Sequestration: Blame goes to GOP

[Procrustes Stretched]

Meanwhile the actual problems with our economy and with the way the government operates is going along on its usual path qithout even the suggestion of being addressed, much less remedied.

An American economic calamity is on the way. But it's not this sequester side show bullshit.

just sayin'

President Obama reduces deficit by $4 trillion

It is a projected deficit, and a projected decrease -- they are all projections btw -- and the Congress gets an assist. Since the cons here are saying the Dems control 3/4 of the GOV or some such nonsense, does that mean the GOP would only get less than 1/12 credit for this?

Lost in the talk of Washington’s dysfunction is this fact: on paper at least, President Obama and Congress have reduced projected deficits by nearly $4 trillion over a decade — the widely embraced goal for stabilizing the national debt.

Who will now start claiming credit for this? More cognitive dissonance?

 

[whitehall]

In a more just world where the media wasn't up the president's ass, the phrase Hussein uttered would have resonated as long as Nixon's "I am not a crook". When he had to sign the spending cuts ...sob...sob the president....the freaking president whined "I'm not a dictator".

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I told you, breath into a paperbag, it will pass.

the only one ranting here appears to be you....you're all over the place.

so- obama defended a piece of shit bill that is now Armageddon in his own rantings, that btw, he and his admin. he had zip to do with Oh and Carney is lying....got it

Context and time. That was then, this is now. The day you started to blame Obama for a suggestion and imply that lets the GOP off the hook is the day you lost much credibility

The sequester is a Congressional bill that Obama signed. Who wrote and passed the bill? Not the Executive Branch

thats the lamest crap I have ever heard from you, bar none, so lets see;

Bush signed the Iraq war resolution too see how that works?

... and jay carney said obama suggested the sequester

........you're squirming is really stupid now.

well you don't get out often, so you have a good excuse

Fine distinctions, distinctions with differences may escape you, but they don't for most informed and intelligent folks.

President Bush asked for an authorization from Congress to act on powers granted to him as President, as the C-in-C -- Executive powers. President Bush's father, the first President Bush asked for a similar authorization.

What President Obama is supposed to have suggested was a mechanism for Congress to become unstuck on an ideological issue dealing with finance and the economy: Legislative and not Executive powers

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Context and time. That was then, this is now. The day you started to blame Obama for a suggestion and imply that lets the GOP off the hook is the day you lost much credibility

The sequester is a Congressional bill that Obama signed. Who wrote and passed the bill? Not the Executive Branch

thats the lamest crap I have ever heard from you, bar none, so lets see;

Bush signed the Iraq war resolution too see how that works?

... and jay carney said obama suggested the sequester

........you're squirming is really stupid now.

well you don't get out often, so you have a good excuse

Fine distinctions, distinctions with differences may escape you, but they don't for most informed and intelligent folks.

President Bush asked for an authorization from Congress to act on powers granted to him as President, as the C-in-C -- Executive powers. President Bush's father, the first President Bush asked for a similar authorization.

What President Obama is supposed to have suggested was a mechanism for Congress to become unstuck on an ideological issue dealing with finance and the economy: Legislative and not Executive powers

^ irrelevant to the point. The point is that for whatever reason, Obama sought it.

His Party has members seated in Congress, too, by the way. So, clearly what he was trying to do (as were the others who chose to use this silly-ass mechanism as a tool to make the Congressmen do their fucking jobs) was make the idea of kicking the can down the road -- yet again -- too painful. It was intended to compel them to do the job they were consistently too spineless to perform.

The Congress-cretins deserve much rebuke for preferring to always kick that can down that road. The President may even deserve some credit for trying to craft a trip wire. But he still has to accept some responsibility for his own notion.

He owns it at least as much as Boehner and the GOP.

They should all be fired for refusing to do their actual jobs. But that's another story.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

thats the lamest crap I have ever heard from you, bar none, so lets see;

Bush signed the Iraq war resolution too see how that works?

... and jay carney said obama suggested the sequester

........you're squirming is really stupid now.

well you don't get out often, so you have a good excuse

Fine distinctions, distinctions with differences may escape you, but they don't for most informed and intelligent folks.

President Bush asked for an authorization from Congress to act on powers granted to him as President, as the C-in-C -- Executive powers. President Bush's father, the first President Bush asked for a similar authorization.

What President Obama is supposed to have suggested was a mechanism for Congress to become unstuck on an ideological issue dealing with finance and the economy: Legislative and not Executive powers

^ irrelevant to the point. The point is that for whatever reason, Obama sought it.

His Party has members seated in Congress, too, by the way. So, clearly what he was trying to do (as were the others who chose to use this silly-ass mechanism as a tool to make the Congressmen do their fucking jobs) was make the idea of kicking the can down the road -- yet again -- too painful. It was intended to compel them to do the job they were consistently too spineless to perform.

The Congress-cretins deserve much rebuke for preferring to always kick that can down that road. The President may even deserve some credit for trying to craft a trip wire. But he still has to accept some responsibility for his own notion.

He owns it at least as much as Boehner and the GOP.

They should all be fired for refusing to do their actual jobs. But that's another story.

Context is only irrelevant when willful denial and ignorance is demanded to make a point.

Woodward summarizes the thoughts of the Obama team: "There would be no chance the Republicans would want to pull the trigger and allow the sequester to force massive cuts to Defense." Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t want to see their favorite domestic programs cut.

As the negotiations proceeded, Republicans seemed to think the same thing.

"Boehner told the House Republican leadership and other key members not to worry about the sequester … ‘Guys, this would be devastating to Defense,’ he said. ‘This would be devastating, from their perspective, on their domestic priorities. This is never going to happen,’" Woodward wrote.

---

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."

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Blown 6 trillion, eh?

What should he have done..cancelled Bush's debts?

You folks would have had a field day with that one.

4 years in, and your Messiah® is STILL hiding in BOOOOSHHH's skirts.

Obama added $6 trillion to the debt. If he can't put on Big Boy Pampers and take responsibility for his acts, then the fucker needs to resign.

He didn't "add" 6 trillion..he PAID down what was added by Bush.

And if you think that's an easy thing to do..try counting to a trillion.

We'll wait.

It helps to start the discussion by at least being ACCURATE when raising the issue about spending.

According to DPCC Democratic Policy and Communications Center

Initiations of U.S. combat operations March 19, 2003
Length of U.S. military mission 8 years, 9 months, 12 days
Total U.S. funding for the Iraq Operations $820 Billion ( CRS: 3/29/11 )

http://dpc.senate.gov/docs/fs-112-1-36.pdf.com

The Obama Stimulus Bill

The Congressional Budget Office now puts the ultimate price tag at $821 billion, $7 billion higher than its previous estimate, and well above the initial projection of $787 billion back when the package was passed in 2009.

Obama stimulus bill has new price tag

Sorry to rain on your parade, but the facts about spending between Presidents George W. Bush and Barrack Obama speaks for themselves.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Responsibility. Just another character trait lacking in Republicans.

Look, say we kept America safe or we had to do something. Don't just say, "Wasn't me."

Gotta love when Democrats talk about spending and "responsibility". They look rather foolish defending that argument when this administration can't even pass a simple budget.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Responsibility. Just another character trait lacking in Republicans.

Look, say we kept America safe or we had to do something. Don't just say, "Wasn't me."

Gotta love when Democrats talk about spending and "responsibility". They look rather foolish defending that argument when this administration can't even pass a simple budget.

Gotta love right wing trolls talking about what they supposedly know...like the Executive passing bills and budgets

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Sequestration is all bullshit.

But to the extent it constitutes any kind of problem or causes any dislocation for anybody, the blame is actually shared by both Parties.

It was, after all, the President's original notion this time around.

But that does not get the foolish GOP-led House off the hook.

A pox on BOTH of their houses.

 

[Trajan]

The sequester cuts will start...

we shall see. Imagine if there was no pain? First it was the President and now it is the GOP running around assigning blame so who would win? Obama is more popular and was elected by a national majority. Hmmmmmmmmmm...

And bush unlike Obama won by more his second term than first, so what?

You must be getting nervous, now it's the PRESIDENT and GOP

 

[Trajan]

Responsibility. Just another character trait lacking in Republicans.

Look, say we kept America safe or we had to do something. Don't just say, "Wasn't me."

Gotta love when Democrats talk about spending and "responsibility". They look rather foolish defending that argument when this administration can't even pass a simple budget.

Gotta love right wing trolls talking about what they supposedly know...like the Executive passing bills and budgets

He said ADMINISTRATION.......


yup, ur out of gas.....

 

[Trajan]

thats the lamest crap I have ever heard from you, bar none, so lets see;

Bush signed the Iraq war resolution too see how that works?

... and jay carney said obama suggested the sequester

........you're squirming is really stupid now.

well you don't get out often, so you have a good excuse

Fine distinctions, distinctions with differences may escape you, but they don't for most informed and intelligent folks.

President Bush asked for an authorization from Congress to act on powers granted to him as President, as the C-in-C -- Executive powers. President Bush's father, the first President Bush asked for a similar authorization.

What President Obama is supposed to have suggested was a mechanism for Congress to become unstuck on an ideological issue dealing with finance and the economy: Legislative and not Executive powers

^ irrelevant to the point. The point is that for whatever reason, Obama sought it.
He owns it at least as much as Boehner and the GOP.
.

Let him go, he's running on empty

 

[hjmick]

PolitiFact's guide to sequestration

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Sequestration is all bullshit.

you have no credibility

Woodward summarizes the thoughts of the Obama team: "There would be no chance the Republicans would want to pull the trigger and allow the sequester to force massive cuts to Defense." Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t want to see their favorite domestic programs cut.

As the negotiations proceeded, Republicans seemed to think the same thing.

"Boehner told the House Republican leadership and other key members not to worry about the sequester … ‘Guys, this would be devastating to Defense,’ he said. ‘This would be devastating, from their perspective, on their domestic priorities. This is never going to happen,’" Woodward wrote.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The sequester cuts will start...

we shall see. Imagine if there was no pain? First it was the President and now it is the GOP running around assigning blame so who would win? Obama is more popular and was elected by a national majority. Hmmmmmmmmmm...

And bush unlike Obama won by more his second term than first, so what?

You must be getting nervous, now it's the PRESIDENT and GOP

Obama did have to go to court to win. His victories were decisive, except on right wing media. Any blame will hurt the GOP more than the President. Obama is NOT running for reelection. He is bucking trends of Presidents of recent memory

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Sequestration is all bullshit.

you have no credibility

Woodward summarizes the thoughts of the Obama team: "There would be no chance the Republicans would want to pull the trigger and allow the sequester to force massive cuts to Defense." Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t want to see their favorite domestic programs cut.

As the negotiations proceeded, Republicans seemed to think the same thing.

"Boehner told the House Republican leadership and other key members not to worry about the sequester … ‘Guys, this would be devastating to Defense,’ he said. ‘This would be devastating, from their perspective, on their domestic priorities. This is never going to happen,’" Woodward wrote.

No no, little feller. YOU are universally recognized as the one lacking credibility.

Sequestration IS bullshit.

Let's pretend that it amounts to $85 billion dollars.

That is a weak stream small bladder piss into an ocean.

You can pretend otherwise, but reality is (as always) not on your side.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

PolitiFact's guide to sequestration

In 2011 the GOP changed the dynamic and unspoken rules because they were still thinking they were going to make President Obama a one term President.

Here’s the background: In the summer of 2011, Obama and Congress were in a high-stakes stand-off over the debt limit. House Republicans insisted on spending cuts before increasing the debt limit. This was a notable change from the past, when members of Congress from both parties would pass debt ceiling increases with relatively little fuss.

The Tea Party caucus threw Boner and Cantor under the bus on this one...

Obama and Speaker of the House John Boehner tried unsuccessfully to reach a "grand bargain" to put the federal budget on more stable footing. When that failed, they arrived at the much less ambitious Budget Control Act of 2011.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Sequestration is all bullshit.

you have no credibility

Woodward summarizes the thoughts of the Obama team: "There would be no chance the Republicans would want to pull the trigger and allow the sequester to force massive cuts to Defense." Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t want to see their favorite domestic programs cut.

As the negotiations proceeded, Republicans seemed to think the same thing.

"Boehner told the House Republican leadership and other key members not to worry about the sequester … ‘Guys, this would be devastating to Defense,’ he said. ‘This would be devastating, from their perspective, on their domestic priorities. This is never going to happen,’" Woodward wrote.

No no, little feller. YOU are universally recognized as the one lacking credibility. Sequestration IS bullshit. Let's pretend that it amounts to $85 billion dollars. That is a weak stream small bladder piss into an ocean. You can pretend otherwise, but reality is (as always) not on your side.

Spin numbers as the latest right wing memo suggests, but in 2011 the GOP Speaker of the House disagreed and on that the Congress voted. The size of the overall budget was never a consideration ... in this argument it is irrelevant.

How the cuts move irresponsibly through government is the issue. The percentage of a cut in an individual government agency budget is the issues.

Other than defense, discretionary spending programs are off the list...that is what the GOP voted on.


now moron, take your pathetic arse out of here

Woodward summarizes the thoughts of the Obama team: "There would be no chance the Republicans would want to pull the trigger and allow the sequester to force massive cuts to Defense." Democrats, meanwhile, didn’t want to see their favorite domestic programs cut.

As the negotiations proceeded, Republicans seemed to think the same thing.

"Boehner told the House Republican leadership and other key members not to worry about the sequester … ‘Guys, this would be devastating to Defense,’ he said. ‘This would be devastating, from their perspective, on their domestic priorities. This is never going to happen,’" Woodward wrote.

 

[hortysir]

If the sequester is the GOP's baby, why would Obama threaten to Veto anything to stop it?

 

[Dot Com]

PolitiFact's guide to sequestration

In 2011 the GOP changed the dynamic and unspoken rules because they were still thinking they were going to make President Obama a one term President.

Here’s the background: In the summer of 2011, Obama and Congress were in a high-stakes stand-off over the debt limit. House Republicans insisted on spending cuts before increasing the debt limit. This was a notable change from the past, when members of Congress from both parties would pass debt ceiling increases with relatively little fuss.

The Tea Party caucus threw Boner and Cantor under the bus on this one...

Obama and Speaker of the House John Boehner tried unsuccessfully to reach a "grand bargain" to put the federal budget on more stable footing. When that failed, they arrived at the much less ambitious Budget Control Act of 2011.

Yep. Repubs didn't agree to a"big deal" then because they were sure, by golly, that Obama would be a one-termer ESPECIALLY w/ all of their obstruction over the last 4-years. Looks like they were wrong & now are pointing fingers everywhere but at themselves