


And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can't turn that off without a supermajority vote. We got that in law. That is here. So, the best way you can actually bank that trillion dollar spending cut is to have legal caps in law which we haven't had since the 1990s. We now have them. And in the committee, the special committee, is tasked for getting the $1.1 to $1.5 trillion in cuts. Now, this, I'm going to tell you, Sean. We're not going to raise taxes in this committee. Number one, we're not gonna put the kind of people on this committee --
​

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2011/08/02/exclusive-rep-paul-ryan-hannity#ixzz2KQNbuvCz


You lose again, retard!!!

 

[Trajan]

The GOP started it as a way to fight for what they thought was right for the debt ceiling.

Sadly........................it's not gonna work.

Hopefully, Boehner, McConnell and Cantor are going to be able to find other work after 2014.

That's a lie that I and others have already debunked.

Paul Ryan Brags about getting the sequester into law (August 2011)

HANNITY: Alright. How much are we getting the first year and how much are we getting the second year? How much is in defense? And how do we hold future congresses accountable to what you're doing today?

RYAN: Right, right, that's a good question. So, $21 billion right away for the first fiscal year. Then it's about $46, I think, that's off the top of my head, for the second fiscal year. How much out of defense in the first fiscal year will be $9 billion from what we call the security accounts. That's not just defense. That's all security. The Homeland Security, National Security. And then $2 billion to $4 billion the next year. So, the cuts on defense are -- were minimized quite a bit by the most recent agreement John Boehner reached. More to the point, how do you bank these cuts? What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money.


And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can't turn that off without a supermajority vote. We got that in law. That is here. So, the best way you can actually bank that trillion dollar spending cut is to have legal caps in law which we haven't had since the 1990s. We now have them. And in the committee, the special committee, is tasked for getting the $1.1 to $1.5 trillion in cuts. Now, this, I'm going to tell you, Sean. We're not going to raise taxes in this committee. Number one, we're not gonna put the kind of people on this committee --
​

Exclusive: Rep. Paul Ryan on 'Hannity' | Interviews | Hannity


You lose again, retard!!!

JAY CARNEY: What I will concede is that we were looking and the Republicans were looking for a trigger around which to build a mechanism to get us out of default possibility and the sequester was one of the idea put forward, yes by the president's team. (Special Report, February 12, 2013)

Jay Carney Admits Sequester Was The President's Idea | RealClearPolitics

 

[Trajan]

The GOP will shoulder mots of the blame for what they claim will be no big deal. So why are they playing the blame game if it will be no big deal?

Not to mention they're gonna be getting what they've been campaiging on. You'd think there'd be more celebration on their part.


Just no satisfying some people, eh?

talk about not being satisfied....

I don't see obama celebrating his tax revenue increase......do you? hes talking about closing loopholes ending deductions etc.....if I recall, thats what the gop wanted to do instead of the rate hikes, which is a Hammer approach to enhancing tax revenue....so, he got his rate hikes now he wants this too? No, sorry. time for some cuts now, he said balanced approach, well, where is it?

 

[EriktheRed]

The GOP will shoulder mots of the blame for what they claim will be no big deal. So why are they playing the blame game if it will be no big deal?

Not to mention they're gonna be getting what they've been campaiging on. You'd think there'd be more celebration on their part.


Just no satisfying some people, eh?

talk about not being satisfied....

I don't see obama celebrating his tax revenue increase......do you? hes talking about closing loopholes ending deductions etc.....if I recall, thats what the gop wanted to do instead of the rate hikes, which is a Hammer approach to enhancing tax revenue....so, he got his rate hikes now he wants this too? No, sorry. time for some cuts now, he said balanced approach, well, where is it?

Certainly not with the current gang in the opposition.


Anyway, isn't it nice to know that neither the Prez nor Reps from his party have any incentive to roll over, like they did in 2011?

With any luck, we'll have some more tax hikes and Teahad heads exploding nationwide.

 

[ABikerSailor]

The GOP started it as a way to fight for what they thought was right for the debt ceiling.

Sadly........................it's not gonna work.

Hopefully, Boehner, McConnell and Cantor are going to be able to find other work after 2014.

That's a lie that I and others have already debunked.

If you've already "debunked" it, then you should have no problem providing the links that prove you right.

Unless...............of course...................you might be lying.......................

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The GOP started it as a way to fight for what they thought was right for the debt ceiling.

Sadly........................it's not gonna work.

Hopefully, Boehner, McConnell and Cantor are going to be able to find other work after 2014.

That's a lie that I and others have already debunked.

If you've already "debunked" it, then you should have no problem providing the links that prove you right.

Unless...............of course...................you might be lying.......................

Calling someone a liar when it isn't true is a failed argument.

Woodward’s reporting shows clearly that defense sequestration was an idea that came out of Obama’s White House. But the intention was to force Republicans to negotiate, not to actually put the cuts into effect.

PolitiFact | Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts

http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html

 

[edthecynic]

That's a lie that I and others have already debunked.

If you've already "debunked" it, then you should have no problem providing the links that prove you right.

Unless...............of course...................you might be lying.......................

Calling someone a liar when it isn't true is a failed argument.

Woodward’s reporting shows clearly that defense sequestration was an idea that came out of Obama’s White House. But the intention was to force Republicans to negotiate, not to actually put the cuts into effect.

PolitiFact | Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts

http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html

Boob Woodward has been thoroughly discredited, as you well know.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you've already "debunked" it, then you should have no problem providing the links that prove you right.

Unless...............of course...................you might be lying.......................

Calling someone a liar when it isn't true is a failed argument.

Woodward’s reporting shows clearly that defense sequestration was an idea that came out of Obama’s White House. But the intention was to force Republicans to negotiate, not to actually put the cuts into effect.

PolitiFact | Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts

http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html

Boob Woodward has been thoroughly discredited, as you well know.

You've said that once before. Your opinion is not proof.
I also posted obama's speech, in text and video.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html
You failed.

 

[edthecynic]

Calling someone a liar when it isn't true is a failed argument.

PolitiFact | Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts

http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html

Boob Woodward has been thoroughly discredited, as you well know.

You've said that once before. Your opinion is not proof.
I also posted obama's speech, in text and video.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html
You failed.

Boob Woodward being discredited is not opinion, it is fact, and the text you posted contradicts the dishonestly edited video you posted.
Try again.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Boob Woodward has been thoroughly discredited, as you well know.

You've said that once before. Your opinion is not proof.
I also posted obama's speech, in text and video.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html
You failed.

Boob Woodward being discredited is not opinion, it is fact, and the text you posted contradicts the dishonestly edited video you posted.
Try again.

Again dumb ass your opinion of woodward is not proof and politifact has fact checkers, do you?
What edited video? I posted the text of the speech along with the video. You fucking lying piece of shit.

 

[edthecynic]

You've said that once before. Your opinion is not proof.
I also posted obama's speech, in text and video.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/6870309-post462.html
You failed.

Boob Woodward being discredited is not opinion, it is fact, and the text you posted contradicts the dishonestly edited video you posted.
Try again.

Again dumb ass your opinion of woodward is not proof and politifact has fact checkers, do you?
What edited video? I posted the text of the speech along with the video. You fucking lying piece of shit.

Obviously I'm a better fact checker than Boob Woodward and politifact combined, and I posted the text edited out when the dishonestly edited video was first posted and before you posted the text that confirmed that the text I posted was edited out of the video.
Try again.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Boob Woodward being discredited is not opinion, it is fact, and the text you posted contradicts the dishonestly edited video you posted.
Try again.

Again dumb ass your opinion of woodward is not proof and politifact has fact checkers, do you?
What edited video? I posted the text of the speech along with the video. You fucking lying piece of shit.

Obviously I'm a better fact checker than Boob Woodward and politifact combined, and I posted the text edited out when the dishonestly edited video was first posted and before you posted the text that confirmed that the text I posted was edited out of the video.
Try again.

No what you are is a liar.
No you didn't post the text of the speech you posted bit's and pieces of the speech.
I posted the video and the text in whole.
Try again.

 

[edthecynic]

Again dumb ass your opinion of woodward is not proof and politifact has fact checkers, do you?
What edited video? I posted the text of the speech along with the video. You fucking lying piece of shit.

Obviously I'm a better fact checker than Boob Woodward and politifact combined, and I posted the text edited out when the dishonestly edited video was first posted and before you posted the text that confirmed that the text I posted was edited out of the video.
Try again.

No what you are is a liar.
No you didn't post the text of the speech you posted bit's and pieces of the speech.
I posted the video and the text in whole.
Try again.

You will never admit the truth.
Thank you.