Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to FortySixAnd2's comment:

    In response to macnh1's comment:

     

    Give obama everything he wants...force him to do the unthinkable...force him to take responsibility for the first time in his presidency....put him in a position where he has to do his job....

     



    Totally agree. That way he won't be able to keep blaming Bush for all his issues.

     




    I tend to view this whole sequestration thing as Obama ( the parent) making a threat to Congress ( the children) to clean their room ( do their job)..or else ( sequestration).

    The problem with Obama..as with any parent who lays down the possiblity of consequences...you should never threaten a "punishment" which you will be unwilling to follow through on.

    I don't blame Obama for making the threat...I am sure he never thought it would come to this. I guess he completely underestimated the lengths that Congress would go through to do...well...nothing.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    Instead of using a scalpel, the cuts will be done with a rusty hacksaw and cauterized with a zippo lighter.

     

    How ironic that people who supposedly want (demand!) the govt to create jobs are endorsing a slash-and-burn policy that will only put more people - public AND private sector - out of work....

     

     

     

     



    If handled that way then a pox on all of their houses and chambers.

     

    Reid and Bboehner are supposedly discussing a quick bill to allow administrative flexibility on the implementation of cuts.

     



    I think it'd is hard for people to understand, particularly the government worshipping liberals, but the solution if for government to stop trying to fix the problem. 

     

    As John Galt said to the government offacials, "you want to help. outnumber get out of my way." Or something like that.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    Instead of using a scalpel, the cuts will be done with a rusty hacksaw and cauterized with a zippo lighter.

     

    How ironic that people who supposedly want (demand!) the govt to create jobs are endorsing a slash-and-burn policy that will only put more people - public AND private sector - out of work....

     

     

     

     



    If handled that way then a pox on all of their houses and chambers.

     

    Reid and Bboehner are supposedly discussing a quick bill to allow administrative flexibility on the implementation of cuts.

     



    There are right ways to do things and wrong ways, and this is the wrong way.

     

    That said, I do think the sequester cuts should take effect...just for people to see what the results will be.

    Some won't notice; others will.  They should remember what they see.

    As they say, you don't know what you've got until it's gone.

     

    Just once, I'd like to see the state not pay to plow after a snow storm...just to remind people what it looks like when cuts to basic public services occur.

     

     



    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.



    Yup, everything is Obama's fault in your world, even though all of this was agreed to and signed off on by Congress/Boehner, too.

    You'd blame him for your undescended teste given half the chance.

    Recall too, I clearly said the cuts should take effect.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    It's amazing with all of the scare tactics about who's gonna lose their jobs if Obama doesn't get tax increases. Who's supposed to lose jobs? Police, firefighters, teachers, airport workers, etc. Not once was politician mentioned.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    Actually..what's kind of funny about reading many of the previous comments is the fear from the self proclaimed right that these drastic cuts might actually take place. What did skeeter call it..? A Saw..a rusty scalpel?

    One would think those on the right would be simply thrilled at the thought of the sequestration cuts taking place. After all..they are drastic..and everyone is going to feel the pain. Aren't spending cuts what they've been preaching form months now? Why the fear..now that it looks like they are going to happen?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from doozy-day. Show doozy-day's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    In response to doozy-day's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    In response to doozy-day's comment:

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:


     

     

    So you, as an expert, are saying that we are stuck at 8% unemployment?

    I guess if you listen long enough you'll accept it too!

    I've got a lot of data with quite a bit of options and opportunities for expanded job growth, even some recent cadidates made suggestions for job growth.

    Seems as though they lost the election to a group that likes to give away free-stuff in exchange for votes.

    But hey, you're a smart guy, I must be wrong...... 

     




     

    The theory that President Obama won because of a tsunami of takers is false and shows a complete lack of demographic understanding on your part.

    I guess its easier to blame the people who are not working than face the real issues facing this nation. It's easier to say people are lazy, unskilled, and want 'free stuff' than to take a long hard look at the economic policies that have decimated the middle class and thrown millions onto the unemployment lines and into poverty. Wingnuts don't do complexity, they want things simple and in sound bites. It's easier.

     




    It is simple really...people blame the poor because they can. It's much easier to pick on someone who can't fight back...so the more ignorant among us like to place the blame on the poor..single parent..or the mentally ill..rather than take on big corporate welfare.

     

     




    Wow, I never thought you would resort to name calling, I am not ignorant, I am a realist.

     

    You need to come out of your little hole and travel a bit, not to a resort or a cruise, but into the cities across America.

    So many of you spend all day on these boards, getting most of your information from news sources, blogs, left/right-leaning television programs etc.

    I travel for a living, and visit the highs and lows of America, trust me I've seen a lot more than most of the clowns on these boards.

    The "free-stuff"  generation is rampant in America, and to someone like you, it's easier to blame corporate America.  That way no one will accuse you of being "mean".

     

     




    Did I say you were ignorant..? It's kind of interesting that you took my comment to be directed toward you...a poster who I don't even recall ever interacting with. Kind of interesting..in a subconcious sort of way.

     

    I am not afraid of anyone referring to me as being mean. I am sure that in my life..I have uncovered and reported more entitlement fraud ( and waste) than you..or anyone else on this board for that matter. I suppose the people commit the fraud and are ultimately bagged by me probably consider me mean...but trust me that I don't lose sleep over it.

    I comment on both. I do not limit my comments to just corporations. I think some entitlements need to be reformed. The difference between you and I is that I don't waste a lot of time picking on the little guy..and I am not afraid to pick on the "big guy"..especially when the "big guy" costs me more tax money than the little guy. Get my drift?



    Back-pedal much, in your passive-aggressive way, you place yourself on such a high pedestal and then throw your darts as you hide behind the BDC screen.

    It's not a big-guy vs lirttle-guy thing, IMO, it is right vs wrong, I made reference to the "takers" of this country. 

    Some of them are corporations, some are people, it's all wrong IMO.

    Trust me, we have interacted before, but that's the beauty of BDC, isn't it?

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    Let the Tea Party grand experiment begin.

    Mr. President, please don't give them cover.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    [...]

    ...a poster who I don't even recall ever interacting with.

    [...]


    Oh, but you have.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to doozy-day's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to doozy-day's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    In response to doozy-day's comment:

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:


     

     

    So you, as an expert, are saying that we are stuck at 8% unemployment?

    I guess if you listen long enough you'll accept it too!

    I've got a lot of data with quite a bit of options and opportunities for expanded job growth, even some recent cadidates made suggestions for job growth.

    Seems as though they lost the election to a group that likes to give away free-stuff in exchange for votes.

    But hey, you're a smart guy, I must be wrong...... 

     




     

    The theory that President Obama won because of a tsunami of takers is false and shows a complete lack of demographic understanding on your part.

    I guess its easier to blame the people who are not working than face the real issues facing this nation. It's easier to say people are lazy, unskilled, and want 'free stuff' than to take a long hard look at the economic policies that have decimated the middle class and thrown millions onto the unemployment lines and into poverty. Wingnuts don't do complexity, they want things simple and in sound bites. It's easier.

     




    It is simple really...people blame the poor because they can. It's much easier to pick on someone who can't fight back...so the more ignorant among us like to place the blame on the poor..single parent..or the mentally ill..rather than take on big corporate welfare.

     

     




    Wow, I never thought you would resort to name calling, I am not ignorant, I am a realist.

     

    You need to come out of your little hole and travel a bit, not to a resort or a cruise, but into the cities across America.

    So many of you spend all day on these boards, getting most of your information from news sources, blogs, left/right-leaning television programs etc.

    I travel for a living, and visit the highs and lows of America, trust me I've seen a lot more than most of the clowns on these boards.

    The "free-stuff"  generation is rampant in America, and to someone like you, it's easier to blame corporate America.  That way no one will accuse you of being "mean".

     

     




    Did I say you were ignorant..? It's kind of interesting that you took my comment to be directed toward you...a poster who I don't even recall ever interacting with. Kind of interesting..in a subconcious sort of way.

     

    I am not afraid of anyone referring to me as being mean. I am sure that in my life..I have uncovered and reported more entitlement fraud ( and waste) than you..or anyone else on this board for that matter. I suppose the people commit the fraud and are ultimately bagged by me probably consider me mean...but trust me that I don't lose sleep over it.

    I comment on both. I do not limit my comments to just corporations. I think some entitlements need to be reformed. The difference between you and I is that I don't waste a lot of time picking on the little guy..and I am not afraid to pick on the "big guy"..especially when the "big guy" costs me more tax money than the little guy. Get my drift?

     



    Back-pedal much, in your passive-aggressive way, you place yourself on such a high pedestal and then throw your darts as you hide behind the BDC screen.

     

    It's not a big-guy vs lirttle-guy thing, IMO, it is right vs wrong, I made reference to the "takers" of this country. 

    Some of them are corporations, some are people, it's all wrong IMO.

    Trust me, we have interacted before, but that's the beauty of BDC, isn't it?

     



    Have we..? I doubt it..unless of course you mean that the beauty of BDC is that posters like you can reinvent themselves and hide behind different user names when they either discredit themselves..or get booted by BDC. Either way..kindly enlighten me as to who you were..or don't bother commenting on my threads. Frankly..your behavior is creepy and thanks to my old "friend" Jackie boy..I have lost all patience and tolerance for clowns that like to play games. So..stop being a coward and fess up.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to Firewind's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    [...]

    ...a poster who I don't even recall ever interacting with.

    [...]


    Oh, but you have.

     




    Well..Firewind..by all means..if you know something then share it with the class.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    No comments re: Elizabeth Warren's response?   Her comment:

    "Senator Elizabeth Warren called the automatic federal spending cuts scheduled to take effect Friday just plain dumb and urged Republicans to sign off on what she described a œbalanced proposal  from the White House to avoid the current standoff between congressional leaders and President Obama."

    So the spending cuts are "dumb" and according to Kerry, we have the right to act "stupid"; looks like we are all set.   

    It's as though the sequester has been ordained.  :)

     

    PS Otherwise, I somewhat agree with MsCricket.  According to Obama and the media, the only citizens that will "feel" the cuts right away are those who are connected with the defense industry / military / Head Start and other specific programs that are targeted first.  It's not as though the govt. is shutting down.   As for being warned, (some) govt. employees will have a potential 24 days on furlough; that's better than being laid off.  

    The cuts will have a cascade effect; it's hard to say when / how / or how much any of us (as individuals / families) will feel the pinch.   Collectively, however, the cuts will be felt immediately; the cuts do and will effect everyone, similar to the way unemployment effects everyone, even if you happen to have a job; there is a domino effect on all of us.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    No comments re: Elizabeth Warren's response?   Her comment:

    "Senator Elizabeth Warren called the automatic federal spending cuts scheduled to take effect Friday just plain dumb and urged Republicans to sign off on what she described a œbalanced proposal  from the White House to avoid the current standoff between congressional leaders and President Obama."

     



    Ms. Warren's studied logic, expertise and common sense have no place on these boards, yogs.  You should know that by now...a reference/slur to her ethnic status will be forthcoming along with some snarky dodge of the issue. 

    But thanks as always for trying.  :)

     

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.

     



    Yup, everything is Obama's fault in your world, even though all of this was agreed to and signed off on by Congress/Boehner, too.

     

    You'd blame him for your undescended teste given half the chance.

    Recall too, I clearly said the cuts should take effect.

     

     



    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from msobstinate99. Show msobstinate99's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    [QUOTE]

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to Firewind's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    [...]

    ...a poster who I don't even recall ever interacting with.

    [...]


    Oh, but you have.

     

    Well..Firewind..by all means..if you know something then share it with the class.

     

    [QUOTE]




    My guess ....jmel?

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    Actually..what's kind of funny about reading many of the previous comments is the fear from the self proclaimed right that these drastic cuts might actually take place. What did skeeter call it..? A Saw..a rusty scalpel?

    One would think those on the right would be simply thrilled at the thought of the sequestration cuts taking place. After all..they are drastic..and everyone is going to feel the pain. Aren't spending cuts what they've been preaching form months now? Why the fear..now that it looks like they are going to happen?



    My "rusty scapel" was lifted from Matty, he used it, I was just referencing it.

    But, that aside, the right is happy that the cuts are taking place.  It is Obama who, as the father of the legislation, seems to be backing away:

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House is threatening a presidential veto of a Senate Republican measure that would give President Barack Obama more authority and flexibility to find $85 billion in spending cuts this year. The measure is intended to replace the automatic across-the-board cuts scheduled to kick in Friday.

    The White House says it instead backs a Democratic measure to replace the cuts with tax hikes on millionaires and spending reductions over 10 years."

    Millionaire?  Are we getting "hammered" again by millionaires and Billionaires?

    So, the republicans grant Obama more flexibility to avoid the "painful" cuts, and he still won't budge.  It is more taxes, no spending cuts.  That's the Obama strategy.

     

    A marketing observation:  Obama is losing the PR battle on this one, so he is resorting to the old saw from the election, tax millionaires and billionaires.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.



    Your blame is misplaced, as usual.

    The GOP has not offered a single specific cut they would accept in lieu of the across-the-board cuts set to take effect.  They have - and always had - the ability to recommend more targeted cuts so as not to adversely, indiscriminately affect relevant public services.

    Just like the payroll tax cut "hike", both parties are responsible for not coming together to meet the terms of their previous agreement.

    Your a&&hat insinuation is equally unsupported.  You seem to think it takes only one to tango.  Not true.  Never was.

    And again, you mixed my metaphor.  I said rusty hacksaw, not rusty scalpel.  Try to observe the details more carefully, and yuou won't get called out so often.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.

     



    Yup, everything is Obama's fault in your world, even though all of this was agreed to and signed off on by Congress/Boehner, too.

     

    You'd blame him for your undescended teste given half the chance.

    Recall too, I clearly said the cuts should take effect.

     

     



    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.




    Oh please...the cuts are going to happen because Congress simply can't do it's job. What else..really..do you want Obama to do? You should be happy that Obama is going to initiate drastic spending cuts. That's been the mantra of the right for 4 years now...this is a Tea Party dream come true.  How come those on the right on this board..are now opposed to these cuts? Obama is giving you exactly what you want...and still you are not happy. I guess there is just no pleasing some.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.  


    So..let me get this straight. Republicans want to cut spending = a solution.

    Obama cutting spending = harming the American people ??

    You really can't make this logic up...lol

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.

     



    Your blame is misplaced, as usual.

     

    The GOP has not offered a single specific cut they would accept in lieu of the across-the-board cuts set to take effect.  They have - and always had - the ability to recommend more targeted cuts so as not to adversely, indiscriminately affect relevant public services.

    Just like the payroll tax cut "hike", both parties are responsible for not coming together to meet the terms of their previous agreement.

    Your a&&hat insinuation is equally unsupported.  You seem to think it takes only one to tango.  Not true.  Never was.

    And again, you mixed my metaphor.  I said rusty hacksaw, not rusty scalpel.  Try to observe the details more carefully, and yuou won't get called out so often.

     



    What get's cut is Obama's responsibility.  That' the way it works.  If the Republicans offered cuts, you would accuse them of overstepping.

    "Instead of using a scalpel, the cuts will be done with a rusty hacksaw and cauterized with a zippo lighter."

    Sorry i mangled your manglilation.  But let's be clear, it is Obama you are accusing of using a rusty hacksaw cauterized with a zippo lighter, as it is his responsibility to make the cuts.

    Or, did you find something in the bill that tells you otherwise?

    Sorry that you are losing this battle.  As much as you WANT to blame the republicans, it is SOLEY OBama's fault:  He pushed the sequestration, he vowed to not let it be avoided, and now he is suggesting the most painful cuts possible to punuish the American people. 

    So, just quit it with the insults and the seething replies.  you lost the argument on facts, man up and accept it.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.

     



    Yup, everything is Obama's fault in your world, even though all of this was agreed to and signed off on by Congress/Boehner, too.

     

    You'd blame him for your undescended teste given half the chance.

    Recall too, I clearly said the cuts should take effect.

     

     



    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.

     




    Oh please...the cuts are going to happen because Congress simply can't do it's job. What else..really..do you want Obama to do? You should be happy that Obama is going to initiate drastic spending cuts. That's been the mantra of the right for 4 years now...this is a Tea Party dream come true.  How come those on the right on this board..are now opposed to these cuts? Obama is giving you exactly what you want...and still you are not happy. I guess there is just no pleasing some.

     

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.  


    So..let me get this straight. Republicans want to cut spending = a solution.

    Obama cutting spending = harming the American people ??

    You really can't make this logic up...lol



    mscricket.  Again, facts matter.  It is Obama's responsiblity to determine what to cut.  That's the law.  If it is not his responsibility, then why is he making the determination of what to cut?  IT IS HIS JOB!  It is not the republicans job to tell the executive what to cut in his area.  That's how the bill was written, the bill Obama created.

    As far as what he is choosing to cut:  Are you going to tell me with a straight face he is not choosing the things that will most hurt and scare people?  Come on.  Let's have a moment of honesty here.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    Well, then tell Obama to put his rusty scalpel away.  You do know that the specific cuts are up to him? You have noticed that it is Obama scare-mongering about releasing prisoners onto the street? That makes him so much like Saddam, who did the same thing.

     

     


    Don't mix my metaphors...

    ...though it may make sense for anyone surreptitiously quoting Rand for no reason.

    You do know Congress still holds the purse strings, right?  You have noticed their varying doomsday cries?

    "Saddam"?  Really?!?  Who are you, Frank Drebbin?

     

     



    You do know the executive makes the cuts?

    you do know that sequestration was Obama's idea?

    you do know that he said he would veto any attempts to not put them through?

    the cuts, the releasing of the illegals, all Obama's responsibility. 

    I guess you are more of a low information voter Than I thought.

     



    Yup, everything is Obama's fault in your world, even though all of this was agreed to and signed off on by Congress/Boehner, too.

     

    You'd blame him for your undescended teste given half the chance.

    Recall too, I clearly said the cuts should take effect.

     

     



    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.

     




    Oh please...the cuts are going to happen because Congress simply can't do it's job. What else..really..do you want Obama to do? You should be happy that Obama is going to initiate drastic spending cuts. That's been the mantra of the right for 4 years now...this is a Tea Party dream come true.  How come those on the right on this board..are now opposed to these cuts? Obama is giving you exactly what you want...and still you are not happy. I guess there is just no pleasing some.

     

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.  


    So..let me get this straight. Republicans want to cut spending = a solution.

    Obama cutting spending = harming the American people ??

    You really can't make this logic up...lol

     



    mscricket.  Again, facts matter.  It is Obama's responsiblity to determine what to cut.  That's the law.  If it is not his responsibility, then why is he making the determination of what to cut?  IT IS HIS JOB!  It is not the republicans job to tell the executive what to cut in his area.  That's how the bill was written, the bill Obama created.

     

    As far as what he is choosing to cut:  Are you going to tell me with a straight face he is not choosing the things that will most hurt and scare people?  Come on.  Let's have a moment of honesty here.




    His cuts..as opposed to what? Let me ask you this skeeter...we've been hearing for years from the right that we need drastic spending cuts. You think you can do better?

     

    What would you cut? List out the drastic cuts you would make to the budget..that you feel are needed.

     

    BTW..it's Congress' job to appropriate funds..not the Executive branch. The executive branch has veto power..but Congress can remedy even that.

    Obama's ability to slash funding would be limited solely to the executive branch had Congress not signed onto this plan..but Congress signed on...so there you go.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    I think it'd is hard for people to understand, particularly the government worshipping liberals, but the solution if for government to stop trying to fix the problem. 

     

    As John Galt said to the government offacials, "you want to help. outnumber get out of my way." Or something like that.



    What?  Care to make another run at this one?  Otherwise it's hard to understand.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Should we just let the Sequestration cuts take place?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    Try as you might to broaden the scope, it won't work.  We are talking about sequestration cuts, and specifically your claim that the republicans are in charge of the specific cuts.  They are not.  Obama is.

    So, yes, Obama is to blame, becasue he chooses harming the American people over helping them.

     



    So, you are disassociating yourself from the idea embodied in the sequester?

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share