Hello:

I've wondered WHY Democrats and Republicans can't come together. Then I remember how it was with my ex-wife.

Will cutting 3% of the budget cripple us as Obama says, or are we going to cruise? Before you say cruise, let me ask you this: If YOUR grocery store starts selling meat that ISN'T inspected, are you going to buy it??

excon

Rand Paul for 2 years in a row returned 20% of his operating budget back to the Treasury .

Like the President ;you cite extreme examples to demagogue the issue. The world will not end with a 2% cut in the expected growth in spending . Let the President do his job and direct his staffers in the bureaucracy to trim 3% of the fat out of their budgets . But he won't do that because he thinks ,with the trillions in red ink... that we don't spend enough .

Hello again, tom:


Rand Paul for 2 years in a row returned 20% of his operating budget back to the Treasury . Rand Paul is running for president.

Excon

Don't they inspect their meat in the UK?

Maybe if you gave it a better name it would be understood, like cutting the budget that doesn't exist doesn't sound logical, how about the close shave, or towards smaller government, everyone can embrace that

I think "The Big Lie" sounds appropriate.

Hello again,

The right wing FORGETS why they voted for Sequestration in the first place... It was DESIGNED to be SOOOO onerous, SOOOO bad, and SOOOO painful, that nobody in their right mind would LET it happen... It's a poison pill law. NOBODY wanted it to go into effect. That's why they wrote it in the first place.

And THAT'S what the right wing forgets, because NOW they're saying the cuts are cool.. Liberals aren't saying that... They saying it'll be a DISASTER, which is what it's designed to BE, after all.

What I DON'T understand, is how you could think they're cool, when there are NO cuts to entitlements, and PLENTY of cuts to defense?? ALL the other cuts will be in discretionary spending, like the TSA and the FDA. That'll mean longer lines at airports and UNINSPECTED meat in your local store...

Me? I ain't going anywhere and I'll eat tofu till we regain our senses.

excon

More scare tactics. As much as I don't like the defense cuts, (defense has already been slashed by this administration that ONLY thinks defense cuts are cool) , the reality is that the defense dept could easily absorb the cuts with some management ;just like the rest of the government could survive a 2% cut in the rate of increase in spending with some basic management discipline. What is so scary is that even with these cuts ;the government will still be spending more than they did when it was proposed in 2011;and yet the left fear mongers them.
Yes the food will still get inspected ;and yes the TSA will still grope at airports. These are all lies . Even the President is backing down from his "Howard Beale", "chicken little" act . He now admits that there will be very little immediate impact of the cuts.
This is typical "Washington Monument ploy " .
Washington Monument Ploy (http://financecareers.about.com/od/rz/g/Washington-Monument-Ploy.htm)

Hello again, tom:

Yeah?? You talk a good story, but you ain't going to be buying any meat either.

excon

Currently,while the government is fully funded ,we still had spinach contaminated ;peanut butter contaminated and many other incidents of similar contaminations .Every day in the US about 200,000 people become sick, 900 are hospitalized due to symptoms related to food poisoning . Annually ,food poisoning kills 5,000 people, and sends 325,000 to the hospital each year.
So I should be worried now that the inspection process can be any worse ?

You may have a point ex if Obama wasn't fear mongering about his own plan. Or are you saying he's too dumb to understand the consequences of his own policies?

So I should be worried now that the inspection process can be any worse ?
Yes!

Of course. Obviously the ag industry has a huge stake in injuring or killing off their customers. Isn't it the FDA that says nothing wrong with the pink slime everyone freaked out over?

Hello again, Steve:


Or are you saying he's too dumb to understand the consequences of his own policies?I'm not sure you quite understand the Sequester.. It is NOT a policy.. It's a poison pill that they SAID nobody in their right mind would LET happen. When I say they, I mean EVERYBODY!! It was MEANT to FORCE them to come to an agreement. It didn't.

And, NOW it's going to happen.. Because the Republicans are happy with the cuts... I don't know WHY... It doesn't cut entitlements, and makes deep cuts in defense.. I don't why any respectable right wing would like that.

Excon

Except that the Repubics already ponied up with the tax increases the President wanted. He's reneging on his end of the deal.
The Dems are using the wrong deal to bargain on loop holes . If they want that ,then it should be in connection with an overhaul of the whole income tax system... a trade for simplification ,flattening ,and rate reduction.
As for entitlements... tell me when the Dems were ever in favor of entitlement cuts .

Hello again, Steve:

I'm not sure you quite understand the Sequester.. It is NOT a policy.. It's a poison pill that they SAID nobody in their right mind would LET happen. When I say they, I mean EVERYBODY!!! It was MEANT to FORCE them to come to an agreement. It didn't.

And, NOW it's gonna happen.. Because the Republicans are happy with the cuts... I dunno WHY... It doesn't cut entitlements, and makes deep cuts in defense.. I don't why any respectable right wing would like that.

excon

Ah, so Obama was just bluffing. Well that's a pretty stupid way to run a country. I didn't drink the Koolaid like you did.

Besides what tom said, it doesn't CUT spending at all. And funny how Pew/WaPo missed offering the real culprit as a choice in a recent survey...

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/wapo-pew-question.jpg

Senate Dems haven't passed a budget in nearly 4 years and have no plan to avoid sequestration. Had they passed a budget like the House it would have gone to committee and been worked out and the sequester would not be an issue. That's a fact, Jack.

Of course. Obviously the ag industry has a huge stake in injuring or killing off their customers. Isn't it the FDA that says nothing wrong with the pink slime everyone freaked out over?

Here is the Federal regulations of the ag industry in a nut shell :
Manure Management Planner (MMP) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA is part of the Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) which is required of farmers with Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs.)




CNMP planners are strongly encouraged to use Manure Management Planner(MMP) because it was designed to simplify and hasten the CNMP development process. MMP was developed on a state-by-state basis to include each state’s unique data and circumstances important to CNMP development and acceptance by state authorities. MMP automates the generation of high quality CNMP reports.

USDA NRCS - Natural Resources Conservation Service (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/plantsanimals/livestock/afo/)
Imagine the savings getting rid of cr@P like that !

Along a country road in southern Oklahoma, there is a place that doesn't make sense. It is an airport without passengers.

Or, for that matter, planes.

This is Lake Murray State Park Airport, one of the least busy of the nation's 3,300-plus public airfields. In an entire week here, there might be one landing and one takeoff — often so pilots can use the bathroom. Or none at all. Visiting pilots are warned to watch out for deer on the runway.

So why is it still open? Mostly, because the U.S. government insists on sending it money

In Oklahoma, tiny airport attracts federal money, but few planes - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-oklahoma-tiny-airport-attracts-federal-money-but-few-planes/2013/02/25/914057e2-7c39-11e2-9e84-3fbb5d2ef2a9_story.html)
Bet you would have no wait at this airport's TSA line. Maybe this is one of the Air Traffic controller towers the President is threatening to shut down.

Nah, he'll make sure the cuts are as painful as possible so he can blame Republicans for hating kids and poisoning you with tainted meat.

P.S. White House Report Claims Sequestration Will Affect Federal Department That No Longer Exists (http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/25/white-house-report-claims-sequestration)

I left out Obama unleashing illegals on our streets because (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/27/us/immigrants-released-ahead-of-automatic-budget-cuts.html)we can't afford to enforce immigration laws and how Republicans refuse to protect us from terrorists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/02/25/napolitano-warns-that-sequester-would-affect-border-security/).

Can this administration possibly be any more shameless and derelict? I don't want to know the answer to that...

Hello again, Steve:


Ah, so Obama was just bluffing.What part of EVERYBODY passed the bill don't you understand??

Excon

His strategery is fundamentally flawed.
If he wants a 2nd term and a legacy he better start learning to like dealing with the Repubics. That or he'll be remembered as the president who presided over an 8 year recession.

Hello again, Steve:


Can this administration possibly be any more shameless and derelict?You guys DO have a problem with math, don't you?? Suffice to say, you believe that even though we're going to spend LESS on stuff, you expect the SAME level of service... And, when you don't get it, it's Obama's fault..

Only in right wing world is this true..

Excon

his strategery is fundamentally flawed.
if he wants a 2nd term and a legacy he better start learning to like dealing with the Repubics. That or he'll be remembered as the president who presided over an 8 year recession.

As long as you remember who started the recession/depression, thing is, Tom, despite the pretensions the president isn't God, he can't wave his hand and it all goes away, but it is good you have someone with a heart during such a period. Just remember your job creators have done nothing to lift you out of recession/depression

Now what I have seen so far is you have blamed him for the mortgage crisis, you have blamed him for the bailout, you have blamed him for giving more americans health insurance and you want to blame him because the republican captains of industry won't get off their buts. Be thankful it is not a totalatarian state or they would all have been shot

republican captains of industry lol ,Amazing how New York and the major industrial centers vote consistently Democrat. Amazing how Obama got the majority of corporate contributions in the last 2 Presidential cycle.

Regardless of when the recession started ;the truth is that his policies have sucked ,and do suck . If he continues down this path we are destined for a decade long recession with brief periods of sluggish recovery.
You talk about national socialist health care as if it's a good thing. I remind you that Italy went from a prosperous nation to a basket case that has a GDP/debt ratio over 100% after they instituted their national health care system in 1978 . Now they have a cast of clowns competing for the right to run their country completely into collapse. The United States should look at them as the canary in the coal mine.

Hello again, Steve:

You guys DO have a problem with math, don't you??? Suffice to say, you believe that even though we're going to spend LESS on stuff, you expect the SAME level of service... And, when you don't get it, it's Obama's fault..

Only in right wing world is this true..

excon

Republicans aren't releasing illegals for political theatre. And I repeat, if Dingy Harry had done his job and passed a budget there would be no sequester, period.

My math, my history and grasp of reality are fine.

Your grasp of reality is skewed to far right literally and precludes alternatives and other options you just don't understand.

Case in point, the concept of continuing resolution, that is a budgetary agreement, and sequester, that requires action by the new congress first with the house and senate. By law anything passed by these bodies previously is null and void, and has to be reintroduced to be valid.

Your grasp of reality is skewed too . The House passed 2 sequester motions that the Senate did not act on . If you want to blame anyone ,blame the do nothing Reid led Senate.
Now in an act of posturing... the President has set up a meeting to take place Friday... the day AFTER the sequester goes into effect. Now that's leadership!!

Your grasp of reality is skewed to far right literally and precludes alternatives and other options you just don't understand. .

Back to condescension I see. I just don't understand, blah, blah blah. Grow up dude.

Oh get over yourselves with the gloom, doom, blame game that failed to make Obama a one term president, and do YOUR job, and not tell someone else what to do. Truth is the new congress has done nothing since being sworn in and the far right won't let it.

Bonehead is already in hot water on his right flank and has to get permission to wipe his own arse after bringing and passing bills with democratic support, and if he did it again with the sequester, the far right would be up in arms and looking for his blood.

Nothing works without the permission of the far right? That's cool, just stop lying about it and blaming the president because he ain't kissing your raw right butts. I mean how many times are you going to use this fiscal crisis stuff as an excuse NOT to do your job?

Right back at you . How many times will the President blame the Repubics for not bowing to his every command ? He got his tax hike on the rich . The only reason he is afraid of the cuts is because he knows how insignificant they are ;and how little impact they will have on most..

Nothing works without the permission of the far right? Thats cool, just stop lying about it and blaming the president because he ain't kissing your raw right butts. I mean how many times are you going to use this fiscal crisis stuff as an excuse NOT to do your job?

What part of the Republican-led House has done their job don't you get? The only ones refusing to do their job are the other two Democrat-controlled segments. Geez, Tal, you're the one excusing inaction and tossing blame while Obama is not only spreading doom and gloom, he's unleashing it on purpose.

http://www.investors.com/image/RAMFNLclr-022613-sequestrat.jpg.cms

Hello again,

It's time for stimulus anyway.. NOT austerity.. Austerity will turn us into Europe. I thought you guy's HATED Europe.

excon

Hello again,

It's time for stimulus anyway.. NOT austerity.. Austerity will turn us into Europe. I thought you guy's HATED Europe.

excon

I thought you were Europe, you have a Europe credit rating, a Europe style QE plan, You have Europe style ineffective government, Oh Wait, you are on the left hand side of the Atlantic

I'm beginning to appreciate a few principled liberal journalists, Bob Woodward has been acting like a journalist and it seems to have pi$$ed off someone at the WH. Damn him for exposing his lies and hypocrisy.

Well what do they do to him? Revoke his White House Press Pass? If it was good enough for him to get Nixon, it might be good enough for him to get Obama

The sequester was OBAMAS idea. Now his chickens are coming home to roost and he is trying to blame the repubs.

This country NEEDS to cut spending and will NOT do so.

If this is what it takes... I am all for it.

Obamas acting EXACTLY like a petulant kids throwing a tantrum when he doesn't get his way... there are lots of worthless research programs nobody would miss if they never happened. But no.. Obamas going to smash all his toys and tear up the house throwing a fit.

Instead of just taking out the trash... like he was asked.

Anyone willing to guess the total amount of money cut from the welfare program? Which does nothing but pay lazy people to get fat and have babies...

My guess is a big fat ZERO.

No what is being cut is the military welfare program, might get a few contractors off the teat and just maybe they will get real about the F35 and enforce quality instead of cost. I think this is a great ploy by Obama, get the republicans to agree to cut the military and then sit back and watch it happen

Hello again,

It's time for stimulus anyway.. NOT austerity.. Austerity will turn us into Europe. I thought you guy's HATED Europe.

excon

because stimulus worked so well in 2009.

Yes Tom that's the reason given, but it has to be the right sort of stimulus, like returning jobs from outside.

The link didn't work for me,but we have had this argument before, so I have my own link here

Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html)

So I ask again was it the tax cuts, the state aid, or the infrastructure projects that didn't work in the stimulus? Be very careful because many states are still spending the money including my own state TEXAS, on highways and roads.

So while you SAY it didn't work, it bought time and resources albeit temporary, but most states, like Texas, leveraged it into many projects. So the idea of doing NOTHING, while attractive to your side it seems, falls flat in the face of REAL evidence state by state. But I know why you guys holler it didn't work, its obvious you don't want to do it again.

You rather let corporations keep their welfare checks while they don't create jobs. And make grandma and her babies the victims of your capitalism.

Yeah, we've had a nearly year long project cutting ADA ramps into sidewalks. Those nine guys are doing OK.

Odd, but since Woodward went public over the WH threatening him Obama's tone has changed. Suddenly most of us aren't going to notice the sequester. The sky isn't going to fall after all.

Yeah, we've had a nearly year long project cutting ADA ramps into sidewalks. Those nine guys are doing ok.

You really should get around your own state more.

You really should get around your own state more.

It's a really big state.

Odd, but since Woodward went public over the WH threatening him Obama's tone has changed. Suddenly most of us aren't going to notice the sequester. The sky isn't going to fall after all.

I wonder if the MSM will circle the wagons around an elder statesman ;or perhaps throw him under the bus ?

Some have already thrown him under the bus, but Lanny Davis says his paper was threatened (http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/28/former-clinton-aide-turned-columnist-says-white-house-threatened-his-publication-too-audio/) over a column they didn't like.

Uh ohh... Now Zero is messing with a Clintonista .

Gee... now the lefties are beginning to see what we have been saying about Owebama for 5 years now.

Its about time...

Useful idiots are frequently disposable

Hello right wing economists:

How does the government buying FEWER airplanes create jobs? How does the government buying LESS concrete add jobs? In fact, how does the government spending LESS on EVERYTHING create jobs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

excon

Hello right wing economists:

How does the government buying FEWER airplanes create jobs? How does the government buying LESS concrete add jobs? In fact, how does the government spending LESS on EVERYTHING create jobs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

excon

Because the government isn't spending THEIR money... they are spending OUR money... which means WE have less money to spend. WE earn wealth... THEY are like parasites that suck your blood until you die from blood loss.

If the government let us keep more of our money ( its called less taxes) , than WE cous spend it on things we want to buy which would stimulate the economy. Letting the government decide where to spend our money for this purpose ISS rarely beneficial in the short or long run.

Cut my taxes by $2,000 and I will have $ 2,000 more to spend.

Hello Mc:

I'm cool with smaller government.. Which government services should we do without? I've got several. I could pare the government wayyyy down. But, you go first.

excon

Dept of Education. Let each state run their own state. It would be OK to have a national standard or guideline but let the penalty for non compliance reduced or a stop of federal funding.

IRS.

FLAT tax for all. No " War and Peace " book of tax regulations.

Hello right wing economists:

How does the government buying FEWER airplanes create jobs? How does the government buying LESS concrete add jobs? In fact, how does the government spending LESS on EVERYTHING create jobs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Planes we don't need are a waste of money .planes that are dogs like the F-35 are a waste of money . As far as concrete goes ,that is the broken window fallacy. If what you said made sense then it also makes sense to have a crew making pot holes for the crew to fill them in .
What is the broken window fallacy? (http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fallacy.asp#axzz2MEM3bloZ)

Further ,the sequester does not cut baseline government spending. It slows the rate of growth of government spending. But leave it to the Dems to say that a $110 billion increase in spending over 10 years is a cut .

Hello again, Mc:

It WOULDN'T be my choice to whack the Department of Education, but in the spirit of compromise, I would... If you'd agree to end the DEA, the NSA, the TSA and the CCofA.

There's still lots more to cut.. This is fun. Your turn.

excon

Dept of Education. Let each state run their own state. It would be ok to have a national standard or guideline but let the penalty for non compliance reduced or a stop of federal funding.

IRS.

FLAT tax for all. No " War and Peace " book of tax regulations.

Yup ,especially the flat tax and elimination of the IRS... or 99% of the bloated bureaucracy. Would be tough on people who have made a career as accountants gaming the system too. Maybe they would need to get real jobs.

Hello again, tom:

In the spirit of compromise, and the need to get RID of the IRS, I'd be willing to have a flat tax for the middle, a slightly higher flat tax for the rich, and a slightly lower flat tax for the poor. That's THREE rates, and NO IRS.

And, I'd be happy if we stopped making airplanes we don't need. How about canning the Trident Submarine? It's a cold war relic.

Isn't cutting government fun?

excon

Hello again, tom:

In the spirit of compromise, and the need to get RID of the IRS, I'd be willing to have a flat tax for the middle, a slightly higher flat tax for the rich, and a slightly lower flat tax for the poor. That's THREE rates, and NO IRS.

And, I'd be happy if we stopped making airplanes we don't need. How about canning the Trident Submarine? It's a cold war relic.

Isn't cutting government fun?

excon
I'm in .I did not check... but I doubt new Tridents are on the assembly line. A modified flat tax is actually a good compromise...

Hello right wing economists:

How does the government buying FEWER airplanes create jobs? How does the government buying LESS concrete add jobs? In fact, how does the government spending LESS on EVERYTHING create jobs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

excon

How does one whine about closing corporate jet loopholes while bilking the taxpayer for using such jets for personal use (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57571788/questions-abound-over-alleged-misuse-of-government-jets/)?

Hello again, tom:


but I doubt new Tridents are on the assembly line.No, but they're in full service. I'm sure there' s some Army bases that we can close.

Excon

uh ohh... Now Zero is messing with a Clintonista .

Uh oh, the push back is growing...


Why Bob Woodward's Fight With The White House Matters to You (http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/why-bob-woodward-s-fight-with-the-white-house-matters-to-you-20130228)
And why I iced a senior Obama White House official.

The fight between the White House and journalistic legend Bob Woodward is a silly distraction to a major problem: The failure of President Obama and House Republicans to lead the country under a budget deadline.

P.S. Democratic and GOP bills to avert the sequester were defeated. Democrats wanted to increase spending, Republicans gave Obama the chance to pick his cuts. I guess that responsibility was too much for them.

Woodward-gate is a distraction the White House welcomed, even encouraged, as part of a public-relations strategy to emasculate the GOP and anybody else who challenges Obama. It is a distraction that briefly enveloped my reporting last weekend, when I essentially broke ties with a senior White House official.

Yes, I iced a source– and my only regret is I didn't do it sooner. I decided to share this encounter because it might shed light on the increasingly toxic relationship between media and government, which is why the Woodward flap matters outside the Beltway.

On Saturday, White House press secretary Jay Carney accused Woodward of being “willfully wrong” on a story holding the White House accountable for its part in a legislative gimmick called sequestration. (Months ago, the GOP-controlled House passed, and Obama signed, legislation imposing $1.2 trillion in cuts unless an alternative is found by Friday.)

Carney isn't the first press secretary to criticize a reporter. Presidential aides do it all the time to set the record straight or -- often, more cynically -- to dodge accountability. I was struck by the fact that Carney's target has a particular history with White House attacks. I tweeted: “Obama White House: Woodward is 'willfully wrong.' Huh-what did Nixon White House have to say about Woodward?”

Reporting by Woodward and Carl Bernstein uncovered Watergate misdeeds and led to the resignation of President Nixon. My tweet was not intended to compare Nixon to Obama (there is no reason to doubt Obama's integrity -- period) but rather to compare the attack to the press strategies of all the presidents' men.

I had angered the White House, particularly a senior White House official who I am unable to identify because I promised the person anonymity. Going back to my first political beat, covering Bill Clinton's administration in Arkansas and later in Washington, I've had a practice that is fairly common in journalism: A handful of sources I deal with regularly are granted blanket anonymity. Any time we communicate, they know I am prepared to report the information at will (matters of fact, not spin or opinion) and that I will not attribute it to them.

This is an important way to build a transparent and productive relationship between reporters and the people they cover. Nothing chills a conversation faster than saying, “I'm quoting you on this.”

The official angered by my Woodward tweet sent me an indignant e-mail. “What's next, a Nazi analogy?” the official wrote, chastising me for spreading “bull**** like that” I was not offended by the note, mild in comparison to past exchanges with this official. But it was the last straw in a relationship that had deteriorated.

As editor-in-chief of National Journal, I received several e-mails and telephone calls from this White House official filled with vulgarity, abusive language, and virtually the same phrase that Politico characterized as a veiled threat. “You will regret staking out that claim,” The Washington Post reporter was told.

Once I moved back to daily reporting this year, the badgering intensified. I wrote Saturday night, asking the official to stop e-mailing me. The official wrote, challenging Woodward and my tweet. “Get off your high horse and assess the facts, Ron,” the official wrote.

I wrote back:

“I asked you to stop e-mailing me. All future e-mails from you will be on the record -- publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you. My cell-phone number is … . If you should decide you have anything constructive to share, you can try to reach me by phone. All of our conversations will also be on the record, publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you.”

I haven't heard back from the official. It was a step not taken lightly because the note essentially ended our working relationship. Without the cloak of anonymity, government officials can't be as open with reporters – they can't reveal as much information and they can't explain the nuance and context driving major events.

I changed the rules of our relationship, first, because it was a waste of my time (and the official's government-funded salary) to engage in abusive conversations. Second, I didn't want to condone behavior that might intimidate less-experienced reporters, a reaction I personally witnessed in journalists covering the Obama administration.

That gets to why this matters beyond the incestuous Washington culture. One of this country's most important traditions is “a free press that isn't afraid to ask questions, to examine and to criticize,” Obama said at the 2012 White House Correspondents Association's annual dinner.

Because of tech-fueled changes in the market, there are fewer reporters doing more work with less experience than when I came to Washington with Clinton in 1993. Also, the standard relationship between reporters and their sources is more combative, a reflection of polarization in Washington and within the media industry.

Personally, I had a great relationship with Clinton's communications team, less so with President Bush's press shop, and now -- for the first time in my career -- I told a public servant to essentially buzz off.

This can't be what Obama wants. He must not know how thin-skinned and close-minded his staff can be to criticism. “I have the greatest respect and admiration for what you do,” Obama told reporters a year ago. “I know sometimes you like to give me a hard time, and I certainly like to return the favor, but I never forget that our country depends on you.”

Hello again, tom:

No, but they're in full service. I'm sure there' s some Army bases that we can close.

excon

If I may interject... if you are going to close down any sector of the triad ,the last one I'd close down is the submarine deterrent . Oh ,I understand the Ohio class is ancient ,but I would only phase them out with the introduction of another class of boomers.

Why would I choose to modernize the submarine deterrent ? Because the US has NO plans to up-grade it's ICBMS (an aging option itself ) ;and because our air deterrent still relies on ancient B-52s and the 14 year old B-2s . Yes ,the Ohio class is old and obsolete ;but we cannot get rid of them until a new class of sub in on line(sometime around 2030 ). When that happens ,we will have replaced triad with diad or a monad at the same time that our potential adversaries are modernizing at a rapid rate.

Yes there are plenty of bases that can ,and have closed.. . The left may not want to admit it ;but the military has downsized for years ,even in the middle of GWOT .

Get rid of the EPA and the Department of Energy... Neither help the country and both spend huge amounts killing jobs and the economy.

And as yet not one single cut to the EPA... DOE or the UN has been announced. Much less a single Welfare Queen having to share the suffering by his most holy of holy... Lord Obama. All praise the Bloviator.

The Blue Angels were cut.

Obama's scare tactics will backfire; and has already started. He is now, today, backpeddling on what he said all last week. He tried to scare everyone, and it isn't working.
He made Emergency Care persons stand behind him giving a speech, and made more speeches. He is a speechmaker, not a President, taking care of the President's business of America!
As you probably already know, these "cuts" aren't really cuts; they just mean that any increases will not be forthcoming.
Let's say I make $50,000 a year (I wish), and my boss told me I would be getting a $5,000 increase next year. These "cuts" do NOT mean they will reduce my salary from $50,000 down to say $40,000. It means I won't be getting the $5,000 increase!
As pointed out on FOX, these so-called automatic "cuts" will be the same amount of money as the Govt spends every 28 days; like an estimated 28 Billion dollars.
I do hope the Republicans will stick to their beliefs, and not raise taxes on the wealthy, who already are paying far more than their "fair share", and will let the automatic cuts take place and become law.
Neither side is going to "cut" anything, and we have to, if America is going to stay economically solvent.

We need more sequestration or whatever it takes to CUT spending more across the board.

The UN still gets full funding... and the ACLU still gets all their under-the-table cash.

Most importantly... and this speaks volumes on its own.

OBAMAS VACATION, TRAVEL AND GOLF BUDGET REMAINS UNTOUCHED!

Because heaven forbid HE share the pain he is dishing out since HE is the one ordering what gets cut... nobody else.

Cut all the right wing BS out, and we would have a balanced budget, and full employment. And as much a Bonehead and house republicans are on vacation, I sure wouldn't cancel mine either.

Right... WELFARE programs... the Billions Obama spends Traveling, going on vacations every two weeks and Flying to Hawaii so he can golf there have absolutely no impact on the budget?

People who are at least capable of working should have to do some sort of work to get welfare.

If we are just going to give money/ food / housing / healthcare away... who would want to work ? Some people are "better off " being on welfare than working.

The WPA worked back in the 1930's , let's do it again.

Right....WELFARE programs....the Billions Obama spends Traveling, going on vacations every two weeks and Flying to Hawaii so he can golf there have absolutely no impact on the budget?
That doesn't cost "billions." Which cuts have hurt you so far?

That doesn't cost "billions." Which cuts have hurt you so far?

Well its 8 hours one way to Hawaii, Air Force One costs $180,000 per hour to fly... then there are the undisclosed costs of the support crews and Air Force cargo planes that carry all the motorcade vehicles and the costs of everyone that flies with him including the secret service staff... He is almost NEVER in DC... he's always out flying here or there to AVOID being in DC.

What cuts have hurt me so far... and damn headache from that liar bloviating all the time on TV how it's the Republicans fault when the sequester was HIS idea to begin with... and the fact Obama is who is deciding what gets cut... and its being done to inflict a MAXIMUM amount of pain rather than cutting stupid and foolish government spending.

Lets see Mr. Hanky stay in DC and do his job for once...

People are getting laid off, and the Obama Government wastes money training for a Zombie Attack.

Government Preparing For Zombie Apocalypse? Taxpayers Shell Out For Anti-Zombie Training Camp | Mediaite (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/government-preparing-for-zombie-apocolypse-taxpayers-shell-out-for-anti-zombie-training-camp/)

You have been watching too much "Pinky, and the Brain", and the "Walking Dead". Get a beer and settle down and watch Natgeo for a week and stay out of those loony right wing talking chambers.

Make that TWO weeks away from the rest of the nuts. Call me in the morning.

You have been watching to much "Pinky, and the Brain", and the "Walking Dead". Get a beer and settle down and watch Natgeo for a week and stay out of those loony right wing talking chambers.

Make that TWO weeks away from the rest of the nuts. Call me in the morning.

How about READING the damn link... ABC news reported on that... its one of YOUR lefty media outlets.

I don't watch ABC news. Nor feed off loony nut jobs, right or left. Bad for the brain.

History Channel, I, and II, Natgeo, Discovery Channel, and whatever channel features WWE Wrestling. Star Trek on the weekends and Law & Order. Walking Dead and Game of Thrones supplement 12 Netflix discs a month and unlimited streaming.

With that and visiting my EMO right wing friends and other forums on this site, plus Fantasy Sports, I have little time for ABC News, and forget FOX!

I don't watch ABC news. Nor feed off loony nut jobs, right or left. Bad for the brain.

Yet you listen to the source of the lunacy himself... Obama.

But the fact remains the government DOES waste our tax money on stuff like that... how else can you explain the massive deficits in spending. Nobody in the Military is getting wealthy... except for those in the Command.

And war contractors.

And war contractors.

Then there is the $1.6 BILLION dollars in advanced weapons the White house was giving to the Muslim brotherhood terrorist organisation in Egypt. Then there is all the money wasted on the ANTI-US UN... and the money wasted being given to Hamas terrorist organisation...

Today while the press was fixated on insignificant cuts to the rate of spending increases ;The Hill is reporting that 700 pages of new Obamacare regulations were released (during the Friday document dump) .
More than 700 pages of healthcare rules released - The Hill's RegWatch (http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/healthcare/285715-more-than-700-pages-of-healthcare-rules-released)

Got to admit ,Zero is good at political jui jitsu . Of course the Congressional Repubics are asleep.. Maybe they will comment by the Sunday talk shows... and of course they will do nothing about it . One thought... the next budget show down is in 2 weeks or so. How about a complete defunding of Obamacare... NOW THAT's WHAT I CALL SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS!!

Comments on the SHOP proposals are due by April 11.

Read more: More than 700 pages of healthcare rules released - The Hill's RegWatch (http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/healthcare/285715-more-than-700-pages-of-healthcare-rules-released#ixzz2MLot3Qfm)
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

A month and a half to read and comment starting this week end. Congress is on a long weekend any way.

Three of the regulations are final .

The rules will become effective on May 11, and HHS will take comments on an interim final regulation regarding cost-savings programs and government risk pooling .Not that that will change anything. I have seen this act many times. We have packed town hall with people who had negative comments on a pending law . The comments get filed ,and the law goes into effect unchanged... pure pro forma bs.

Hello again,

I don't know what this has to do with anything, but I wanted to post it, so I am.

Yes Republicans are more critical of the Repubics running the party.

Next up ;the CR (or what the Dems call a "budget"). The Repubics have to establish the sequester as the permanent base line until the Dems in the Senate pass a budget that can go to a conference committee. They also have to set the budget priorities instead of this across the board cutting. The Senate Repubics were willing to give the President that authority ,but he passed on it.
The Repubics also have to get to the business of defunding Obamacare .
If the President wants to talk about taxes ,then go for it... Now is the time for a tax overhaul with the President's wish to close loopholes ,and the Repubic's wish to flatten marginal rates.

And after all that his message is the same, it's the Republicans fault. How long can one man and a do-nothing senate get by with shirking responsibility?

And after all that his message is the same, it's the Republicans fault. How long can one man and a do-nothing senate get by with shirking responsibility?

For as long as repubs keep stalling in the house.

Are you really that detached from reality or just think we are?

Hello again, Steve:


Are you really that detached from reality or just think we are?If you think it's only the Dems who are blocking and blaming, then you ARE pretty much detached from reality. BOTH sides are to blame.

But, I don't care about blame... The Republicans will take take that. I want to see my country back on track.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

If you think it's only the Dems who are blocking and blaming, then you ARE pretty much detached from reality. BOTH sides are to blame.

But, I don't care about blame... The Republicans will take take that. I wanna see my country back on track.

excon

Obama wasted his currency on scarequester only to do an Emily Letilla impersonation after Repubics offered him the chance to pick the cuts. Even dems offered a plan and he passed, so what are you missing here? You want to help Trumka "take your country back"? From what?

Let's put it this way... he used his political capital in the last 2 months. Everyone knows a 2%cut is modest . It is up to him to make it work .He's the Chief Executive . It's time he started acting like one and make RESPONSIBLE cuts... not the ones he threatened with his demagoguery .

RESPONSIBLE cuts
Cutting federal funds to the Blue Angels.

Bet the sluts like Sandra Flock still get their free birth control at taxpayer expense while they are paying to attend $40,000 a year universities like she did.

Amazing though is that most of America agree with him,more so than with repubs.

Large Majority Of Americans, Including Most Republicans, Support Raising Taxes On The Wealthy | TPMDC (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/large-majority-of-americans-including-most-republicans-support-raising-taxes-on-the-wealthy.php)

More in U.S. Now Want Balanced Approach to Cutting Deficit (http://www.gallup.com/poll/158828/balanced-approach-cutting-deficit.aspx)

Obama calls for replacing sequester with balanced approach - xinmsn News (http://news.xin.msn.com/en/business/obama-calls-for-replacing-sequester-with-balanced-approach-4)

I think his investments in political capital will screw you guy up despite the bravado from the right.

Cutting federal funds to the Blue Angels.

Perfect example. That is a symbolic cut to punish the rubes. Meanwhile they are giving 20 F-16 jets to Egypt. Like I said... responsible cuts.

Bet the sluts like Sandra Flock still get their free birth control at taxpayer expense while they are paying to attend $40,000 a year universities like she did.
There is no free birth control. And contraception may be needed for reasons other than to prevent pregnancy --

Quotes from Sandra Fluke (02/23/2012) --

These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons suffer dire consequences.

One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but it can't be proven without surgery, so the insurance hasn't been willing to cover her medication.

One student told us that she knew birth control wasn't covered, and she assumed that's how Georgetown's insurance handled all of women's sexual healthcare, so when she was raped, she didn't go to the doctor even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn't going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman's reproductive health.

Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy. She's gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy. After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn't afford her medication anymore and had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of her final exam period she'd been in the emergency room all night in excruciating pain. ... Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary.

This is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends. A woman's reproductive healthcare isn't a necessity, isn't a priority.

Many of the women whose stories I've shared are Catholic women, so ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the healthcare we need.

Funny thing is that provision isn't written into Obamacare.. it is a directive by HHS Sec Sebillius . The next POTUS could just as easily reverse the call... that is if the judiciary doesn't declare it unconstitutional first .

Hello again, tom:


The Senate Repubics were willing to give the President that authority (to CHOOSE which cuts to make) ,but he passed on it.I've said on MANY occasions that I DON'T understand the underlying POLITICS of many Washington proposals... But, I certainly see the trap in THIS offer..

I always thought YOU were better at unraveling the Washington intrigue. I guess not. Clearly, this is an offer that he'll NEVER accept, and the reason why is OBVIOUS to me. I think to you too.

Excon

Yeah, the reason is he's just a blowhard, not a leader.

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, over the last week, I've heard NOTHING from your side, other than the president should "lead".

Let me ask you, right winger, if he leads, are you going to follow??

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

Leading is more than running around the country scaring the public and bypassing the media. It's more than controlling the message, blaming the other guy and waiting until AFTER your apocalypse to bring Republicans in to talk. If I ever see him lead I'll let you know.

We wouldn't be here if the congress had done its job in the 2011 debt ceiling debacle. Face it, gridlock has accomplished nothing for either side.

You mean if the senate had passed a budget.

Hello again, tom:

I've said on MANY occasions that I DON'T understand the underlying POLITICS of many Washington proposals... But, I certainly see the trap in THIS offer..

I always thought YOU were better at unraveling the Washington intrigue. I guess not. Clearly, this is an offer that he'll NEVER accept, and the reason why is OBVIOUS to me. I think to you too.

excon

Well ,let's put it this way. He's the president, and presidents are expected to work out agreements, not “force the moment to its crisis”. He's also the chief executive of the United States ,and as such is perfectly capable of directing agencies to make sure all cuts are in wholly nonessential areas. He shouldn't need an invite from Congress to do his job. Maybe he should bring in his cabinet officers and put them in a Jedi Mind-meld and direct them to sharpen their #2 Ticonderogas ,and trim 2% of bloat and fat out of their agencies. It does not require keeping carriers from deploying ,or laying off janitors like his lie from Friday.

Hello again, tom:

If the right wing has the answers, why didn't they write a bill? That IS how it's done there, no?

excon

They did... 3 times

Hello again, tom:

This post COULD be on Obama 2.0, but they all meld into general partisanship anyway...

As I said over there, rather than doing what's BEST for the country, Obama is aiming at DESTROYING the Republicans. Maybe, in the long run, that'll be BETTER for the country than doing short term stuff..

I'm STILL very pissed off at Mitch McConnell for announcing that he's going to DESTROY the Obama presidency. And, then he proceeded to ATTEMPT to do that very thing..

The key word above is ATTEMPT. McConnell FAILED. Now, it's HIS turn in the box. Do I have sympathy for the Republicans? I do NOT.

excon

The right hollers the President should lead, and then turns around and tells Bonehead he can't talk to the Prez, and then says from his own mouth he won't talk to the Prez. So when the Prez talks to the people they holler even louder.

What's funny is that the people are behind the Prez. Not the right wing! Not Bonehead! Not McConnell! Not the TParty! Not Republicans! Not Rush! Not Mitt!

They are behind Obama very firmly! So keep hollering! Keep talking crazy! Keep throwing your rocks! Keep obstructing! Keep objecting! Keep sitting there with your guns for the sky to fall, and the Boogey man to get you!

Since 174 house repubs voted for sequestration so you guys shouldn't complain at all. You got what you wanted, and Bonehead said he got 98% of what he wanted.

We will see whose happy, and whose NOT in a few weeks.

Saturday Night Live on the sequester... priceless.

Saturday Night Live - Sequester Cold Open - Video - NBC.com (http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sequester-cold-open/n33493#.UTTk7Z22dDE)

Owebama got 100% of what he wanted... he has said as much publicly and in interviews.

Prbolem now is his malfunctioning brain doesn't want to take ownership of it or anything else... He thinks he can be on both sides of everything all the time... and since the average liberal has the attention span and memory of a goldfish... he's been getting away with it... but people are finally deserting the sinking ship... and Bob Woodward is only the most well known so far... and not the only one by far.

M<aking threats to reporters that don't report exactly how the WHite house demands the coverage report... shows he is the man with a tiny mind... and an even smaller wiener.

Hello again, smoothy:


shows he is the man with a tiny mind... and an even smaller wiener.I have a HUGE, HUMONGOUS wiener. Most liberals do.

Hmmmm.. I think I've figured out what the problem is..

Excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I have a HUGE, HUMONGOUS wiener. Most liberals do.

Hmmmm.. I think I've figured out what the problem is..

excon

You black out when you see a nice set of hooters?

Hello again, smoothy:

I have a HUGE, HUMONGOUS wiener. Most liberals do.

Hmmmm.. I think I've figured out what the problem is..

excon

I never thought of that, but it explains the hollering, and the fear of being bent over by liberals. It would hurt!! Hurt really bad!!

I never thought of that, but it explains the hollering, and the fear of being bent over by liberals. It would hurt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hurt really bad!!!!!!!!!!

Well, if you look at the liberal women out there... there is a legitimate reason to fear amourous advances from frustrated liberals.

http://votingamerican.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1robb.jpg

And your point is? You feel it is more pleasant to be bent over by republicans?

and your point is? you feel it is more pleasant to be bent over by republicans?

Republican men get the republican women... we don't NEED to bend over democrat men.

You let republican men screw you all the time and never holler.

My this thread has devolved. I'm telling you, quit talking about wieners and watch the SNL take (http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sequester-cold-open/n33493/)- all you need to know about the sequester.

If the White House and Congress are looking for a place to cut, how about ending the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit for those making over $200,000 a year?

The Congressional Budget Office recently reported that federal EV subsidies will cost taxpayers about $7.5 billion over the next few years .

CBO Says Electric Vehicle Subsidies to Cost $7.5 Billion With Little Benefit | National Legal and Policy Center (http://nlpc.org/stories/2013/01/18/cbo-says-ev-subsidies-cost-75-billion-little-benefits)

The majority of those buying "green" vehicles, like General Motors' Chevy Volt, or the even more expensive Tesla are making more money than the average American. Why should those that can afford to buy them get reimbursed $7,500 each ?
We can start with military procurements of Volts
Military adding more electric vehicles to fleet - News - Stripes (http://www.stripes.com/news/military-adding-more-electric-vehicles-to-fleet-1.184928)

Recent moves by Japan's two largest automakers suggest that the electric car, after more than 100 years of development and several brief revivals, still is not ready for prime time - and may never be.

In the meantime, the attention of automotive executives in Asia, Europe and North America is beginning to swing toward an unusual but promising new alternate power source: hydrogen.

The reality is that consumers continue to show little interest in electric vehicles, or EVs, which dominated U.S. streets in the first decade of the 20th century before being displaced by gasoline-powered cars.

Despite the promise of "green" transportation - and despite billions of dollars in investment, most recently by Nissan Motor Co (7201.T) - EVs continue to be plagued by many of the problems that eventually scuttled electrics in the 1910s and more recently in the 1990s. Those include high cost, short driving range and lack of charging stations.

The public's lack of appetite for battery-powered cars persuaded the Obama administration last week to back away from its aggressive goal to put 1 million electric cars on U.S. roads by 2015.

The tepid response to EVs also pushed Nissan's high-profile chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, perhaps the industry's most outspoken proponent of battery cars, to announce in December a major strategic shift toward more mainstream gasoline-electric hybrids, which overcome many of the shortcomings of pure EVs.

The move was widely seen as a tacit acknowledgement by Ghosn that his all-or-nothing, multibillion-dollar bet on EVs is falling far short of his ambition to sell hundreds of thousands of battery-powered Nissan Leafs.

Instead, Nissan plans to follow rival Toyota Motor Co (7203.T), the world's largest purveyor of hybrids, which now is poised to leapfrog pure EVs altogether to pursue what might be the next big green-tech breakthrough: pollution- and petroleum-free fuel-cell cars that convert hydrogen to electricity.

Vice Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, the "father of the Prius" who helped put hybrids on the map, said he believes fuel-cell vehicles hold far more promise than battery electric cars.

"Because of its shortcomings - driving range, cost and recharging time - the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most conventional cars," said Uchiyamada. "We need something entirely new."

Electric cars head toward another dead end | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/04/uk-autos-electric-hydrogen-idUSLNE91303P20130204)

You let republican men screw you all the time and never holler.

Not hardly... the only ones screwing people are the Democrats... Republicans tell them to go out and earn it... Liberals feels it's their duty to rob those who DID go out and work for it.

Rescind Obamacare... you can save $1.5 Trillion a year with NO other cuts needed.

If the White House and Congress are looking for a place to cut, how about ending the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit for those making over $200,000 a year?

The Congressional Budget Office recently reported that federal EV subsidies will cost taxpayers about $7.5 billion over the next few years .

CBO Says Electric Vehicle Subsidies to Cost $7.5 Billion With Little Benefit | National Legal and Policy Center (http://nlpc.org/stories/2013/01/18/cbo-says-ev-subsidies-cost-75-billion-little-benefits)

The majority of those buying "green" vehicles, like General Motors' Chevy Volt, or the even more expensive Tesla are making more money than the average American. Why should those that can afford to buy them get reimbursed $7,500 each ?
We can start with military procurements of Volts
Military adding more electric vehicles to fleet - News - Stripes (http://www.stripes.com/news/military-adding-more-electric-vehicles-to-fleet-1.184928)

Electric cars head toward another dead end | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/04/uk-autos-electric-hydrogen-idUSLNE91303P20130204)

I see once again you fail to grasp the meaning of subsidy, If these vehicles are not subsidised no one is going to buy them and the technology will not develop. They had electric vehicles back in 1900, I agree it doesn't need a subsidy because the idea was a failure then and it is a failure now

I imagine they could do things better than have this sequester go into effect. But Bonehead has admitted he can't get anything done in the house because any bill the TParty crafts is dead on arrival at the senate.

Bonehead also knows he can get some republicans and democrats to back a senate plan. The senate will probably pass something then the house, and the right will holler and call for Boneheads head. No repub in the house wants Bonehead's job but Nancy, and if things continue down this path she may well get it in 2014.

I imagine they could do things better than have this sequester go into effect. But Bonehead has admitted he can't get anything done in the house because any bill the TParty crafts is dead on arrival at the senate.

Bonehead also knows he can get some republicans and democrats to back a senate plan. The senate will probably pass something then the house, and the right will holler and call for Boneheads head. No repub in the house wants Bonehead's job but Nancy, and if things continue down this path she may well get it in 2014.

So stop blaming the Repblicans and put the blame where it belongs... with Democrats in the Senate. You just showed the Republicans are doing something.. its the Dumbocrats that are the roadblock.

I imagine they could do things better than have this sequester go into effect. But Bonehead has admitted he can't get anything done in the house because any bill the TParty crafts is dead on arrival at the senate.

Bonehead also knows he can get some republicans and democrats to back a senate plan. The senate will probably pass something then the house, and the right will holler and call for Boneheads head. No repub in the house wants Bonehead's job but Nancy, and if things continue down this path she may well get it in 2014.

You don't know how the system works yet ? The House passes a bill... the Senate passes a bill... then a conference committee irons out the difference. The House has passed budgets.. it doesn't matter that the Senate won't pass the same version. They can pass their own... but they won't because they don't want to own it.

The new house has not submitted anything for a budget and you know as well as I do that they at least have to revive an old bill and resubmit it as a current proposal and VOTE again on it. Bonehead knows that too, yet has not done so. Why? Because it gets buried in the senate at worst, or changed in the senate at best before going back to he house.

To get around TParty obstruction, and destruction agenda, The senate has to start the law making process, and Bonehead knows that too. The house is divided and effectively rendered useless to initiate anything, or do its job effectively. On the majority republican side.

Hello again,

What we see, is what we get. Nothing is going to change. There'll be NO work done in the remaining Obama years. Our problems will be left over for the next president to fix IF she can, and IF the country survives..

excon

Tal, you know damn well the House has done their job over and over. Stop blaming them for the Senate refusing to do theirs. This is the 4th year Reid has refused to submit a budget AS REQUIRED BY LAW. That you would keep assigning blame to the body which has passed budgets while excusing Democrats who refuse to complete their lawful duties is enlightening.

Hello again,

What we see, is what we get. Nothing is gonna change. There'll be NO work done in the remaining Obama years. Our problems will be left over for the next president to fix IF she can, and IF the country survives..

excon

How is anyone going to get anything done when Obama is still on a permanent campaign?

The new house has not submitted anything for a budget and you know as well as I do that they at least have to revive an old bill and resubmit it as a current proposal and VOTE again on it. Bonehead knows that too, yet has not done so. Why? Because it gets buried in the senate at worst, or changed in the senate at best before going back to he house.

To get around TParty obstruction, and destruction agenda, The senate has to start the law making process, and Bonehead knows that too. The house is divided and effectively rendered useless to initiate anything, or do its job effectively. On the majority republican side.

No ;perhaps he's been dealing constantly with the President's manufactured crisis' of the week. Like I said . The Dems have passed a budget for the fiscal year (which you know does not begin in January ) . It's the Senate's turn.

I have never heard anything so childish

I have never heard anything so childish

And yet that is EXACTLY what Obama is doing... he doesn't want to accept responsibility for anything.

Was't long ago congress actuyally agree to give Obama everything he was demanding... just to shut him up... he rejected his own demands... because he would them own the situation lock stock and barrel.

Obama doesn't want to solve anything... he's on a rampage to make whitey pay for every perceived fault his cocain addled mind has halucinated.

That's a little strong smoothy you think he is on drugs, I have to admit I think your house and senate politicians might be but the WH they don't control the process

no ;perhaps he's been dealing constantly with the President's manufactured crisis' of the week. Like I said . The Dems have passed a budget for the fiscal year (which you know does not begin in January ) . It's the Senate's turn.

Should read the Repubics have passed a budget for the fiscal year (which you know does not begin in January )

You answering your own posts now Tom?

Naw he made a correction but this congress has passed nothing for the sequester, or CR due March 23rd. What part of any bill the last congress passed is null and void is it you don't understand?

Naw he made a correction but this congress has passed nothing for the sequester, or CR due March 23rd. What part of any bill the last congress passed is null and void is it you don't understand?

Geez dude, give it a rest.

P.S. WaPo let the cat out of the bag (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323494504578340562616234822.html?m od=rss_opinion_main)anyway, we already know Obama has already quit governing to focus on campaigning (already) for 2014 so it doesn't matter what the GOP does, your guy has no intention of doing anything.


"The goal is to flip the Republican-held House back to Democratic control, allowing Obama to push forward with a progressive agenda on gun control, immigration, climate change and the economy during his final two years in office, according to congressional Democrats, strategists and others familiar with Obama's thinking," reports the Post, which is hardly hostile to the President.

Ok, this is how unserious our president is. Due to the sequester he's canceling White House tours.


The White House announced Tuesday that it was canceling all public tours of the president’s home because of the sequester spending cuts.

“Due to staffing reductions resulting from sequestration, we regret to inform you that White House Tours will be canceled effective Saturday, March 9, 2013 until further notice. Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected tours,” the White House said in an email

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/mar/5/more-


And you thought Bush was a dufus? This guy is positively juvenile in his approach to governing. I'm with Jim Geraghty, furlough the WH chefs and let 'em eat baloney sandwiches instead.

Yet we don't see OweBama cutting back on white house travel... because he's the messiah... Sequester cuts are only for the lowly help...

Yeh if BO was serious he would cut his own salary for the duration of the sequester, then as a monkey he would be working for peanuts

Naw he made a correction but this congress has passed nothing for the sequester, or CR due March 23rd. What part of any bill the last congress passed is null and void is it you don't understand?

What you mean to say is that the House passed a budget for 2013 ,and the Senate DEMS were negligent in their duty. Now AGAIN the House will do their duty before the end of the month and Paul Ryan will unveil his plan for the 2014 budget . Senate Budget Chair Patty Murray will put out her proposal by the end of March too. But unlike the House ,the Senate proposal will sit on Harry Reid' shelf. The do-nothing Dem Senate will be content... or at least they would've in the past .
But now there is a new twist .You see ,this year it's no ticky no washy .Thanks to the No Budget, No Pay Act, the House and Senate are each obligated to pass their own budget resolution by April 15 or they don't get their pay. If EITHER house fails to pass a budget then their pay is withheld .
Of course there is no deadline on a reconciliation ,but at least the Senate Dems will be on record of having no plan except tax increases.

But before all this is the CR deadline March 27.I still say let the government shutdown ,or pass a CR that defunds Obamacare .

Yeh if BO was serious he would cut his own salary for the duration of the sequester, then as a monkey he would be working for peanuts

Bananas... elephants work for peanuts.

So what do donkeys work for

Since the child who would be king decided to cancel White House tours instead of USDA wine tastings, Eric Bolling of Fox News offered to pay for a week of tours out of his own pocket:


In a Facebook post on Thursday, anchor Eric Bolling announced that he will offer to personally pay the costs to keep the tours at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue open for a week.

During Thursday evening’s episode of “The Five,” Bolling elaborated. “I will absolutely write the check if they open the doors next week.”

“I’ll make you a deal Mr. President…Let these families take their White House tours next week and I’ll cover the added expenses. Word is it will cost around $74,000.”

Referencing White House press secretary Jay Carney, the Fox host added: “Mr Carney, you know this an offer you can’t refuse. Give me a call.”

Read more: Bolling offers to personally pay to keep White House tours open | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/07/fox-news-anchor-offers-to-personally-pay-to-keep-white-house-tours-open/#ixzz2MxXkr1Gm)


Hannity offered to pay for a week also. .

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, That would be EXACTLY what Obama should do.

Let me ask you this. Are you posting because you actually believe that Obama SHOULD take their offer, or are you interested in ramping up more FOX News hate?

Never mind.

excon

PS> By the way, Hannity also said that he'd let himself be waterboarded, and that was a lie. So, we KNOW where he stands on stuff.

PPS> (edited) Additionally, if you're trying to impress me quotes from Tucker Carlson's website, you're FAILING badly. He's a worse LIAR than Hannity.

You keep calling Carlson a liar but haven't backed it up yet. As for the other guys, I just think it's funny as hell watching Obama get gigged for his stupid, pathetic, juvenile sequester games... no matter who does it. You know he's losing this PR battle don't you?

so what do donkeys work for

Dry aged Delmonico steaks. We have our standards.

Dry aged Delmonico steaks. We have our standards.

So you are a democrat at heart

so you are a democrat at heartNo.. I outgrew that in my mid 20's. After I learned the world is not the way the newpapers and TV tries to portray it. Been a conservative ever since.


I'm still waiting to win the lottery so I can go to a real good steak house and get one of those dry aged Delmonico steaks... its not cheap.. in fact they are damned expensive.

Until then I have to be happy with what I buy in the store and grill myself.

No..I outgrew that in my mid 20's. After I learned the world is not the way the newpapers and TV trys to portray it. Been a conservative ever since.


I'm still waiting to win the lottery so I can go to a real good steak house and get one of those dry aged Delmonico steaks.....its not cheap..in fact they are damned expensive.

until then I have to be happy with what I buy in the store and grill myself.

You only live once

This piece begs the question, should the President be sequestered?

First Couple's Sequester Sacrifice: Date Nights - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/03/10/first-couples-sequester-sacrifice-date-nights/)

He should've considered the image and the expense of him going to Manhattan on a date night ;or the 1st couple travelling separately to Hawaii vacations ,or the many flights he has taken for no other purpose than to have a backdrop for a policy (campaign )speech .But he is a celebrity living large on other people's money .
When Bush needed time out he would take the short trip to Camp David where there wasn't the need for the same level of Secret Service protection. When he vacationed ;he went to his own home cleared brush and rode bicycles. And that was a time when the economy was doing well.
Yes they should publish the cost of every junket the President takes until a budget deal is reached .

So much for the WHite House have a descretionary cut to have to deal with...

Adele And Beyonce To Sing At Michelle Obama's Birthday Party|Fox Kansas | KSAS-TV | Wichita News, Weather & Sports | FOX Programming (http://www.foxkansas.com/mostpopular/story/Adele-And-Beyonce-To-Sing-At-Michelle-Obamas/qwsvejOjGkm9SElmtVNieA.cspx)

There is money to throw Mrs. Wide-load a party.. but not to have White house tours... but they do to have a big party and all the security that goes with it.

Goes to show the hypocrisy in this administration. Heaven forbid the Mr. and Mrs. God cut back a bit on anything at all.

Yes they could eat hamburger and not feel it at all

http://www.politifake.org/image/political/small/1008/michelle-antoinette-well-let-them-watch-me-political-poster-1281870551.jpg#michelle%20antoinette%20265x343

Yes a pretty picture,

You only live onceOne day when or more like IF I feel more financially secure than I have for the last few years... on my birthday maybe I will.

One thing that can be said for never having experienced a really, REALLY great steak... is that you won't be missing it when you have to settle for far less.

Pizza is like that for me... having lived in Italy long enough to have had some REALLY great pizza fairly frequently... nothing I've had on this side of the big pond has really met that standard.

yes they could eat hamburger and not feel it at all

Actually rumor has it that Barry likes a good hamburger from time to time... its that self proclaimed queen he married that has a problem with that...

You know how it is elevation to the peerage goes to the head

you know how it is elevation to the peerage goes to the head

No I don't... perhaps you could enlighten us? One thing I am not is elitist.

No I don't...perhaps you could enlighten us? One thing I am not is elitist.

I wasn't referring to you but to Michelle

Actually, Obama loves chili dogs (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394099/Obama-eats-2-chili-dogs-fries-day-wife-Michelle-unveils-new-dietary-guide.html)and Michelle has a weakness for french fries. I think that should be their new WH menu and they can forgo the Bison Wellington.

Actually, Obama loves chili dogs (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394099/Obama-eats-2-chili-dogs-fries-day-wife-Michelle-unveils-new-dietary-guide.html)and Michelle has a weakness for french fries. I think that should be their new WH menu and they can forgo the Bison Wellington.
Now if the two of them and their daughters were piggy-fat and slobby looking with grease spots on the fronts of their clothes, I'd say you have an argument. Isn't there something you absolutely love to eat, but think better of it because it isn't good for you, but still have it once in a while? My downfall is caramel brownies with melty chocolate chips and gooey caramel and pecan halves inside. I bake them only twice a year.

My point has nothing to do with cravings. The guy is punishing children which is bad enough, but he refuses to make any personal sacrifices in the process.

My point has nothing to do with cravings. The guy is punishing children which is bad enough, but he refuses to make any personal sacrifices in the process.
I'm sure he eats lots of broccoli and cauliflower (i.e. "personal sacrifice"). If he was photographed eating that, you'd complain that he is a goody two-shoes and is lying about what he really eats and is doing it as a photo op. If inner-city kids satisfied cravings once in a while, but that is not what happens. Fast food is the cheap food and is close to home and easy to get to, so that's what they live on.

I refer to him closing canceling WH tours while living it up on the taxpayer dollar.

Hello again, Steve:


I refer to him closing canceling WH tours while living it up on the taxpayer dollar.
In other words, he has to make the cuts YOU approve of... But, if that's so, why didn't you put those into the law?

If the right wing snookered Obama INTO the sequester, Obama snookered the right wing by making the cuts HE wants to make.

It's ALL political theater. I think Obama is winning.

Excon

It is political theater but Obama is losing in this act (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/03/10/185388/poll-sequester-has-not-hit-home.html).

Oh, and I'm sure no one thought the President of the United States would be so juvenile as to close the WH for his centerpiece cut - especially after using kids as props for his scarequester campaign.

It's for the children remember?

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ht_white_house_sequester_tk_130306_wblog.jpg

Nice try dude, but it's the members of congress who ask for the tours formally and they have said we are broke so who pays for the extra security for those tours?

Why are you so hyped up about children not going on a tour but say nothing about the children, poor women, and seniors because of the sequester.

How Would the Sequester Affect Women and Families - iVillage (http://www.ivillage.com/how-would-sequester-affect-women-and-families/8-a-523889)

http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/finance/2013/sequestration-senior-citizens-budget-cuts-affect-elderly/

Thanks for the perfect example of right wing hypocrisy. Congress has had more than a year almost to avoid this sequester, and have done NOTHING! That's where the blame lies.

The scarequester card was already played and you lost.

Your assertion of my defeat is premature. The battle wages on despite your claims of victory.

Name the person who has lost WIC

Hello again, Steve:


It's for the children remember?

You'd think Republicans would want to pay for veteran benefits before tours. Oh wait, the hypocrite right wingers have voted down almost every benefit for vets in the last 15 years.

Your assertion of my defeat is premature. The battle wages on despite your claims of victory.

I refer to the link I posted above, the American people weren't moved by his doom and gloom. Except for Democrats, they fell for it as expected.

Speaking of the scarequester that flopped, and especially to those of you who think Republicans were throwing children under the bus, a Maryland congressman skillfully exposed the administration's lies about vaccinations.

The CDC issued a document that said because of the sequester “2,050 fewer children will get vaccines for diseases like measles and whooping cough” in Maryland. Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland quizzed the CDC director (http://washingtonexaminer.com/the-gop-congressman-who-destroyed-obamas-sequester-scare-story/article/2524071) on this:


HARRIS: Dr. Frieden, I have a great deal of concern about a document that my office got from the White House that talked about the cuts that were going to occur due to Republicans and affecting children. And I’m going to read their quote about vaccines for children. It says, in Maryland, about 2,050 fewer children will receive vaccines due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $140,000. Did the CDC assist the White House in preparing that estimate?

FRIEDEN: I would have to get back to you on that.

HARRIS: You as the director don’t know if you assisted the White House in preparing an estimate that was distributed to every member of Congress?

FRIEDEN: On that specific number, I would have to — to give you…

HARRIS: OK, let’s — let’s forget the number. Let’s forget the idea of how vaccines for children are going to be affected by the sequester. Is this the vaccine for children program?

FRIEDEN: No, it is not, sir.

HARRIS: Which program is it? Is it 317?

FRIEDEN: Yes, it is, sir.

HARRIS: And what did the president’s budget do to 317, the president’s prospective budget for 2013?

FRIEDEN: The precise numbers I would have to get back to you.

HARRIS: Does $58 million cut sound familiar?

FRIEDEN: Yes.

HARRIS: And what was the sequester cut?

FRIEDEN: Again, the precise numbers…

HARRIS: Does $30 million sound familiar?

FRIEDEN: I would…

HARRIS: You think that’s around ballpark, isn’t it? So actually, the president cut the program twice as much in his budget. Can I assume that the president’s proposed cut would have reduced funding to 4,100 children in Maryland?

FRIEDEN: As per the justification that was published with that, we’ve looked at ways that we can run the program more efficiently by helping state and local health departments recoup dollars, for example, for insured patients.

HARRIS: And you can’t do that under a sequester, but you can do it under the president’s budget? Is that my understanding of your testimony today?

FRIEDEN: I would have to get back to you on that.

HARRIS: So let me get it — let me get it straight. Under the president’s cut of $58 million to the 317 program, you think you could get around that to avoid cutting vaccines to children, but under a sequester, that the president blames on Republicans, you don’t know if you can do that?

FRIEDEN: We’re going to do everything we can to limit any damage that occurs because of the across-the-board cut, but it reduces our flexibility significantly.

HARRIS: Is it your testimony that under the president’s proposed cut of $58 million in his budget to the 317 program you could have avoided cuts to vaccines to children in Maryland?

FRIEDEN: We believe that we could have maintained vaccination levels, yes.

HARRIS: Very interesting. I yield back the balance of my time for now.


So with Democrat logic, the prez could cut $58 million and all the children will get vaccinated, but under the sequester, it's the GOP's fault that children won't get vaccinated over a cut half that size (which turned out to actually be $18 million, not $30 million).

Harris said, “When they want to do with less, they can find a way. But when they don’t want to find a way to do with less, they claim they can’t do things in a budget-restricted environment.”

Exactly.

Sounds like the program is overblown anyway, look you have been saying there has been waste so the sequester should deal with that and make for more innovative solutions, so it might be a good thing. The Republicans wanted cuts, they got cuts so stop complaining

So how is that any worse than hollering broke and keeping corporate welfare, and wanting to lower rich guys taxes? Its okay when you guys holler gloom and doom, which you have done for 4(5) straight years, but if we do it, NOW it's a big deal??

So how is that any worse than hollering broke and keeping corporate welfare, and wanting to lower rich guys taxes? Its okay when you guys holler gloom and doom, which you have done for 4(5) straight years, but if we do it, NOW its a big deal?????

So far all these years of an Obama economy haven't led too much, and it's showing in the polls now.

There's a huge difference between messaging that says we can do better and the Dems constant message of "you're screwed." I mean really, Tal, you say the same thing every day about corporate welfare and making the rich richer, and/or Republicans don't care about women, children and old people - or in other words, "you're screwed."

Regardless, you've validated my earlier point that you guys will excuse any deception as long as it moves your agenda along. Shame on you.

My agenda is simple since you asked, a strong effective government that's for the people by the people, as the biggest priority, against the would be rich guys robbing us through laws that they write and collude to pervert our government in their own interests, which is extracting unhindered, MO" MONEY.

Shame on you for being against that. Can't believe you think its okay to be invaded and robbed by the elites, who keep you poor and beholding to their charity.

Just like for example building a pipeline for private companies that sell the product to the world. I would build it in a minute if THEY took responsibility for the maintanance and upkeep, AND liability for any accidents, which they do NOT.

The business model is broken and corrupt, yet you say give 'em more money. Shame on you for ignoring the facts.

... and yet the oil companies are the bad guys when the government makes seventy five times the profit on every gallon that the people that spend money to find, extract and refine it do after expences?

But the Government who leaches off the productive members of society isn't the bad guy?

Hello smoothy:


But the Government who leaches off the productive members of society isn't the bad guy?Personally, I LIKE roads. You, not so much..

Excon

Nice spin, but those poor companies the government leaches off have plenty of profits and even more they hide and don't pay taxes on. Who pays for the pipeline? Who makes the profits?

The only thing better than MO' MONEY is MO' FREE MONEY from the taxpayers. I am sure your company loves you for spewing the company line, and holding the door open while they take the money and RUN!!

At least you are honest and upfront about it, and I can respect that!

Nice spin, but those poor companies the government leaches off of have plenty of profits and even more they hide and don't pay taxes on. Who pays for the pipeline? Who makes the profits?

The only thing better than MO' MONEY is MO' FREE MONEY from the taxpayers. I am sure your company loves you for spewing the company line, and holding the door open while they take the money and RUN!!!!!!!!!!!

At least you are honest and upfront about it, and I can respect that!

Who is "gouging" Whom at the Pumps? (http://www.jb-williams.com/4-25-06.htm)

About a peny a gallon profit on a product that goes for over $4.00 is wretched?

And ex... do you believe those excise taxes only go to the roads... like our SSI taxes only go to SSI? You know that MYTHICAL LOCKBOX, that never existed?

My agenda is simple since you asked, a strong effective government thats for the people by the people, as the biggest priority, against the would be rich guys robbing us thru laws that they write and collude to pervert our government in their own interests, which is extracting unhindered, MO" MONEY.

Shame on you for being against that. Can't believe you think its okay to be invaded and robbed by the elites, who keep you poor and beholding to their charity.

Just like for example building a pipeline for private companies that sell the product to the world. I would build it in a minute if THEY took responsibility for the maintanance and upkeep, AND liability for any accidents, which they do NOT.

The business model is broken and corrupt, yet you say give 'em more money. Shame on you for ignoring the facts.

So in other words, you're OK defrauding the American people.

Just like for example building a pipeline for private companies that sell the product to the world. I would build it in a minute if THEY took responsibility for the maintanance and upkeep, AND liability for any accidents, which they do NOT.

And here I thought you liked building infrastructure.

What part of financial responsibility, and liability are you having a problem with, Tom? Are companies like BP not accountable for the lives, and livelihoods they adversely affected? Was Exxon?

Obama killed more people by accident Jince January than BP has in total the last 29 years.

What part of financial responsibility, and liability are you having a problem with, Tom? Are companies like BP not accountable for the lives, and livelihoods they adversely affected? Was Exxon?

So let me get this straight. You would prefer that the oil from North Dakota get inefficiently trucked to refineries or travel on a Warren Buffett owned freight line rather than piping it down ? Yeah that's Dems logic.. Did you think that perhaps you charge the companies that are using the pipeline for the service ? That the pipeline is a source of tax revenues ? That tens of thousand of Americans get hired because the pipe line is there ? Maybe that by piping it down there is less of a carbon footprint if that's your concern.
Of course not . Your only concern is to stick it to the rich guy.

so let me get this straight. You would prefer that the oil from North Dakota get inefficiently trucked to refineries or travel on a Warren Buffett owned freight line rather than piping it down ? Yeah that's Dems logic .. Did you think that perhaps you charge the companies that are using the pipeline for the service ? That the pipeline is a source of tax revenues ? That tens of thousand of Americans get hired because the pipe line is there ? Maybe that by piping it down there is less of a carbon footprint if that's your concern.
Of course not . Your only concern is to stick it to the rich guy.

Unless it's their rich guy... Like Buffet or Soros... then they are right behind making THEM richer.

Lots of sour grapes here guys, for the record no problem with building a pipeline but that really isn't the issue is it? The issue is that the oil comes from a place where it is environmentally unfriendly to extract it and there are other sources of oil, so we will just dispense with your strawman arguments that this is about business or employment at any price

Hello again, tom:


so let me get this straight. You would prefer that the oil from North Dakota get inefficiently trucked to refineriesI don't know about tal, but I'd prefer they build the pipeline to the ports at BC. They're only going to ship the oil out.

Uhhhh.. That's not our oil. We didn't buy it and it's not going to be used for US. I know you thought otherwise, and THAT'S why you shouldn't watch FOX News.

Excon

I guess that's on the new updated version of the DNC talking points after der Fuhers OH-pocalypse predictions where ALL shot down.

So in other words, you're OK defrauding the American people.

Looks whose putting words in other peoples mouths!


so let me get this straight. You would prefer that the oil from North Dakota get inefficiently trucked to refineries or travel on a Warren Buffett owned freight line rather than piping it down ? Yeah that's Dems logic.. Did you think that perhaps you charge the companies that are using the pipeline for the service ? That the pipeline is a source of tax revenues ? That tens of thousand of Americans get hired because the pipe line is there ? Maybe that by piping it down there is less of a carbon footprint if that's your concern.
Of course not . Your only concern is to stick it to the rich guy.

Lets not forget the private lands that must be bought at a fair price, and the history of oil companies responding to accidents, DEQ - 2010 Oil Spill/ Kalamazoo River (http://michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3313_56784---,00.html), do I have to post links for Exxon and BP? To name one of many, and to be fair sticking it to rich guys is the last thing on my mind.


Originally Posted by talaniman

Just like for example building a pipeline for private companies that sell the product to the world. I would build it in a minute if THEY took responsibility for the maintanance and upkeep, AND liability for any accidents, which they do NOT.

Guess you missed something in your zeal to spew right wing talking points. Gues you are excited that CPAC is trotting out its line up of losers and also ran to throw red meat to the starving disolutioned WingNuts.

Looks whose putting words in other peoples mouths!.

I gave you a chance to condemn the lies, so am I wrong?

Hello again, Steve:


I gave you a chance to condemn the lies, so am I wrong?If you believe, as you do, that it's OUR SIDE who's the liar, and YOUR SIDE isn't, then you're wrong.

What else is new?

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

If you believe, as you do, that it's OUR SIDE who's the liar, and YOUR SIDE isn't, then you're wrong.

What else is new?

excon

I documented it yesterday (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3418065-post182.html). Your turn.

Hello again, Steve:

Uhhh, Romney lying about Obama getting rid of the WORK requirement in welfare...

Look. You're NOT going to win here, and it's futile to try.

excon

Speaking of the scarequester that flopped, and especially to those of you who think Republicans were throwing children under the bus, a Maryland congressman skillfully exposed the administration's lies about vaccinations.

The CDC issued a document that said because of the sequester “2,050 fewer children will get vaccines for diseases like measles and whooping cough” in Maryland. Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland quizzed the CDC director (http://washingtonexaminer.com/the-gop-congressman-who-destroyed-obamas-sequester-scare-story/article/2524071) on this:



So with Democrat logic, the prez could cut $58 million and all the children will get vaccinated, but under the sequester, it's the GOP's fault that children won't get vaccinated over a cut half that size (which turned out to actually be $18 million, not $30 million).

Harris said, “When they want to do with less, they can find a way. But when they don't want to find a way to do with less, they claim they can't do things in a budget-restricted environment.”

Exactly.

I did my own fact finding and came up with of course more facts, as why the 58 million was NOT cut in the first place, and why a 30 million dollar cut would not be recommended.

US disease agency in fiscal peril : Nature News & Comment (http://www.nature.com/news/us-disease-agency-in-fiscal-peril-1.10109#/core)


Cuts to the CDC have already contributed to the loss of nearly 50,000 jobs in state and local health departments since 2008. This year, the administration argues that “efficiencies” will make possible the specific cuts it has proposed in areas such as adult-immunization funding and epidemiological support. But CDC advocates and public-health officials are sceptical. A proposed $47-million cut to the Strategic National Stockpile “is a lot more than just efficiency. It's going to cut capability as well,” says Crystal Franco, an associate with the Center for Biosecurity of UPMC in Baltimore, Maryland. “We are reaching the tipping point where preparedness efforts are going to be reversed because of the lack of funding,” she adds... In the current atmosphere of fiscal constraint, the PPHF has become a target for raiding, and already, as part of a payroll-tax-cut extension that was signed into law by Obama on 22 February, Congress has cut the fund by 20%, or $250 million, in 2013, and by a total of $6.25 billion to 2025.

The morale of the story, don't let a butcher do brain surgery. Come on Speech, we all know that since you cannot repeal Obama Care, defunding it is the next best thing.

You guys can just go on enjoying and excusing this administration's lies, but I didn't drink the koolaid and neither did America.

B b b b b b b b but he's the Messiah? He's perfect.

Like I said, his scarequester continues to backfire. First the WH cancels the tours and announces it, then Obama blamed the Secret Service, then Carney said the WH canceled the tours, then blamed Republicans... and I'm sure the story is still evolving but in the long run, anyone but Obama will be to blame...

White House tour move backfires on Obama (http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/288055-tour-move-backfires-on-obama)

... and the scarequester will continue.

... not only does it continue but Dingy/Dirty/Filthy Harry Reid shamelessly blamed an explosion that killed 7 Marines on the sequester.


Mr. President, it's very important we continue training our military, so important. But one of the things in sequester is we cut back in training and maintenance. That's the way sequester was written. Now, the bill that's on the floor, we hope to pass today helps that a little bit. At least in the next six months, it allows the military some degree of ability to move things around a little bit. Flexibility, we call it, and that's good. But we have to be very vigilant. This sequester should go away. We have cut already huge amounts of money in deficit reduction. It's just not appropriate, Mr. President, that our military can't train and do the maintenance necessary.

The USMC is none too happy (http://realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/19/marine_corps_rips_reid_pure_political_posturing_on _the_backs_of_those_dead_marines.html) about Reid's nonsense:


NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reports: Now I can tell you, Marine Corps officials this afternoon are taking a strong exception to what Harry Reid implied. Saying that this this exercise, for example, was planned well in advance, had nothing to do with the budget cuts. There were no corners cut, and if they couldn't afford to have all the safety precautions into place, they wouldn't do the exercise.

And in fact, one Marine Corps official told us a short time ago that he considers this nothing but pure political posturing on the backs of these dead Marines.

How low can they go?

I hear the Easter Egg Roll on the White House Lawn is a gonner .

Has the sequester introduced a sense of reality

Here's reality . The sequester is the law of the land until all elected branches get together and come up with a budget that sets spending priorities . That's what mature people would do... instead of playing this game of punishing the people in trivial ways.

here's reality . The sequester is the law of the land until all elected branches get together and come up with a budget that sets spending priorities . That's what mature people would do ...instead of playing this game of punishing the people in trivial ways.

I thought budget bills had to originate in the house, but who would introduce a bill that has no hope of passing. The way I see this Tom is that is that the Republicans thought BO had fallen into their trap when the sequester was passed, but the fact is BO is smarter than the average republican and he let these cuts fall where the republicans would like them least thereby making them unpopular. There is nothing trivial about this, but cuts agreed to that do not seriously affect welfare programs, not only that be he got them to agree to tax hikes on the rich. I would say he has them over a barrel and he likes to hear them squeal

I thought budget bills had to originate in the house, but who would introduce a bill that has no hope of passing. The way I see this Tom is that is that the Republicans thought BO had fallen into their trap when the sequester was passed, but the fact is BO is smarter than the average republican and he let these cuts fall where the republicans would like them least thereby making them unpopular. There is nothing trivial about this, but cuts agreed to that do not seriously affect welfare programs, not only that be he got them to agree to tax hikes on the rich. I would say he has them over a barrel and he likes to hear them squeal

Bull... Obama The average dog has more intelligence than Obama... all his blabbering and bloviating has come back to haunt him and his ratings are tanking even among the more gullible than average democrats.

And for all of his claims... the sky hasn't fallen... teahcers haven't lost their jobs... (no surprise because teachers are not paid from the federal government).

Heck the sun even came up again... which is more to say than Obama's putter.

I thought budget bills had to originate in the house, but who would introduce a bill that has no hope of passing. The way I see this Tom is that is that the Republicans thought BO had fallen into their trap when the sequester was passed, but the fact is BO is smarter than the average republican and he let these cuts fall where the republicans would like them least thereby making them unpopular. There is nothing trivial about this, but cuts agreed to that do not seriously affect welfare programs, not only that be he got them to agree to tax hikes on the rich. I would say he has them over a barrel and he likes to hear them squeal

The Constitution mandates the President submit a budget for consideration. His is late ,and when he has submitted them ,they've been voted down by huge bipartisan majorities. Meanwhile the House has PASSED one every year .The Senate has not ,so it's been impossible to have a conference committee to iron out the differences. This year at least the Senate let one out of the budget committee.
Like I said;if the White House and Senate don't grow up then sequester is the law of the land. Look the President got his tax on the rich. The spending levels of the sequester are NOT going to go away .So it's incumbent on our elected leaders to prioritize the spending ,and stop silly games like Reid(that POS) played today.

Well maybe the President likes the budget he has and all he seeks is a continuence, which the Republicans seem willing to pass. Way I see it he got what he wanted and screwed the Republicans, now that is good politicin

Well maybe the President likes the budget he has and all he seeks is a continuence, which the Republicans seem willing to pass. way i see it he got what he wanted and screwed the Republicans, now that is good politicin

After his scarequester the people are seeing through him and hid ratings gave taken a tumble. One can only play the chicken little game so long.

Hello again, Steve:

Right wingers are the only people who think you can SLASH budgets and get the same level of service.. It's actually nuts when you think about it.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Right wingers are the only people who think you can SLASH budgets and get the same level of service.. It's actually nuts when you think about it.

excon

Only left wingers think you can perform miracles by throwing trillions of dollars at it.

The Welfare program has proven the more money you hand someone to sit on their azz... the less work they are willing to do.

What, a perfect correlation and statistics also prove that the more incentive you give to industry the bigger their bank balance

what, a perfect correlation and statistics also prove that the more incentive you give to industry the bigger their bank balance

Like your country doesn't do the very same thing... or every country would have the robust economy of the average African nation.

Like your country doesn't do the very same thing...or every country would have the robust economy of the average African nation.

Smoothy, my country doesn't do pork barrelling, and legislation stands alone, sometimes incentives are offered in the taxation system, but they are more like early writeoffs in industries where there is high risk and sometimes subsidies are offered to keep industries onshore but we don't give incentives to take industry offshore. Our political system is more transparent than yours because our leaders have to face questioning in the house everyday, they don't like it but it happens and we have a system where a budget is presented and passed every year or the whole thing will shut down. A government that cannot get a budget passed will go to an election

Smoothy, my country doesn't do pork barrelling, and legislation stands alone, sometimes incentives are offered in the taxation system, but they are more like early writeoffs in industries where there is high risk and sometimes subsidies are offered to keep industries onshore but we don't give incentives to take industry offshore. Our political system is more transparent than yours because our leaders have to face questioning in the house everyday, they don't like it but it happens and we have a system where a budget is presented and passed every year or the whole thing will shut down. A government that cannot get a budget passed will go to an election

Yeah... and there is no poverty in Australia... everything is perfect and nobody has ever done anyone else wrong... ever... yada, yada yada...

You are the perfect sheeple... they have you well trained to believe everything they tell you to believe.

Yeah....and there is no poverty in Austrailia...everything is perfect and nobody has ever done anyone else wrong...ever.....yada, yada yada....

You are the perfect sheeple....they have you well trained to believe everything they tell you to believe.

Well let's put it this way there is less poverty in Australia than there is in the US and we do intervene to address specific issues. If we have an inadequacy it is in the way we deal with boat people (illegal immigrants). The CIA factbook gives the US a 15% poverty rating but doesn't bother to provide the Australian statistic, after tax transfer measures suggest we are at least 3 - 4 % lower than USA, but real poverty, difficult to measure as it isn't obvious except in remote areas

Australians are very skeptical this is why the Labor (socialist) government will be out of office at the next election, we cannot be easily bought

Hello again, Steve:

Right wingers are the only people who think you can SLASH budgets and get the same level of service.. It's actually nuts when you think about it.

excon

Slash ? Lol this isn't even a holding the line... this is a slight reduction in the rate of increase in spending .

I wonder what we wold see if we took an Australian style razor gang to your budget

I'm for deep slashing... like bringing spending back to 2008 levels initially ,and further to Clintoon era spending... The Dems should agree to that since they think the Clintoon era was the 'good ole days' .

Hello again, Steve:

Right wingers are the only people who think you can SLASH budgets and get the same level of service.. It's actually nuts when you think about it.

excon

Most of my services are local. Yours too I'm sure.

Hello again, Steve:

Like a good right winger you look to what benefits YOU. Like a good left winger, I look to what benefits the COUNTRY.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Like a good right winger you look to what benefits YOU. Like a good left winger, I look to what benefits the COUNTRY.

excon

Bwaaaaahahahhahaaa haha ha


I got a good laugh out of that...

When was the last time a Democrat ever did anything that was good for the country?

Wasn't that under John F Kennedy? And wasn't that the Space program?

Hello again, Steve:

Like a good right winger you look to what benefits YOU. Like a good left winger, I look to what benefits the COUNTRY.

excon

Like a good conservative I look at the facts, not the BS. I don't think it's good for the country to spend $57.72 per person for lunch or $44 per person for breakfast for GSA employees. Or this:

http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/images/gsa-official-in-vgas-hot-tub.jpg

I don't see the point of half a million to study shrimp on a treadmill (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oklahoma-sen-tom-coburn-report-shows-taxpayer-money/story?id=13689403), 20 holiday parties at the White House or a Senate barber shop that loses money. Do you?

Hello again, Steve:

If the congress wanted to END those programs, they COULD have put it in the Sequester.. They DIDN'T. Apparently, they thought Obama would make the cuts HE deemed necessary, and he IS.

So, if you have a problem with spending, I'd go to the source.

excon

So then... Obama is making the choices of what gets cut so its all Obamas fault for deciding to inflict maximum pain... not Congresses.

This is on your lefty demigod... not the conservatives.

Apparently, they thought Obama would make the cuts HE deemed necessary, and he IS.

Thank God Obama saved us from White House tours.

Thank God Obama saved us from White House tours.

And Easter Egg hunts .

and Easter Egg hunts .

Well he saved the money do he can spend it on a few more Hawaii golf outings.

The man has class

You mean gas. Or is it grass?

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/526924_10151520560683588_1987347802_n.jpg

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/526924_10151520560683588_1987347802_n.jpg

You just can't make that stuff up. Or this (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/black-market-cigarette-trade-on-the-increase-29135117.html), courtesy of Ireland...


CIGARETTE-smuggling continues to soar in Ireland, with new Department of Finance figures showing that tobacco excise tax receipts are falling dramatically short of targets, even though taxes have increased and the number of people smoking has remained constant at 29 per cent of the population.

Let that highlighted part soak in for a few minutes, lefties...

the man has class

Class? More like lack of class... the man probably eats with his fingers and doesn't know why anyone would have more than one spoon, one fork, and one knife on the table.

They seem to have a problem with collecting tax in various parts of Europe and it goes hand in glove with financial failure

They just are telling the governments a very popular Italian gesture...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EQmXP-C_CMo/UTU0wEFw0LI/AAAAAAAAIII/U9nhjEJ5B3A/s1600/beppe-grillo.-satira.jpg

Spelled out...

http://www.i-italy.org/files/image/vaffanculo%20jpeg%281%29.jpg

In America we have the much more subtle one finger salute.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--ndOIM157Zo/UTU01F7-l0I/AAAAAAAAIIQ/WZy7jB29SdQ/s400/vaffanculo.jpg

We learn it shortly after birth.

they seem to have a problem with collecting tax in various parts of Europe and it goes hand in glove with financial failure

Apparently you didn't let that line soak in long enough.

Apparently you didn't let that line soak in long enough.

I'm not going to debate with smoothy regarding the characteristics of a person he considers an inferior

I'm not going to debate with smoothy regarding the characteristics of a person he considers an inferior
You mean like you Australians have considered the aborigines..

You mean like you Australians have considered the aborigines...?

There is a vast difference between an educated person who has attained high office and a person who wants to live in the stone age. They are not inferior, they are misguided, they think being smashed out of their brain is a solution to their problems, maybe it is, they die earlier despite our efforts to prevent it

I doubt you have any idea of how to deal with a people who want to talk endlessly around a point, on the other hand, maybe you do

there is a vast difference between an educated person who has attained high office and a person who wants to live in the stone age. They are not inferior, they are misguided, they think being smashed out of their brain is a solution to their problems, maybe it is, they die earlier dispite our efforts to prevent it

I doubt you have any idea of how to deal with a people who want to talk endlessly around a point, on the other hand, maybe you do


I am familiar enough with what they were forced to do "in their best interests" including taking kids from their families.

Muslims want to like in the 7th century... how are they any different? You don't do it to them.

Give us time we did it to everyone not just aboriginees

give us time we did it to everyone not just aboriginees

Personally given the option of living as an Aborigine... or under Muslim oppression stuck forever in the 7th century..

I'd pick living as an Aborigine