Why Everything Republicans Are Saying About The Sequester Is Wrong

[TruthOut10]

Barring a last minute Congressional compromise, $85 billion in automatic across-the-board cuts will go into effect in the next 72 hours as a result of the sequester mechanism included in the 2011 Budget Control Act.
Republicans — many of whom voted for the BCA and have for years championed deep spending reductions — are hoping to blame the Democrats and President Obama for the consequences of the cuts, claiming that if “bad things” happen as a result of sequester, “it’s because [Obama] wants them to.” As the nation moves closer to the March 1 deadline, here is your guide to the GOP spin on the sequester:
1. We need spending cuts to get the economy going. The GOP claims that government spending is out of control and reason that reducing spending would spur greater economic growth. But government expenditures have grown at its slowest pace since the Eisenhower administration under President Obama and the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office show that the nation’s deficits have shrunk by trillions of dollars, and the debt is close to being stabilized as a percentage of the economy. Austerity measures have dragged down economic growth in Europe and some economists argue that sequestration won’t actually lead to substantial shrinking of the deficit, since fiscal contraction caused by sequestration is likely to slow economic growth, reducing tax revenue and preventing meaningful deficit reduction.

Why Everything Republicans Are Saying About The Sequester Is Wrong | ThinkProgress

 

[Flopper]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it. This is the problem with indiscriminate spending cuts. The place to handle spending and revenue decisions should be in the budget process.

 

[hjmick]

Has any Republican ever said anything that Think Progress thought was right?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

 

[asaratis]

The sequester was Obama's idea. The Republican House of Representatives has sent bills proposing spending cuts to Harry Reid's Senate only to have them sit in committees and never brought to vote.

It is the sleazy-assed Democrats that are standing in the way of legitimate spending cuts proposed by the House.

It is the Democrats that are trying to frighten the American people with a measly 2% reduction in spending.

It's okay for Obama to give BILLIONS to his bankrupt friends at failing green energy companies but it's going to kill us to cut 85 billion from excessive spending.

Right!

Fuck Obama and Harry Reid.

 

[Sallow]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

Effective in terms of what?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Barring a last minute Congressional compromise, $85 billion in automatic across-the-board cuts will go into effect in the next 72 hours as a result of the sequester mechanism included in the 2011 Budget Control Act.
Republicans — many of whom voted for the BCA and have for years championed deep spending reductions — are hoping to blame the Democrats and President Obama for the consequences of the cuts, claiming that if “bad things” happen as a result of sequester, “it’s because [Obama] wants them to.” As the nation moves closer to the March 1 deadline, here is your guide to the GOP spin on the sequester:
1. We need spending cuts to get the economy going. The GOP claims that government spending is out of control and reason that reducing spending would spur greater economic growth. But government expenditures have grown at its slowest pace since the Eisenhower administration under President Obama and the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office show that the nation’s deficits have shrunk by trillions of dollars, and the debt is close to being stabilized as a percentage of the economy. Austerity measures have dragged down economic growth in Europe and some economists argue that sequestration won’t actually lead to substantial shrinking of the deficit, since fiscal contraction caused by sequestration is likely to slow economic growth, reducing tax revenue and preventing meaningful deficit reduction.

Why Everything Republicans Are Saying About The Sequester Is Wrong | ThinkProgress

Think Progress is a biased extremist Web site that has no credibility. Try thinking for yourself for once in your life, rube. You're wetting your pants over 2% of the budget, which we don't even have.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

Effective in terms of what?

According to Flopper, saving taxpayers money.

 

[g5000]

If you believe anything anyone in Washington DC is saying about the budget debate, you are a fool.

 

[Flopper]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

I suspect that the sequester will end up costing more money than it saves. If congress does nothing, the economy will head south, reducing revenues and bring on new economic stimulus. If the House and Senate come up with some agreement, spending will increase.

 

[TNHarley]

3 cents on every dollar. What is the big fuckin deal? It is 3 cents!
It will likely be the only cuts we are going to see for a while..

 

[edthecynic]

The sequester was Obama's idea. The Republican House of Representatives has sent bills proposing spending cuts to Harry Reid's Senate only to have them sit in committees and never brought to vote.

It is the sleazy-assed Democrats that are standing in the way of legitimate spending cuts proposed by the House.

Again we see why the Right are perfect contrarian indicator. The sequester was the GOP's idea as their solution to their debt ceiling/fiscal cliff creation.

Obama sent a proposal to Boner to solve the sequester and he says only the GOP have made any proposals.

Here is Obama's proposal that the pathological liar Boner says doesn't exist.

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit | The White House

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

I suspect that the sequester will end up costing more money than it saves. If congress does nothing, the economy will head south, reducing revenues and bring on new economic stimulus. If the House and Senate come up with some agreement, spending will increase.

The economy is already heading south and the sequester doesn't even begin to make the cuts that are necessary.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why Everything Republicans Are Saying About The Obama Sequester Is Wrong

There, fixed

 

[Avatar4321]

Are they saying we need to keep spending? If so i agree that they are wrong If they are agreeing we can cut spending and demanding more, than id say i disagree, they are completely right about spending.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Barring a last minute Congressional compromise, $85 billion in automatic across-the-board cuts will go into effect in the next 72 hours as a result of the sequester mechanism included in the 2011 Budget Control Act.
Republicans — many of whom voted for the BCA and have for years championed deep spending reductions — are hoping to blame the Democrats and President Obama for the consequences of the cuts, claiming that if “bad things” happen as a result of sequester, “it’s because [Obama] wants them to.” As the nation moves closer to the March 1 deadline, here is your guide to the GOP spin on the sequester:
1. We need spending cuts to get the economy going. The GOP claims that government spending is out of control and reason that reducing spending would spur greater economic growth. But government expenditures have grown at its slowest pace since the Eisenhower administration under President Obama and the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office show that the nation’s deficits have shrunk by trillions of dollars, and the debt is close to being stabilized as a percentage of the economy. Austerity measures have dragged down economic growth in Europe and some economists argue that sequestration won’t actually lead to substantial shrinking of the deficit, since fiscal contraction caused by sequestration is likely to slow economic growth, reducing tax revenue and preventing meaningful deficit reduction.

Why Everything Republicans Are Saying About The Sequester Is Wrong | ThinkProgress

Can you give us an example of the "deep cuts" that the Republicans are championing? Also, can you explain how sequester counts as a spending cut when spending is still going to rise?

 

[asaratis]

The sequester was Obama's idea. The Republican House of Representatives has sent bills proposing spending cuts to Harry Reid's Senate only to have them sit in committees and never brought to vote.

It is the sleazy-assed Democrats that are standing in the way of legitimate spending cuts proposed by the House.

Again we see why the Right are perfect contrarian indicator. The sequester was the GOP's idea as their solution to their debt ceiling/fiscal cliff creation.

Obama sent a proposal to Boner to solve the sequester and he says only the GOP have made any proposals.

Here is Obama's proposal that the pathological liar Boner says doesn't exist.

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit | The White House

Why must you people continue to lie. The White House has admitted that this is the way it came about.

Bob Woodward: Obama Made Big Mistake on Sequester

Woodward documents in his 2012 book The Price of Politics that team Obama first proposed the idea of the sequester. Expanding on his work in a Sunday Washington Post op-ed, he noted—as he has before—that both President Obama and his would-be Treasury Secretary Jack Lew lied on the campaign trail by saying the sequester originated with House Republicans. The White House has now ceded that fact.

 

[Flopper]

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

I suspect that the sequester will end up costing more money than it saves. If congress does nothing, the economy will head south, reducing revenues and bring on new economic stimulus. If the House and Senate come up with some agreement, spending will increase.

The economy is already heading south and the sequester doesn't even begin to make the cuts that are necessary.

As of Jan 1, the 10 leading economic indicators point to continued economic expansion.

 

[edthecynic]

The sequester was Obama's idea. The Republican House of Representatives has sent bills proposing spending cuts to Harry Reid's Senate only to have them sit in committees and never brought to vote.

It is the sleazy-assed Democrats that are standing in the way of legitimate spending cuts proposed by the House.

Again we see why the Right are perfect contrarian indicator. The sequester was the GOP's idea as their solution to their debt ceiling/fiscal cliff creation.

Obama sent a proposal to Boner to solve the sequester and he says only the GOP have made any proposals.

Here is Obama's proposal that the pathological liar Boner says doesn't exist.

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit | The White House

Why must you people continue to lie. The White House has admitted that this is the way it came about.

Bob Woodward: Obama Made Big Mistake on Sequester

Woodward documents in his 2012 book The Price of Politics that team Obama first proposed the idea of the sequester. Expanding on his work in a Sunday Washington Post op-ed, he noted—as he has before—that both President Obama and his would-be Treasury Secretary Jack Lew lied on the campaign trail by saying the sequester originated with House Republicans. The White House has now ceded that fact.

Boob Woodward has been completely discredited. He has in his discredited book a conversation between Gene Sperling, Boner and Obama on July 12, 2011 where the liar Boob Woodward claims Sperling first brought the sequester up. That was exposed as a lie because Boner and Obama stopped talking to each other on July 9 and didn't speak again until July 14, so there could not be a meeting between Sperling, Boner and Obama on July 12.

The liar Boob Woodward then changed his story in a WoPo Op-ed this month claiming that Jack Lew first brought it up on July 27. This contradicts his own book which says Lew brought it up July 26. The thing is Boner had HIS sequester posted on his own website on July 25, so both of the Liar Boob Woodward's dates are contradicted by Boner.

From your link:

The first mention of "sequester"—according to the index for The Price of Politics—occurred at a July 12 meeting that included Obama and Boehner. Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic Council, talked about it as a trigger if they didn't reduce the long-term deficit by a sum equal to the proposed debt ceiling increase.

"If this is a trigger for tax reform," Boehner is quoted as saying, "this could be worth discussing. But as a budget tool, it's too complicated. I'm very nervous about this."

"This would be an enforcement mechanism," Obama said.

Obama?s sequester deal-changer - Washington Post

My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some of the cuts that will effect defense contracts will end up costing the taxpayer money not saving it.

Obviously borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent and running up $17 trillion in debt is far more effective.

I suspect that the sequester will end up costing more money than it saves. If congress does nothing, the economy will head south, reducing revenues and bring on new economic stimulus. If the House and Senate come up with some agreement, spending will increase.

I bet absolutely nothing happens at all and the average American doesn't notice a damn thing.