Pres Obama Using Sequestration For Political Gain

[GiancarloC]

All you true believers... please consult Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution under "separation of powers."

Oh forget that... why don't we just do what the Roman Republic did? Declare a dictatorship for a while so one man can just pass sweeping laws... nevermind that eventually did fall into total dictatorship lol.

The moment anyone says "the President isn't passing a budget!"... fine point! We should just declare a dictatorship and abolish Congress for a while. And he can pass a budget overnight without any approval of any legislative body! Then the President can pass a budget!!!!

[loki81]

P.S. To all Republicons... keep your cotton pickin' hands off our Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which for umpteenth time are not entitlements.

someone's cotton pickin' hands is going to have to touch them eventually, they're not sustainable without reform.

and yes, they're entitlement programs and are broadly referred to as such by just about everyone.

An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation. A "right" is itself an entitlement associated with a moral or social principle, such that an "entitlement" is a provision made in accordance with legal framework of a society. Typically, entitlements are laws based on concepts of principle ("rights") which are themselves based in concepts of social equality or enfranchisement.

I'd think that basic demographics and falling birthrates ensure the insolvency of Social Security without reform/change, but the sequestor's only about a small fraction of non-entitlement spending, which is why I'm rolling my eyes when the GOP talks about this like it's key to solving our fiscal future.

we're probably not going to see significant reforms unless we get another GHWB in office -- someone who's willing to do what's necessary (in his case, raising taxes) even though it will cost him his job.

but, er... back on topic.

[CTF]

Oh forget that... why don't we just do what the Roman Republic did? Declare a dictatorship for a while so one man can just pass sweeping laws... nevermind that eventually did fall into total dictatorship lol.

The moment anyone says "the President isn't passing a budget!"... fine point! We should just declare a dictatorship and abolish Congress for a while. And he can pass a budget overnight without any approval of any legislative body! Then the President can pass a budget!!!!

We're already doing that.

SCOTUS (and Mitt Romney) have already declared "Corporations are people too..."

Fox News and MSNBC (and their pundits) are just the clowns playing MC to "the show."

[GiancarloC]

someone's cotton pickin' hands is going to have to touch them eventually, they're not sustainable without reform.

Oh yea? Perhaps this nation could actually start taxing the rich a little more and pay for them? They're not sustainable with the regressive tax code this nation presently has.

- - - Updated - - -

We're already doing that.

SCOTUS (and Mitt Romney) have already declared "Corporations are people too..."

Fox News and MSNBC (and their pundits) are just the clowns playing MC to "the show."

Okay then why all this trouble with Congress? Obama should just abolish Congress for a year, and declare a dictatorship. Lol... I think Bush said something about a dictatorship being easier lol.

[maxpowr9]

We're already doing that.

SCOTUS (and Mitt Romney) have already declared "Corporations are people too..."

Fox News and MSNBC (and their pundits) are just the clowns playing MC to "the show."

I'm all for electing a Sith Lord, Emperor of the US Empire.

[loki81]

Oh yea? Perhaps this nation could actually start taxing the rich a little more and pay for them? They're not sustainable with the regressive tax code this nation presently has.

increasing the SS tax cap would be a good start... we should probably raise the retirement age given how the average life expectancy has increased (61.7 when social security was first enacted, compared to 78 today) and enact means testing for SS and Medicare both, but it's not anything I hear a lot of politicians talking about lest they get branded as wanting to force grandma to eat cat food.

[Rolyo85]

It'd be nice but wildly unrealistic to see u contribute something here

Step 1 is to read the article

We'll wait

You should try and show me some time what it looks like to contribute.

[CTF]

Okay then why all this trouble with Congress? Obama should just abolish Congress for a year, and declare a dictatorship. Lol... I think Bush said something about a dictatorship being easier lol.

Honestly?

You're not going to like my answer.

It's a question of "leadership."

Bush43 won the White House in 2000 by a SCOTUS decision, perhaps you've heard of it Bush V Gore.

But he "lead" like he had a "mandate" from the American Public, and with a GOP Majority in both the House AND the Senate they ran up one of the largest national deficits, and the largest consolidation of POWER since FDR.

Can you say Iraq, Afghanistan (The Department of Homeland Security)?

Obama gets elected by a clear majority of the American populace in 2008, and the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, and by the 2010 Mid Terms Obama had already "lost the narrative" and we're already a month into Obama's second term and the GOP are still controlling the narrative.

Rather than demanding MORE leadership, our corporate controlled legislators (both parties) are playing the "blame game" and my fellow Americans are playing right along.

[chance1]

increasing the SS tax cap would be a good start... we should probably raise the retirement age given how the average life expectancy has increased (61.7 when social security was first enacted, compared to 78 today) and enact means testing for SS and Medicare both, but it's not anything I hear a lot of politicians talking about lest they get branded as wanting to force grandma to eat cat food.

Guessing you're at or below the cap ?

Thanks but no

Just another tax

Raising the age I get

And I get means testing

[chance1]

You should try and show me some time what it looks like to contribute.

I'm into helping those who help themselves

[GiancarloC]

Guessing you're at or below the cap ?

Thanks but no

Just another tax

Raising the age I get

And I get means testing

The reality is the rich aren't paying their fair share...

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Up Boner's ass.
Please Google, "jobs, jobs, jobs."

Don't do it with Safe Search off, unless you want to see some drawings on Deviant Art involving the founder of Apple fellating himself.

[JB3]

Why don't the republicans come to the table and negotiate? And lets not skirt the reality here... this falls on the Congress. They are the ones who write the bills. Not the President. The House of Representatives is one of the most out of touch and unpopular as far as polls goes... but I guess the blame always falls on the President lol? Is he a dictator now?

Sequestration was written by the Obama administration. Specifically, by Jack Lew.

[Ninja108]

Sequestration was written by the Obama administration. Specifically, by Jack Lew.

To avoid a government shutdown. One should also note it was agreed to by Republicians who made it a point to gloat about how they got 98% of what they wanted with this deal.

[JB3]

To avoid a government shutdown. One should also note it was agreed to by Republicians who made it a point to gloat about how they got 98% of what they wanted with this deal.

It doesn't matter why it was written. Supporters cannot claim the White House had no involvement with this when it was their idea in the first place.

Both sides are to blame for the fact that it actually took effect.

[GiancarloC]

Perhaps so, but that doesn't matter. Congress refused to talk about introducing measures to prevent it from happening. It was part of a prior deal anyways.

[Jack Springer]

Here we go again. Have anymore strawman arguments for us to devour?

The problem in this country is Congress (specifically the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES)... where laws are written. The President doesn't write laws... unless the right wing wants a dictator and that seems to be what they want.

Where's the budget?

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps so, but that doesn't matter. Congress refused to talk about introducing measures to prevent it from happening. It was part of a prior deal anyways.

Where's the budget?

[GiancarloC]

I posted the fucking article read it for once. Leave the republican math sunglasses at home.

[maxpowr9]

Sequestration was a suicide pact between the two parties so to try to blame the Republicans shows your own idiocy of politics.

[GiancarloC]

Oh I know politics quite well. Republicans refused to come to the table and negotiate. These cuts did not have to happen. I'm sure they'll come up with something else to make up for it in the next few weeks anyways, as well as addressing the more serious impending budget issue.

[Kulindahr]

Sequestration was written by the Obama administration. Specifically, by Jack Lew.

To avoid a government shutdown. One should also note it was agreed to by Republicians who made it a point to gloat about how they got 98% of what they wanted with this deal.

It wasn't just agreed to by the Republicans; Boehner put more effort into getting the House to pass it than he's put into anything else during his time as a hostage of the Tea Party Speaker of the House.

[Kulindahr]

Obama's playing it for political gain... and Boehner is, too, in spades.

[JayHawk]

Politically Krauthammer's comments are a Non sequitur.

Republicans have been dragging their feet between the 2010 mid terms, and the 2012 POTUS elections hoping that by doing nothing that they might get some political traction on Obama.

Nothing has changed.

Even the 2012 Elections pretty much left all of the "players" intact.

I don't know though.

As much as Obama has been harping about the sequestration, and how it's going to "cut government spending" it seems like the Republicans are going to get what they want (less government), and the American Public seems to think (for now) that could be a good thing.

I've been listening to NPR over the past couple of days, and their analysts have been talking about how bad this is going to hurt middle class Americans, and what they've been pointing out is that the current Federal Budget IS BLOATED.

Personally?

For me, when this shit starts getting political is (if and when) the Obama Administration starts agreeing to cuts that will MOST DIRECTLY affect Middle Class Americans, and THEN trying to blame that on Republicans.

Either way I'm disgusted with the whole lot of them; and what passes for "leadership"(on both sides) in Washington these days.

I'm more than certain that Charles Krauthammer isn't going to experience any real reality any time soon, and considering who his employers are he'll keep doing what he does, and the partisans will continue to snipe at each other if for no other reason than to add to the sense of theater.

None of which addresses anything of any real value.

(My apologies if the complete sentences and punctuation confused anyone here)

Honestly, I think this is the only way forward. Republicans would happily play word games and do nothing for four more years. Democrats are no better. However what we need is a path forward instead of stagnation. This will actually kick America in the balls.

What I will find particularly interesting will be how the public reacts. Once all of these red states start losing their federal government welfare. The blue states will hurt no doubt. However by far and wide they can afford and are willing to fund their own programs should the federal government falter. So to me the interesting part is how american will react. What will catch their sound bite fancy? Will it go on long enough to actually be painful?

These questions and many more on the next episode of what Fox news comes up with next??? lol (p.s. you could replace that with MSNBC as well)

[JayHawk]

Where's the budget?

- - - Updated - - -



Where's the budget?

Published on the internet, offered many times, obstructed by morons.

[Apollo]

Oh I know politics quite well. Republicans refused to come to the table and negotiate. These cuts did not have to happen. I'm sure they'll come up with something else to make up for it in the next few weeks anyways, as well as addressing the more serious impending budget issue.

Republicans have been coming to the table. All week in fact. The problem is neither side is willing to budge, so the meetings are incredibly short and a waste of time. The House and Senate attempt to pass bills they know won't pass to look like they are doing anything.

Until the President and the Congress are willing to compromise, nothing will happen. No matter if they come to the table or not.

[Jack Springer]

Published on the internet, offered many times, obstructed by morons.

Obama has presented his budget?

[GiancarloC]

Republicans have been coming to the table. All week in fact. The problem is neither side is willing to budge, so the meetings are incredibly short and a waste of time. The House and Senate attempt to pass bills they know won't pass to look like they are doing anything.

Until the President and the Congress are willing to compromise, nothing will happen. No matter if they come to the table or not.

By coming to the table, I mean coming with a workable compromise. Not that nonsense they have been coming up with. Republicans need to concede more because the American rejected them at the polls... it's time they admit defeat again and agree to what the democrats are demanding.

[GiancarloC]

Obama has presented his budget?

Obama presents a budget? Oh my... can he also instate 5 year plans like they did in the USSR? The President does NOT present a budget nor does he write laws/legislation. Congress does. It's not up to the President to write a budget. That power isn't vested to him. IT's a LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. In fact it's often this way too in MANY other western countries.

[Kulindahr]

Honestly, I think this is the only way forward. Republicans would happily play word games and do nothing for four more years. Democrats are no better. However what we need is a path forward instead of stagnation. This will actually kick America in the balls.

What I will find particularly interesting will be how the public reacts. Once all of these red states start losing their federal government welfare. The blue states will hurt no doubt. However by far and wide they can afford and are willing to fund their own programs should the federal government falter. So to me the interesting part is how american will react. What will catch their sound bite fancy? Will it go on long enough to actually be painful?

And if it gets too painful, will a demagogue rise to power?

[JayHawk]

Obama has presented his budget?

Multiple times...

Obama unveils $3.8 trillion budget - Feb 1st 2010

President Obama’s 2013 Budget Revealed: A Look at the Tax Details (Also Included: A Comprehensive Comparison of the Obama/Gingrich/Romney Tax Proposals)

Multiple times... that is all the time I have to Google search for you Jack... try it out... these search engine thingys do miraculous things.

Pity the only web pages you get at your house are Jub and Fix News

[JayHawk]

And if it gets too painful, will a demagogue rise to power?

Not hardly. The people don't have that much will anymore. Not to make a conserted effort. Republicans are already getting hours of angry phone calls from their constituents ... This is going to be another power play that Obama will win.

You see in May the country stops having a budget. SO if republicans go nuclear on the closing of tax loopholes versus entitlement cuts, then Obama can just continue the same message power, and then when the government shuts down the Republicans in the house will go the way of Newt Gingrich's bunch of phonies during the Clinton years.

Their turkey is cooked and republicans know it. They just keep trying every message they can to put this on Obama. I don't think it will work. Four years of obstructions leaves a long memory. Plus you have republicans on the air in recent weeks saying sequester will be okay... it is no big deal... don't worry about it.... as things go sour Americans will remember that because Obama is going to play it ad nauseum .. AND while Americans suffer they get paid. That will not play well.

Many folks told Obama during his run up to Term # 2 that he needs to be more agressive and get his message out there.

Stand by for heavy rolls.

[Jack Springer]

Good attempt at spin JH. Your link is from 2012.

Obama has NOT presented his budget to Congress as required by law. The deadline is the first Monday of February.

So far he has met the budget deadline one time.

[GiancarloC]

Obama isn't the one writing budgets. It's up to Congress to come up with them. Nice try on the spin. And is there any proof that he's required to do so by law? I've seen that claim float around, but have yet to see any proof for it.

Such a weak attempt... come up with better material please.

Edit: BY the way, Obama has presented something to Congress:

http://double-taxation.com/2012/02/1...e-tax-details/

Read this link again. First paragraph.

[maxpowr9]

I think Jayhawk is right to a point. Neither side has skin in this game atm. People thought the congressional approval rating couldn't get any worse well, zero hasn't been reached yet...

[JayHawk]

Jack what you don't get is nobody is listening to you or your obstructionist bullshit. By you I mean you and that ignorant bunch of gay hating fucking closet queens you call a political party.

This is a game now and the rules that have been violated by every president since they made a fucking deadline really doesn't play. Tell the unemployed, and those residually affected by it that republicans are good and Obama just didn't do his budget. It wont play sweets.

People are going to side with spending that helps them and they will be making their decisions while listening to republicans played over and over and over saying it was a good idea to cut their jobs.

[bankside]

And if it gets too painful, will a demagogue rise to power?

No, no, no, no, no! How many times do we have to say it? No more Kenyans, no Mexicans, no Chinese and certainly no Demagogues! Only a natural-born, USA American citizen can be President!!!
.
.
.
.
.
Well maybe Shwarzenegger's okay.

[JB3]

Perhaps so, but that doesn't matter. Congress refused to talk about introducing measures to prevent it from happening. It was part of a prior deal anyways.

No. The republicans refused to talk about it when the president asked for another tax increase. The republicans already told him when they passed their last continuing resolution that he would not get any new tax revenues beyond what they already approved.

[JB3]

By coming to the table, I mean coming with a workable compromise. Not that nonsense they have been coming up with. Republicans need to concede more because the American rejected them at the polls... it's time they admit defeat again and agree to what the democrats are demanding.

None of them were interested in compromise. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever that another increase in taxes needed to be a part of the sequestration negotiations. If they were actually interested in compromising, none of that would have ever been on the table.

[GiancarloC]

No. The republicans refused to talk about it when the president asked for another tax increase. The republicans already told him when they passed their last continuing resolution that he would not get any new tax revenues beyond what they already approved.

What the republicans have proposed is grossly inadequate and there should be further tax increases on the rich. That's pretty much my position on it. There was a compromise. Republicans should have admitted total defeat and went with it.

[chance1]

No. The republicans refused to talk about it when the president asked for another tax increase. The republicans already told him when they passed their last continuing resolution that he would not get any new tax revenues beyond what they already approved.

hence woodward's "changing the goal posts" comment which has the obama admin up in arms

attacking him personally for having the gall to write this fact

axelrod tried to refute him on MJ this week but came off like the lying weasel he is

woodward has no ax to grind - he's an equal opportunity journalist who has no "side"

while axelrod is bought and paid for by you know who

no more taxes is the deal

- - - Updated - - -

What the republicans have proposed is grossly inadequate and there should be further tax increases on the rich. That's pretty much my position on it. There was a compromise. Republicans should have admitted total defeat and went with it.

why don't u stop typing and READ

Obama agreed to no more taxes

[GiancarloC]

why don't u stop typing and READ

Obama agreed to no more taxes

Read my post again. "That's pretty much MY POSITION ON IT." I am NOT echoing what the President has said. I think there should be more tax increases on the wealthy beyond what has been discussed and agreed upon.

And leave the insults out please.

This is what happens when one types up rapid fire ipad responses.

[JB3]

What the republicans have proposed is grossly inadequate and there should be further tax increases on the rich. That's pretty much my position on it. There was a compromise. Republicans should have admitted total defeat and went with it.

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

[GiancarloC]

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

The "biggest tax increase" was far from enough and didn't even match the original promise to raise taxes on those who make $250k. And taxes were at an all time low... so they had to be increased.

[Apollo]

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

The President won't get his way on more new taxes IMO. I think the republicans are willing to let the government shut down then agree to anymore new taxes. I think Obama will most likely falter first before both parties come to the table. Even then, nothing real good is going to happen.

I really want to like Obama more, but I don't see him handling this budget situation very well sadly.

[Jack Springer]

Special Note to JH and GianCarloC -- This is 2013 NOT 2012

So that you can get acquainted with the US budget process ... here is a primer ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...budget_process

Obama isn't the one writing budgets. It's up to Congress to come up with them. Nice try on the spin. And is there any proof that he's required to do so by law? I've seen that claim float around, but have yet to see any proof for it.

Such a weak attempt... come up with better material please.

Edit: BY the way, Obama has presented something to Congress:

http://double-taxation.com/2012/02/1...e-tax-details/

Read this link again. First paragraph.

[Apollo]

Special Note to JH and GianCarloC -- This is 2013 NOT 2012

So that you can get acquainted with the US budget process ... here is a primer ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...budget_process

Um dude, the Presdient has submitted his budget for Fiscal Year 2013. The link to read it is right here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview

[xbuzzerx]

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

I find this claim beyond credibility considering that part of what was in discussion was simply the disagreement over the continuance of unsustainable Bush era tax cuts.

[T-Rexx]

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

This is just nonsense.

To claim that the end of some of the temporary tax cuts implemented by GWB is the "biggest tax increase in history" is laughable. The Bush tax cuts were never intended to be permanent, from the moment they were first proposed. That's why they had an expiration date attached to them when they were originally passed.

And there was never any intention or discussion or agreement that letting the cuts expire precluded resolving sequestration in part with tax reform. That idea was just invented this past week by John Boehner. President Obama has advocated letting the Bush tax cuts expire since before he entered office. To claim that the president's partial success on tax reform policy which preceded sequestration prevents further negotiation on sequestration is just absurd.

[CowboyBob]

There was not ever a compromise on the table. We've already had the biggest tax increase in American history, and it was a deal that was forged specifically to avoid the inclusion of any taxes in sequestration. Any offer that included it was DOA, which the president has known for several months.

You're sounding like Rush Limbaugh.

The biggest tax increase in history was under Ronald Reagan in 1982.

http://www.democraticwhip.gov/conten...an-not-preside

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/big...se-in-history/

Allowing the irresponsible Bush tax cuts to expire was not increasing taxes. As T-Rexx said, they were never meant to be permanent.

[xbuzzerx]

This is just nonsense.

To claim that the end of some of the temporary tax cuts implemented by GWB is the "biggest tax increase in history" is laughable. The Bush tax cuts were never intended to be permanent, from the moment they were first proposed. That's why they had an expiration date attached to them when they were originally passed.

And there was never any intention or discussion or agreement that letting the cuts expire precluded resolving sequestration in part with tax reform. That idea was just invented this past week by John Boehner. President Obama has advocated letting the Bush tax cuts expire since before he entered office. To claim that the president's partial success on tax reform policy which preceded sequestration prevents further negotiation on sequestration is just absurd.

You are absolutely correct. However, I'm sure it was always the Republican plan to get these tax cuts in on the presumption that then they'd be very difficult/unpopular to not make permanent. And here we see the proof of that, Republicans who view the end of these unsustainable tax vacations as a "tax increase." Obviously many fully viewed and regarded them as permanent in all but formality.