Page 1 of 15 12345 ... Last
  1. #1
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts

    Sequester Cuts - brought to you by Obama

    Navy to Ground Blue Angels
    As the sequester cuts Obama signed into law in August 2011 draw closer to implementation, the Navy is making plans to ground the Blue Angels during the latter half of 2013

    by AWR Hawkins7 Feb 2013, 3:38 AM PDT

    This was revealed by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert last week, when he sent out a memo showing the Navy's plan for complying with the cuts. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...equester-hits/

    Grounding the Blue Angels for half a year will entail canceling 30 shows and will save approximately $20 million.

    Greenert says the Navy is already making cuts "because of Congress's failures to pass...spending bills last year," and if sequester hits it will cost them an additional $4 billion for 2013 alone.

    Sequester was the risk Obama was willing to take to raise the debt ceiling in 2011. Now, it is posed to cost us the Blue Angels.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...er-Cuts-Set-In

    comments

    The Blue Angels are a very effective recruiting vehicle for precision flying and for those who wish to receive the finest flying education available. So why are we, on the one hand, cutting $20 million from a productive, domestic program like the Blue Angels, while we are, on the other hand, sending F-16's ($20 million apiece) and M-1 Tanks ($8-10 million apiece) to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? What is the Function of the Department of Education? What is the function of the EPA? What is the function of the NLRB? Why is the Federal Government involved in Planned Parenthood (364,000 abortions last year)? Where are the cutbacks for foreign aid? Where are the cuts in funding for the United Nations? Why are we paying billions to Brazil and Mexico to help them fund offshore oil drilling? Why is Obama pumping billions, yes, billions of taxpayer dollars into companies that are going bankrupt?

    These are all rhetorical questions, perhaps. But perhaps they should be addressed before we drastically cut funding to one of the few institutions that is an enumerated Constitutional responsiblity of the Federal Government - our military forces.

    ..

    The purpose of the Stunt Flying was not to entertain. It purpose was to Inspire citizens to consider a career in the Navy. Maybe even as a Blue Angel (The coolest of all navy ambitions.) Watching them in real time is ground shaking as they do a low flyby. It wakes every cell in ones dead body. A great recruitment tool in the time of a volunteer only military.

    ..

    How about tell Michell to cut out one of her many vacations with her huge posee, and hundreds of thousands of the "common people" a year can go back to enjoying the Blues.

    ...

    How about stop buying "green fuel" at $225 per gallon. What the old fuel at $3.50 per gallon wasn't good enough?

    ..

    This is a tried-and-true Big Government tactic: When cuts are mandated, make sure to announce that everyone's favorite program ... Head Start, high school sports, free meals for seniors, Social Security, police protection, Medicare or the Blue Angels ... is on the chopping block. Public outcry will make Congress blink, and the gubmint will keep spending -- on things like sensitivity training for "archaic" straight people, $200/gallon "green fuel," and condom training for pre-teens. We've read this script before and know how it will end!

    ..

    Thank God we are grounding those pesky Blue Angels,next we can go after the USAF Thunderbirds and the Armys Black Knights. People we gotta keep those food stamps and welfare checks coming. Who honestly thinks we need a crack military when we can have free Obama phones? National security? Who needs it - Obama just order a drone strike when ever - where ever - whom ever he thinks may be an imminent threat.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement Sequester Cuts - brought to you by Obama
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #2
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Please, no: Jay Carney tries to revive #GOPamneisa; #Obamaquester strikes back

    Posted at 9:13 pm on February 8, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

    Jay Carney (EOP)✔ @PressSec

    House passed the sequester, 269-161, on 8/1/11. Who voted yes? 174 Republicans-including Boehner, Cantor, McCarthy and Ryan. #GOPamnesia

    9:43 PM - 08 Feb 13
    The White House✔ @whitehouse

    Fact Sheet: Examples of How the Sequester Would Impact Middle Class Families, Jobs and Economic Security: http://wh.gov/p6WO

    9:35 PM - 08 Feb 13
    With sequestration cuts due to hit both domestic programs and defense spending in a matter of weeks, the White House has plenty of motivation to distance itself from its own plan. The automatic cuts were put in place to pressure the president and Congress to find places to cut the fat, but the House GOP has been alone in that search. As Charles Krauthammer wrote at National Review Online yesterday: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...es-krauthammer

    Naturally, the Democratic Senate, which hasn’t passed a budget since before the iPad, has done nothing. Nor has the president — until his Tuesday plea.

    The GOP should reject it out of hand and plainly explain (message No. 2): We are quite prepared to cut elsewhere. But we already raised taxes last month. If the president wants to avoid the sequester — as we do — he must offer a substitute set of cuts.

    Otherwise, Mr. President, there is nothing to discuss. Your sequester — Republicans need to reiterate that the sequester was the president’s idea in the first place — will go ahead.
    The GOP has its own hashtag linking the sequester with President Obama: #Obamaquester.

    David Popp @davidpopp

    @PressSec Oh, I see what you did there with #GOPamnesia. Too bad we dominate the hashtags around here #Obamaquester

    9:46 PM - 08 Feb 13
    Eric Cantor✔ @GOPLeader

    Spending is the problem in Washington. I hope President Obama finally offers an alternative to #Obamaquester

    8:39 PM - 08 Feb 13
    Kevin McCarthy✔ @GOPWhip

    The sequester was the President's idea. There is no denying it. http://ow.ly/hyrUj #Obamaquester

    8:04 PM - 08 Feb 13
    Speaker John Boehner✔ @SpeakerBoehner

    House GOP has voted to replace the president’s sequester twice. Here’s why, courtesy @whitehouse: http://j.mp/WzhNgY #obamaquester

    7:29 PM - 08 Feb 13
    To his credit, Boehner’s fighting back, linking to the White House’s own report on the effects of the sequester, along with an explanation:

    Republicans agree the sequester is the wrong way to cut spending, and agree the consequences are harmful. That’s why Republicans have twice passed legislation to replace it with common sense cuts and reforms. But without a plan to prevent his sequester, the president is out of excuses.
    GOP Conference✔ @gopconference


    The sequester was President Obama's idea. We voted twice to replace it with responsible cuts. It's the #Obamaquester pic.twitter.com/MDIGtROv

    8:50 PM - 08 Feb 13

    Rick Klein @rickklein


    lots of Republican offices are reading a single page of a Bob Woodward book today. and if #Obamaquester trends in DC, maybe it will matter.

    8:47 PM - 08 Feb 13
    http://twitchy.com/2013/02/08/please...-strikes-back/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  4. #3
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Budget cut warnings may prove harsher than reality
    By ALAN FRAM | Associated Press – 3 hrs ago.

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Get ready for two weeks of intensifying warnings about how crucial, popular government services are about to wither. Many of the threats could come true.

    President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans made no progress this past week in heading off $85 billion in budget-wide cuts that automatically start taking effect March 1.

    Lacking a bipartisan deal to avoid them and hoping to heap blame and pressure on GOP lawmakers, the administration is offering vivid details about the cuts' consequences: trimmed defense contracts, less secure U.S. embassies, furloughed air traffic controllers.

    Past administrations have seldom hesitated to spotlight how budget standoffs would wilt programs the public values.

    When a budget fight between President Bill Clinton and congressional Republicans led to two government shutdowns, in 1995 and 1996, some threats came true, like padlocked national parks.

    Others did not.

    Clinton warned that Medicare recipients might lose medical treatment, feeding programs for the low-income elderly could end and treatment at veterans' hospitals could be curtailed. All continued, thanks to contractors working for IOUs, local governments and charities stepping in and the budget impasse ending before serious damage occurred.

    This time, at stake is not a federal shutdown but a range of automatic cuts. Between March 1 and Sept. 30, the remainder of the government's budget year, it would mean reductions of 13 percent for defense programs and 9 percent for other programs, according to the White House budget office.

    The cuts, plus nearly $1 trillion more over the coming decade, were concocted two years ago. Administration and congressional bargainers purposely made them so painful that everyone would be forced to reach a grand deficit-cutting compromise to avoid them.

    Hasn't happened.

    A look at the cuts and the chilling impact the administration says they would have, based on letters and testimony to Congress:

    —A key reminder: Social Security, Medicare and veterans' benefits, Medicaid and a host of other benefit programs are exempted. The cuts take effect over a seven-month period; they don't all crash ashore on March 1. If a bipartisan deal to ease them is reached, lawmakers could restore some or all the money retroactively.

    —On the other hand: Left in effect, these cuts are real even though their program-by-program impact is unclear. The law limits the administration's flexibility to protect favored initiatives, but the White House has told agencies to avoid cuts presenting "risks to life, safety or health" and to minimize harm to crucial services.

    —Defense: Troops at war would be protected, but there'd be fewer Air Force flying hours, less training for some Army units and cuts in naval forces. A $3 billion cut in the military's Tricare health care system could diminish elective care for military families and retirees. And, in a warning to the private defense industry, the Pentagon said it would be "restructuring contracts to reduce their scope and cost."

    —Health: The National Institutes of Health would lose $1.6 billion, trimming cancer research and drying up funds for hundreds of other research projects. Health departments would give 424,000 fewer tests for the AIDS virus. More than 373,000 people may not receive mental health services.

    —Food and agriculture: About 600,000 low-income pregnant women and new mothers would lose food aid and nutrition education. Meat inspectors could be furloughed up to 15 days, shutting meatpacking plants intermittently and costing up to $10 billion in production losses.

    —Homeland Security: Fewer border agents and facilities for detained illegal immigrants. Reduced Coast Guard air and sea operations, furloughed Secret Service agents and weakened efforts against cyberthreats to computer networks. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund would lose more than $1 billion.

    —Education: Seventy thousand Head Start pupils would be removed from the prekindergarten program. Layoffs of 10,000 teachers and thousands of other staffers because of cuts in federal dollars that state and local governments use for schools. Cuts for programs for disabled and other special-needs students.

    —Transportation: Most of the Federal Aviation Administration's 47,000 employees would face furloughs, including air traffic controllers, for an average of 11 days.

    —Environment: Diminished Environmental Protection Agency monitoring of oil spills, air pollution and hazardous waste. The color-coded air quality forecasting system that keeps schoolchildren and others inside on bad-air days would be curtailed or eliminated. New models of cars and trucks could take longer to reach consumers because the EPA couldn't quickly validate that they meet emissions standards.

    —State Department: Slow security improvements at overseas facilities, cuts in economic aid in Afghanistan and malaria control in Africa.

    —Internal Revenue Service: Furloughed workers would reduce the IRS' ability to review returns, detect fraud and answer taxpayers' questions. It offered no specifics.

    —FBI: Furloughs and a hiring freeze would have the equivalent impact of cutting 2,285 employees, including 775 agents. Every FBI employee would be furloughed 14 workdays.

    —Interior Department: Hours and service would be trimmed at all 398 national parks, and up to 128 wildlife refuges could be shuttered. Oil, gas and coal development on public lands and offshore waters would be diminished because the agency would be less able to issue permits, conduct environmental reviews and inspect facilities.

    —Labor: More than 3.8 million people jobless for six months or longer could see their unemployment benefits reduced by as much as 9.4 percent. Thousands of veterans would lose job counseling. Fewer Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspectors could mean 1,200 fewer visits to work sites. One million fewer people would get help finding or preparing for new jobs.

    —NASA: Nearly $900 million in cuts, including funds to help private companies build capsules to send astronauts to the International Space Station.

    —Housing: The Department of Housing and Urban Development said about 125,000 poor households could lose benefits from the agency's Housing Choice Voucher program and risk becoming homeless.

    http://news.yahoo.com/budget-cut-war...--finance.html

    Congress is now on a 10 day recess. We the people demand no more recesses, no more vacations, no more time off for any of our elected officials until they pass a budget that pays down the deficit.

    ..

    Want to cut the Budget ? Congress & Senate both get payed $9.00 an Hour , they pay Social Security just like the people they are suppose to be working for. Next they get a travel pay allowance,just like Military personal. no more lunches Dinners on tax payers dollars. They only get payed for the Hours they are working. that should save some of the Budget to start, No more paying $300.00 for a hammer or $500.00 for a chair. the Stupid C>R>A>P is out the window start being responsible to the people you serve.

    ..

    Cutting future growth in spending won't hurt a damn thing, for decades government entity's have said at the end of the year, we have to spend what we have left, so we can get more next year..Ask anyone that works in the government..

    ..

    All of these threats are because they keep the administrators of these projects and lay off the ones doing the actual work. What is it now in government one administrator for every three workers? Don't forget the administrators need administrators so for every three administrators there needs to be another administrator. It goes on and on and on like this.

    ..

    If Congress is so serious about saving the economy, how come Boehner and Reid called a recess and sent them all on vacation? They have something better to do?

    ..

    There is no budget. A budget is to outline where you spend available funds, not borrowed funds. What our government callls a budget is just an excuse list to borrow more against the future until there is no future.

    ..

    We as a nation of taxpayers can't continue spending money we don't have! I think it's time SOME of these programs just tighten their respective belts and cut out some of their free programs to people. If not now - then when?! Somewhere down the road it's gonna be a case of HAVE TO! May as well begin now! A good start would be to cut out a lot of the foreign aid we give to a bunch of un-deserving countries that hate us anyway. Stop giving our tax dollars to a bunch of un-deserving citizens who don't WANT to find a job - because they know they'll get it free from the government. Stop the idea of giving benefits to a bunch of illegal immigrants who broke the law to get here - and send them packing! Stop big government, politically fueled contracts to a bunch of fat-cat political backers and buddies of Washington's elite. And cut ALL the pork out of every bill that comes down the pike. And if politicians refuse to pass them without the pork, fire them! Over the years (a LOT of years!) politicians have learned how to play the people against each other and let THEM run the Washington big business. THAT needs to stop! Voting is a wonderful privilege! But it's gone awry because almost all politicians have the same M.O. ! And that M.O. is to tell any lie you can to obtain the backing of the wealthy who can help get them into public office. Which, in turn will allow them to get their mitts on OUR tax money so they can funnel it back to their rich backers! It's time to put our foot down and stop all this government pilfering of our tax money! NOW is a good time!
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #4
    pepperpot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    exactly where I should be...
    Posts
    8,566
    Thanks
    4,402
    Thanked 3,793 Times in 2,027 Posts
    Cutting future growth in spending won't hurt a damn thing, for decades government entity's have said at the end of the year, we have to spend what we have left, so we can get more next year..Ask anyone that works in the government..
    This is the idiocy I have seen.....it's not spend for what is needed, it's spend because we have it now and want it again next time. It promotes improper spending ideals.
    Mrs Pepperpot is a lady who always copes with the tricky situations that she finds herself in....

  6. #5
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    This whole sequester is Obama's idea! In fact, I think he wants the sequester to happen because I think he wants to cut down the US military, in a big way. Most liberals do. Here it's gonna happen automatically. He's not gonna have to do anything but sit around and let it, but he's gonna score some political points along the way.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  7. #6
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    War on women: Press secretary Carney sneers at female reporter; ‘I know you are just filling in’
    Posted at 1:05 pm on February 19, 2013


    Steven Dennis @StevenTDennis

    You know Jay Carney is peeved when he says "I know you're filling in..." Asked about sequester being an idea that came out of WH

    5:12 PM - 19 Feb 13
    That’s right. Press secretary Jay Carney sneered at a reporter during his briefing today, for daring to ask a sequester question. But, wait … there’s more.

    AprilDRyan @AprilDRyan

    Jay just told a CNN reporter when she asked a question, "I know you are filling in...". Room audibly gasped! Not good.

    5:13 PM - 19 Feb 13
    GOP Fashionista™ @GOPfashionista

    FYI, Carney go snarky today to substitute journo who is "filling in" today when SHE asked sequester Q. She is also black. #WarOnWomen

    5:32 PM - 19 Feb 13
    Well, no wonder! How can silly dames dare to pretend to know about such things? Oh, look! A shiny! Excuse her while she goes and twirls her hair.

    Zeke Miller @ZekeJMiller

    Carney is in a mood: “Trigger mechanisms….this is complicated budget-speak”

    5:12 PM - 19 Feb 13
    Geoff Holtzman @Geoff_Holtzman

    "This is complicated budget speak," Jay Carney explaining sequester to fill-in White House reporter.

    5:13 PM - 19 Feb 13
    It’s oh-so-complicated, you see. For a girl.

    http://twitchy.com/2013/02/19/war-on...st-filling-in/

    comments

    ngs women reporters should do when belittled by jay carney:

    1. Vomit
    2. Urinate themselves.
    3. Use there network provided whistle.
    4. Swoon.
    5. Go to the pressroom "safe zone".
    6. Cry.
    7. Laugh hysterically at the little man.

    ..

    He might as well have said "Listen toots, don't you have some ironing you need to get to?"

    ..

    What Carney was actually saying: Oh, you're a fill-in and therefore you do not know that you are not supposed to ask such questions. They must have not given you the propagated list of questions to ask that I wrote down beforehand. Sorry. Know your place if you are going to fill in!"

    ..

    Oh my god, a real reporter snuck into the press briefing...security ...security"
    -Carney

    ..

    $20 says Carney will get a pass by the mainstream media and this won't even be mentioned on any of their news broadcasts. Had this been the Bush administration, the MSM would be having a hysterical fit

    ...

    Lucky for Carney he has The Magic (D) next to his name, or he would be branded with The Scarlet R (for "racist")

    ..

    Not surprising that when the 'spokesbrat' gets startled by a real question, he goes on the offensive....it is the Progressive way

    ..



    I think the problem here is that Jay Carney just doesn't have the intelligence or knowledge to understand these fiscal issues himself, much less explain them to others. He's exasperated by his stupidity and ignorance and taking it out on reporters just doing their job. Obama was determined to staff his White House with lackeys, hacks, flacks and flunkies. Well then, this is what you get.

    ..

    That assumes that "reporters just doing their jobs" are actually part of this little bit of kabuki theater. They're there to be the White House steno pool, and just take their notes and ask their pre-approved softball questions on cue like the good little lapdogs they are. Every now and then they'll have a collective little whinefest like they did over the weekend when The Boss didn't allow them to take their fluff photos of Him with Tiger Woods, but that's nothing more than moral preening to convince themselves that they actually are an independent press corps holding the powerful "accountable."

    This "reporter" that Carney called out was new and didn't fully understand the rules or what was expected of her. The rest of them will sit her down and "explain the facts of life" to her, and after a sufficient amount of groveling on her part has taken place, she'll be patted on the head and allowed to take her place as the good little lapdog they want her to be.

    ...

    Thing is, Carney gets away with this kind of snarkiness and sarcasm all the time. Could he have gone to far this time? My magic eight ball says it's doubtful. It is interesting that now that Obama is safely reelected, there have been some rumblings of discontent amongst the media herd. They might at least begin to pretend they aren't just stenographers for the White House. I know, that last part made me laugh too.


    Last edited by Jolie Rouge; 02-20-2013 at 10:56 AM.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  8. #7
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    2/20/2013
    Boehner on Sequestration:
    Oh My God It’s So Dangerous and Unthinkable
    Patterico @ 7:59 am


    John Boehner in the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...032274944.html

    A week from now, a dramatic new federal policy is set to go into effect that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more. In a bit of irony, President Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who could lose their jobs if the policy goes into effect. Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester. What they might not realize from Mr. Obama’s statements is that it is a product of the president’s own failed leadership.

    The sequester is a wave of deep spending cuts scheduled to hit on March 1. Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts will occur this year, with another $1.1 trillion coming over the next decade. There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much—we should be cutting even more—but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it.
    Cry me a river. It’s a drop in the bucket. Boehner has a point that entitlement spending is not touched by the sequester. So call for entitlements to be cut too. But stop talking about how a relatively piddling set of budget cuts is so awful and dangerous. When you tighten the belt, you feel the squeeze, son.

    Boehner does have one good point:

    The president got his higher taxes—$600 billion from higher earners, with no spending cuts—at the end of 2012. He also got higher taxes via ObamaCare. Meanwhile, no one should be talking about raising taxes when the government is still paying people to play videogames, giving folks free cellphones, and buying $47,000 cigarette-smoking machines.
    The GOP keeps allowing this charlatan Obama to talk about “balance” when 1) they already gave him the tax part of the “balance” and 2) the problem is spending, not taxes. As I wrote last month: http://patterico.com/2013/01/22/the-...to-understand/

    Can’t we just tax the rich? No, for two reasons.

    First, even confiscating all millionaires’ taxable income would not close the gap. It’s difficult to find recent statistics for these numbers, but in posts I wrote in April 2011 I quoted people who had examined IRS statistics and found that in 2008, http://patterico.com/2011/04/11/so-o...-our-deficits/ “Taxable income over $100,000 was $1,582 billion, over $200,000 was $1,185 billion, over $500,000 was $820 billion, over $1 million was $616 billion, over $2 million was $460 billion, over $5 million was $302 billion, and over $10 million was $212 billion.” To get that $1.3 trillion you can’t close the gap by taxing rich people. You could confiscate all the income of people with taxable income over $1 million and it would not close the gap by half.

    But there’s another problem: it wouldn’t work that well anyway. As I illustrated yesterday, we have had top marginal rates as high as 91% and as low as 28%, and we still get about 18% of GDP in revenues every year, regardless. Extremely rich people change their behavior when you start to confiscate all their money.

    We haven’t even addressed paying off almost $17 trillion in debt.
    It’s as if you had a large mountain of sand and a small bucket of dirt to haul away, and when you said we should start getting on moving that sand, some yutz starts insisting on a balanced approach: one teaspoon of dirt to be removed for each teaspoon of sand.

    Yet Obama continues to play the game of demanding more taxes, more taxes, more taxes, as if that will fix everything. Sweetness and Light notes that Obama vowed in 2011 to veto any effort to undo the sequester http://sweetness-light.com/archive/o...r#.USTtbFpr7rZ — unless Republicans raised taxes on the rich. Which they did, recently. Which they need to keep reminding the public.

    We already agreed to move the dirt. Now let’s get to work on the real problem. And Boehner, stop treating the sequester as if it’s this awful and unthinkable set of cuts. You’re part of the problem.

    http://patterico.com/2013/02/20/boeh...d-unthinkable/

    “President Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who could lose their jobs if the policy goes into effect.”
    Mr. President, it is unconscionable that you indicate these first responders would be the first ones cut. They should be the LAST ones cut, and it is YOUR JOB to make sure it works out that way. Does their department have an armored vehicle, how many chiefs and liutenants, do they have a diversity office? There are a lot of places even a police department can cut without terminating first responders.

    ...

    Hey, Police, Fire, and Teachers are NOT federal employees, yet. Let the House cut the Obamas where it really hurts them, their entertaining, Travel, and food budgets. Let them eat vegetarian MREs and stay home!!!

    ..

    11.I have heard differing things about the impact of the sequester, specifically on the military. Part of the issue is the way the cuts are planned without any discretion as to where and how they are made. Some claim it will seriously hamper battle-readiness. For Obama, that is a feature, as he doesn’t really want the US military anywhere, unless it is a token presence than can win him a political advantage.

    Obama has an agenda to Cloward-Piven us into socialism while our ability to project power around the world is evaporated. Anything that doesn’t further that is a political maneuver to cover for the agenda.

    It was clear from the beginning this was an Obama plan, and I was willing to bet from the beginning the dems would be happy to have it go into effect and damage the military.

    But I, even I, never expected that Obama could actually pull off blaming it on the repubs and talking it up as something terrible, based on piddly domestic spending cuts.

    The dishonesty of the president and the press continue to astound, even when I think I’m beyond being astounded.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  9. #8
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Obama was for the sequester before he was against it
    Wed, 02/20/2013 - 2:10pm | posted by Jason Pye


    During a press conference yesterday in Washington, President Barack Obama claimed that spending cuts — known as “sequestration” or the “sequester” — that are scheduled to take effect on March 1st would hurt the economy and slow down response times for emergency personnel.

    “[I]f Congress allows this meat-cleaver approach to take place, it will jeopardize our military readiness; it will eviscerate job-creating investments in education and energy and medical research,” claimed President Obama as emergency responders stood behind him. He added, “[T]hese cuts are not smart. They are not fair. They will hurt our economy. They will add hundreds of thousands of Americans to the unemployment rolls.”

    While he has laid on thick the aggression toward Republicans for the sequester, this is ultimately something that President Obama created. Oddly enough, President Obama admitted that the goal of having automatic spending cuts “was to make them so unattractive and unappealing” that Congress would make some cuts and raise taxes. Keep in mind that no legislation that clears Congress can become law without a president’s signature. As Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) recently told White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, this is “Being President 101.”

    Moreover, it was President Obama who once threatened to veto “any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending.” Take a listen to President Obama in his own words in this video from the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2521931


    Remember, the sequester doesn’t actually cut spending. It barely cuts the rate in growth of spending over the next 10 years. Also remember that the United States currently has a $16.5 trillion national debt and $9.492 trillion in estimated budget deficits over the next 10 years thanks to President Obama’s reckless spending binge.

    These daunting fiscal problems are not something that taxes, which have already been raised on 77% of American households, can fix. Deep spending cuts will eventually have to be made. We can either take our medicine now, when the pain won’t be as bad, or later when severe economic damage could be done.

    http://www.unitedliberty.org/article...was-against-it
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  10. #9
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  11. #10
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Worse Than a Hurricane? New York Times Hypes Effect of Sequester on Air Travel
    By Clay Waters | February 22, 2013

    Worse than a hurricane? New York Times reporter Matthew Wald went a bit overboard in his Friday story on possible delays at airports because of the budget cuts due to take effect next week, known as the sequester: "Spending Cuts Threaten Delays In Air Travel." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/us...ef=todayspaper

    Airlines and airports across the country are preparing for across-the-board federal budget cuts due to hit next week as if they were a hurricane, although with even less certainty about how many flights they will have to cancel and how many passengers will be stranded. The federal government is warning about delays that could begin in March, as the first cuts take effect, and reduced takeoffs and slower security lines that could worsen in April with furloughs.

    Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has told Congress that most of the Federal Aviation Administration’s 47,000 employees would face a day of furlough per two-week pay period, meaning on average about 10 percent fewer workers on any given day. There are about 14,750 air traffic controllers, including trainees, so that would mean on every shift there would be substantially fewer in all. In some areas, like New York, there could be problems even in advance of furloughs, if overtime budgets are cut.

    To handle such a major staff shortage but still maintain safety, federal aviation officials said they would accept fewer airplanes into the system, the same tactic they use in bad weather. That means that in places where airplanes normally follow one another with a six- or seven-mile gap, there might be a 10- to 20-mile gap. As a result, passengers may sit on tarmacs and endure delays as they wait for planes to push back from the gate.

    “It’s going to be like perpetual bad weather,” said Kevin Mitchell, the chairman of the Business Travel Coalition. “You’re going to have to look at this as if you’re going out knowing there’s a storm.”

    There could also be longer security lines at airports because of anticipated furloughs of Transportation Security Administration workers. In addition, deplaning from international flights could be slower because Customs and Border Protection agents are expected to work fewer hours.
    (ABC's Good Morning America also picked up on the convenient airline passenger angle, warning of a "fiscal emergency" that will "cripple" flights in the United States. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-w...e-much-america )

    Wald quoted the air traffic controllers union which, shocking no one, was against the budget cuts, predicting “a negative impact on the efficiency and capacity of the National Airspace System, as well as the nation’s fragile economy.” Nowhere did Wald make the point that the sequester, though it will have some effect, involves an $85 billion cut out of a $3600 billion annual federal budget.


    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-wa...#ixzz2Lf2NORta
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  12. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    i thought there was a law against bullying? is it national or just state wide? bullying is exactly what O is doing. he is threatening us at every turn...food will disappear from stores (no inspectors...accept only at the white house?), traveling thru airport security will takes hours (or maybe days), the security of the country will be in question (we already have open borders and even the government has acknowledge that terrorist have been crossing our borders), our economy will go down..and down (which he already has done in the past). heck the man is ready to fly from state to state to cry about the doom that the republicans are about to stab us with (at a cost of $186000 per hour on air force one). dang the man doesn't have time to go to meetings, play acting president but has time to spend our money on what I consider non-essentials like going to hollywood for dinner, playing golf with tiger, probably has his own makeup artists and photog. I would not be surprised to find out he is the most expensive president to maintain in the history of this country.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in