AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2013 10:49:49 AM
gocat...at what point do any of you liberals ever consider cutting spending?
|
gocatgo
Champion Author
South Carolina
Posts:15,647
Points:2,529,580
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2013 5:42:12 AM
ed, "Impeachment, Lol. As soon as Bush & friends are charged with the misinformation that got 4,287 American service people killed in Iraq. What part of 4 vs 4,287 do you not understand?
175, "Obama wants a lot more." Closing loopholes only to give it back in a tax cut to the wealthy is dumb. But when you are the party for the wealthy what do you expect.
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 11:19:09 PM
MTM...so, do you admit that the first recession had a Democrat controlled House AND Senate? Now we are facing a huge fiscal cliff and possible economic decline and we still have a Democrat Senate but also a Democrat president. And yet you still want to blame the bad economics on the Republicans. Facts are a strange thing...they get in the way of the fantasy land so many liberals live in.
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 6:23:01 PM
worry...and what ideas to cut our government spending is coming out of the Senate or the White House?
|
jdhelm
Champion Author
Iowa
Posts:11,862
Points:1,198,890
Joined:Dec 2009
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:57:39 PM
don't worry, be happy, drink some koolaid mannn
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:56:35 PM
Seven politicians who said the sequester would never happen:
Barack Obama
John Boehner
Eric Cantor
Mitch McConnell
Dick Durbin
Claire McCaskill
Fred Upton
|
worryfree
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:23,855
Points:1,868,800
Joined:Oct 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:51:46 PM
Well we don't really expect any ideas to come out of the House do we?
|
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:36,854
Points:3,984,955
Joined:May 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:51:38 PM
MiddletownMarty, did Obama sign the sequester into law or did he not?
So not only did Obama push the law to be passed, he signed it without objection.
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:37:50 PM
You have got to be joking - 4.5 days and they cant figure out how to deal with it....
>>>In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama described the upcoming sequestration cuts as “sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts,” claiming they would “devastate” important government functions and cost “hundreds of thousands of jobs.”
However, according to Congressional Budget Office figures, the cuts amount to only 1.2 percent of 2013 spending, which is enough to keep the government running for about 4.5 days.
“These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They’d devastate priorities like education, and energy, and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs,” Obama said on Tuesday.
However, in its latest budget projections, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) explains that the sequester, a package of automatic spending reductions, would amount to only $44 billion in cuts in 2013, a mere 1.2 percent of total spending.<<<
Looks like Obama is lying again....
.
.
[Edited by: flyboyUT at 2/26/2013 5:40:05 PM EST]
|
jdhelm
Champion Author
Iowa
Posts:11,862
Points:1,198,890
Joined:Dec 2009
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:33:47 PM
REPORTER QUESTION: "Do you finally admit that the sequester fiasco came from you and your administration"?
POTUS Barry Obama: "uh, I inherited this mess from George Bush".
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:27:14 PM
REPORTER QUESTION: "Do you have a sense of how many jobs will be lost as a result of the sequester?"
HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER: "Uh, I do not. But I can tell you this: If we don't solve the spending problem here in Washington, there'll be tens of millions of jobs in the future that won't happen because of the debt load that's being laid on the backs of our kids and our grandkids."
|
I75at7AM
Champion Author
Dayton
Posts:66,533
Points:2,433,650
Joined:Feb 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:01:51 PM
As I showed below, WaPo editor Bob Woodward did the research, and showed without a doubt that the sequester concept was the brainchild of Obama's closest advisors, and Obama embraced it.
Nice try, Marty, but your powerpoint is worthless.
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 4:19:07 PM
The PowerPoint That Proves It’s Not Obama’s Sequester After All
But here’s the thing. I happened to come across an old email that throws cold water on House Republicans’ attempts to call this “Obama’s Sequester.”
It’s a PowerPoint presentation that Boehner’s office developed with the Republican Policy Committee and sent out to the Capitol Hill GOP on July 31, 2011. Intended to explain the outline of the proposed debt deal, the presentation is titled: “Two Step Approach to Hold President Obama Accountable.”
It’s essentially an internal sales document from the old dealmaker Boehner to his unruly and often unreasonable Tea Party cohort. But it’s clear as day in the presentation that “sequestration” was considered a cudgel to guarantee a reduction in federal spending—the conservatives’ necessary condition for not having America default on its obligations.
The presentation lays out the deal in clear terms, describing the spending backstop as “automatic across-the-board cuts (‘sequestration’). Same mechanism used in 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement.”
The Joint Committee, ultimately misled by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) into enacting the sequester, is explained in detail under a page titled “Entitlement Reforms and Savings”:
Sets up a new sequestration process to cut spending across-the-board—and ensure that any debt limit increase is met with greater spending cuts—IF Joint Committee fails to achieve at least $1.2T in deficit reduction.
If this happens, POTUS may request up to $1.2T for a debt limit increase, and if granted, then across-the-board spending cuts would result that would equal the difference between $1.2T and the deficit reduction enacted as a result of Joint Committee.
Across-the-board spending cuts would apply to FYs 2013-2021, and apply to both mandatory & discretionary programs.
Total reductions would be equally split between defense and non-defense programs. Across-the-board cuts would also apply to Medicare. Other programs, including Social Security, Medicaid, veterans, and civil & military pay, would be exempt.
Sequestration process is designed to guarantee that Congress acts on the Joint Committee’s legislation to cut spending.
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 2:49:17 PM
Why not read the entire transcript...what was he talking about when he said he got 98% of what he wanted? Put it in context because the liberals on here have been quoting something out of context...but go ahead and read it and see how WRONG you all are.
|
I75at7AM
Champion Author
Dayton
Posts:66,533
Points:2,433,650
Joined:Feb 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 2:33:04 PM
And what was that 98% that Boehner was referring to?
Why, the percentage of the tax-paying population that continues to pay the tax rates set forth by the "Bush Tax Cuts". About 2% of the population faces an increase in income tax rates. The rest will continue paying what was i place for about a decade. Boehner didn't want much, and he didn't get much.
Obama wants a lot more. He won't be getting it. And you, Marty, you don't get it either.
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 1:23:37 PM
"Oh but it is the Republicans...LOL...you guys will never get it!"
Unfortunately for you, we do get it:
"When you look at this final agreement that we came to with the White House, I got 98 percent of what I wanted. I'm pretty happy." --John Boehner, August 1, 2011
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 12:05:57 PM
"The worst thing that can happen is the sequester happens and we sink into a recession deeper than the one we experienced at the end of the Bush administration.."
What is interesting is that two parts of our voting government system were controlled by the Democrats then...and now we are about to crash again and guess who controls two parts of the voting government again? Oh but it is the Republicans...LOL...you guys will never get it!
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 12:00:00 PM
"I wish that the party of "NO" would make a move off of "It is not my turn" blah blah blah."
You are right. The Democrats keep insisting on no spending cuts. The Republicans gave in to tax raises but the Democrats just keep saying no...no...no and are forcing us off this fiscal cliff. I am glad to see you are coming around.
|
jdhelm
Champion Author
Iowa
Posts:11,862
Points:1,198,890
Joined:Dec 2009
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 9:53:23 AM
the worst thing that can happen is that both parties don't get the nads to shake the h out of bho and get him to straighten up and stop campaigning and for all the lefties to quit blaming bush. that horse has long been dead, it's time to get the h off your 6 and start doing something for the country and we the people.
|
Cliffisher
Champion Author
Wisconsin
Posts:26,019
Points:3,136,650
Joined:Sep 2003
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 9:51:07 AM
I wish that the party of "NO" would make a move off of "It is not my turn" blah blah blah.
No one wants to be the one that gets down to details. They are all waiting for the other side to blink or shoot themselves in the foot.
"Well, we didn't want to cut benefit (XYZ)or cut loophole (ABC) but the other side came up with the ideas and we had to vote for it. Our side kept us from going over the brink to recession. So if it doesn't work, blame them."
[Edited by: Cliffisher at 2/26/2013 9:51:59 AM EST]
|
Jorgie
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:9,967
Points:2,921,500
Joined:Jul 2002
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 9:39:16 AM
I wish the ayatollah would get off the campaign trail screaming that the sky is falling and talk to the Republicans.
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 9:25:07 AM
The worst thing that can happen is the sequester happens and we sink into a recession deeper than the one we experienced at the end of the Bush administration..
|
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:36,854
Points:3,984,955
Joined:May 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 8:43:42 AM
You are right Bell, the cuts that will be made will be made to make the sequester look like a disaster. But then we should ask if there were any less important areas that should have been cut, citing examples. This will show bad management on the part of the White House.
|
I75at7AM
Champion Author
Dayton
Posts:66,533
Points:2,433,650
Joined:Feb 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 8:33:48 AM
I think the favored term is "crooks and liars", Edpap!
|
Edpap
Champion Author
Pennsylvania
Posts:4,330
Points:506,925
Joined:Oct 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 7:55:58 AM
Obama continues to prove how worthless he really is. When will the GOP change the focus by starting impeachment for Benghazi? Is there any leadership in the GOP?...or in the DEMS, for that matter. Looks like we have a Federal Government filled with worthless liars and thieves.
|
Tru2psu2
Champion Author
Winston-Salem
Posts:14,476
Points:1,555,630
Joined:Feb 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:42:18 AM
Right now...that's where all bad stuff comes from....
|
Bell30012
Champion Author
Atlanta
Posts:3,927
Points:616,745
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:40:12 AM
The worst thing that can happen is the Sequester happens and no one notices. The Administration is going to have to make this devastating.
|
wbacon
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:13,415
Points:2,983,260
Joined:Jun 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 5:36:14 AM
and now he is against it... Hmmmmmmm
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:12,808
Points:2,614,235
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2013 1:20:41 AM
"Many people are acting like Sequester is a problem."
I don't; I see it as an opportunity. There's plenty more that can be cut from the military's budget; the sequester is a good starting point for that.
|
EZExit
Champion Author
Phoenix
Posts:10,441
Points:1,708,630
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 5:15:19 PM
Marty: <<<"The Republicans fell for the Tax Revenue Increases now in exchange for Expense Spending Cuts in the future before, they are not going down that road again."
Awful lot of whining from the group that got 98% of what it wanted.">>>
*************
You're kidding, aren't you?
|
noseatbelt
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:7,627
Points:205,330
Joined:Feb 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 4:42:21 PM
Like most liberals, marty forgets, that obama got his tax raises on the wealthy, now he want's to double dowm and get even more, so he can spend even more. It's time for obama to compromise.
|
101Speedster
Champion Author
Ventura
Posts:30,418
Points:2,716,670
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 3:25:51 PM
Marty,
Why is it that compromise to a democrat means that the Republicans should continue to raise tax rates, but the democrats never have to make any spending cuts?
|
101Speedster
Champion Author
Ventura
Posts:30,418
Points:2,716,670
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 3:24:58 PM
Countdown until sequester: 3 days.
|
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:36,854
Points:3,984,955
Joined:May 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 3:21:41 PM
MiddletownMarty, ""The Republicans fell for the Tax Revenue Increases now in exchange for Expense Spending Cuts in the future before, they are not going down that road again."
Awful lot of whining from the group that got 98% of what it wanted."
Didn't Obama say he wanted "a balance of spending cuts and tax increases"?
Since the ratio of tax increase to spending cuts was something like 40:1, isn't it time to balance the spending cut side?
Or is a 40:1 ratio "balanced"?
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 2:21:39 PM
"The Republicans fell for the Tax Revenue Increases now in exchange for Expense Spending Cuts in the future before, they are not going down that road again."
Awful lot of whining from the group that got 98% of what it wanted.
[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 2/25/2013 2:21:49 PM EST]
|
Bell30012
Champion Author
Atlanta
Posts:3,927
Points:616,745
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 2:07:35 PM
We've operated without a budget since Obama's first year in office. However, this year he's not even bothered to propose one. I guess, golfing with Tiger was more important that meeting that little budget deadline. President Obama was offered closing of loopholes by the Republicans but he insisted on rate increases in December. He got his rate increase with virtually no cuts. Now, he wants to go back to the "Tax the Rich" well, yet again.
The Republicans fell for the Tax Revenue Increases now in exchange for Expense Spending Cuts in the future before, they are not going down that road again.
|
teacher_tim
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:15,731
Points:744,585
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 1:59:49 PM
The sequester will hppen on schedule and the sky will not fall. The continuing resolution to keep the government funded in the continued absence of a Senate budget will be much more immediate and may well hurt our credit rating again if Obama doesn't figure out how to negotiate pretty quickly. As usual, he's "leading from behind"...WAY behind.
|
AFSNCO
Champion Author
Montgomery
Posts:14,734
Points:1,291,210
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 10:14:37 PM
The Democrats just do not want to cut a dime...their answer is tax...tax...tax.
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 7:25:46 PM
Suicide budgeter
|
worryfree
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:23,855
Points:1,868,800
Joined:Oct 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 7:03:34 PM
The severe sequester was concocted to try and move an intransigent Republican House. Apparently it isn't severe enough.
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 1:13:26 PM
"When you look at this final agreement that we came to with the White House, I got 98 percent of what I wanted. I'm pretty happy." --John Boehner, August 1, 2011
|
gocatgo
Champion Author
South Carolina
Posts:15,647
Points:2,529,580
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 12:23:19 PM
As Speaker Boehner said about the Sequestor on 8-2-2011, "I got 98% of what I wanted". So I guess that means he was for the sequestor before he was against it but he wanted more cuts. Now there's a typical con response for you.
We have to start cutting somewhere but there should have been more cuts on overseas spending. America first, the rest should go to the end of the line. I may not get too many gbs agreeing with me but that's my story and I'm stiiiiiicking to it.
|
BlackGumTree
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:18,439
Points:1,459,665
Joined:Dec 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 12:02:25 PM
Many people are acting like Sequester is a problem. But the real problem is cutting spending and there is no agreement on how to do that.
Sequester then becomes a good thing because it does cut spending. The results may not be entirely good but they provide us with a good starting point.
The trick now is not to spend any more. If Congress wants to spend more in one area, they should decrease spending in another area by the same or greater amount.
The economy will continue to tank due to the damage they have already done but the damage will not get worse and recovery will be able to get underway after a several more years.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority and duty to create money, determine how to spend money and to control the value of money. Congress has not performed its duty in controlling the value of money.
We need to stop reelecting career politicians. Amend the Constitution so that anyone who serves in an elected position for any part of any term cannot serve in government for the two years following the end of the term in which he served. Then those who don't do a good job will not ever be elected again.
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:26,582
Points:2,902,095
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 11:19:10 AM
Absolutely true that sequester came from the WH. And Obama signed it. If he didn't actually WANT automatic budget cuts, then he shouldn't have signed it.
Any fairminded person ought to be looking at this and blaming Obama and the Democrats, not the Republicans. Obama could have stopped this before it ever began. He didn't, so therefore he wants it himself. But you won't hear the mainscream media mention this, now will you. And MSLSD will say it's all the Republican's fault. AFter all, MSLSD is the propganda wing of the Democrat party.
|
mudtoe
Champion Author
Cincinnati
Posts:9,514
Points:1,289,340
Joined:May 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 10:40:16 AM
gm: "Isn't it just embarrassing to watch a United States President acting like a 4th grader trying to manipulate people to get his way?"
It won't be long before Obama's minions put out the word that the Republicans are in favor of the sequester because they are racists. Watch and see.
mudtoe
|
Guitar_Man
Champion Author
Colorado Springs
Posts:8,526
Points:126,430
Joined:Nov 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 8:48:08 AM
Isn't it just embarrassing to watch a United States President acting like a 4th grader trying to manipulate people to get his way?
He comes up with the sequester in 2011, threatens heatedly to VETO any law that would stop it...and now is jumping up and down, claiming the sky is falling and children will go hungry and the apocalypse will strike us dead if Congress doesn't give in to his every want and need.
So what does this President want? It's easy....MORE taxes and BIGGER government.
Does he want to help the tens of millions who have been searching for work? Nope...couldn't care less, actually. (Golf with the multi-rich is a lot more fun than work.) Does he want to do anything about the nuclear threat coming out of Iran or North Korea? Nope, doesn't even mention it in his SATU speech...not a word. (Yet the "threat" of global warming was talked about at length.)
What a joke...is America strong enough to survive this?
|
wbacon
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:13,415
Points:2,983,260
Joined:Jun 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 5:16:24 AM
and now he wants it to end.....
|
jdhelm
Champion Author
Iowa
Posts:11,862
Points:1,198,890
Joined:Dec 2009
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2013 10:32:00 PM
SNOPES says it, this is the guy who came up with the sequester idea, yikes
|
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author
Connecticut
Posts:17,555
Points:269,345
Joined:Jul 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2013 10:05:41 PM
Watch: Paul Ryan on Sequester
|
I75at7AM
Champion Author
Dayton
Posts:66,533
Points:2,433,650
Joined:Feb 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2013 7:59:08 AM
WaPo associate editor Bob Woodward (of Watergate era fame) writes this column:
Obama’s sequester deal-changer
"...last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed."
"Jack Lew,.... backed up the president two days later."
"The president and Lew had this wrong. 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"
"Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)."
Thanks, Bob!
|