FingerLakes1.com Forums
Page 1 of 18 1 2 3 ... 17 18 >
Topic Options
#1388047 - 02/20/13 11:54 AM Sequestration
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11876
Loc: NYS
Today we see some of the same hyperpartisan fantasies dominating the debate, the idea that waiting just one more election will allow one party to impose its will and avoid any concessions that could anger the base. So Republicans say the problem is only spending—but then in the next breath decry the deep defense cuts that are scheduled to make up half the sequester and pass a bill that would simply exempt their given interests from pain. Liberal Democrats attack the Bowles-Simpson commission, which offered new details on Tuesday as an alternative to sequestration, as a capitulation to Republican priorities and imagine they will retake the House in 2014.

Like a junkie begging for just one more fix before they get straight, these politicos keep begging for one more election before they face facts. Math isn’t partisan. Our current levels of debt are unsustainable. They can’t be solved by simply cutting or taxing our way out of the hole.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-after-all.html
_________________________
GOP bumper sticker:

SUPPORT SOME OF OUR TROOPS

Top
FingerLakes1.com
#1388051 - 02/20/13 12:01 PM Re: Sequestration *DELETED* [Re: twocats]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11876
Loc: NYS
Post deleted by twocats
_________________________
GOP bumper sticker:

SUPPORT SOME OF OUR TROOPS

Top
#1388089 - 02/20/13 02:57 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 5856
Loc: NY
The president came up with the idea, the repubs voted for it. But wait the Repubs are the party that won't compromise, the party of no.

Oh wait, it was the Presidents idea, and now he is against it. Gee whiz.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1388091 - 02/20/13 03:02 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 5856
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: twocats


I am shocked that a teacher would post lies. Is this what you teach our kids?

The Budget Control Act passed in the House with 269 votes in favor — 174 from Republicans and 95 from Democrats. And the bill cleared the Senate with 74 “yea” votes, of which 28 were cast by Republicans.

Of course we should never let facts get in the way of indoctrinating our kids.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1388099 - 02/20/13 03:26 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: cwjga]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9177
Loc: CNY
Shall we go back a few weeks to check the veracity of all of YOUR posts? I don't think history will look favorably on your 'LIES' since that's what you prefer to call them.

Don't be a jerk cwjga.
_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
#1388102 - 02/20/13 03:29 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: cwjga]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11876
Loc: NYS
Is this what you teach kids?

Nope. I teach them to read so they can reach their own conclusions. You should try it sometime.
_________________________
GOP bumper sticker:

SUPPORT SOME OF OUR TROOPS

Top
#1388105 - 02/20/13 03:32 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 5856
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: twocats
Is this what you teach kids?

Nope. I teach them to read so they can reach their own conclusions. You should try it sometime.


So in your world 141 democraps is = to 0. Hey you mihght have somthing there.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1388106 - 02/20/13 03:33 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: cwjga]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11876
Loc: NYS
Nope, that's called a mistake. All people make them, but only the wise admit them and learn from them. You should try it some time.
_________________________
GOP bumper sticker:

SUPPORT SOME OF OUR TROOPS

Top
#1388111 - 02/20/13 03:43 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: cwjga]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9177
Loc: CNY
Originally Posted By: cwjga
The president came up with the idea, the repubs voted for it. But wait the Repubs are the party that won't compromise, the party of no.

Oh wait, it was the Presidents idea, and now he is against it. Gee whiz.

Talk about lies. Let's dispel cwjga's.

More Republican Denial
by Michael Tomasky

Whose "idea" was the sequester, and why should it matter?

My Twitter feed these last couple of weeks has been overflowing with people going beyond the usual "communist" and "idiot" name-calling that I get every day and throwing the occasional "liar" in there because I "withhold" the information that the sequester was the Obama administration's idea. Very well, consider that nugget hereby unwithheld. Let's grant that this is true. But it's true only because the Republicans were holding a gun to the administration's head—and besides, the Republicans immediately voted for it. In any case the important thing now is that outside of Fox News land, it's an unimportant fact whose “idea” it was. The Republicans are partial owners of this idea, and as the party that now wants the cuts to kick in, they deserve to, and will, bear more responsibility for the negative impacts.

A trip back through the full context of this saga tells the story. The idea of having these deep budget cuts called "sequestration" goes back to the summer of 2011 and the debt-ceiling negotiations. You'll recall readily enough that it was first time in history that an opposition party had attempted to attach any conditions to increasing the debt limit. You’ll also recall that the Republicans made this intention quite clear from the beginning of 2011; indeed, from campaign time the year before. Remember Obama’s quotes from late 2010 in which he said he felt sure the Republicans would behave more reasonably once the responsibility to govern was partly theirs?

Instead, they almost crashed the economy. And they were also clearly the side pushing for drastic spending cuts. Let’s go back quickly over a partial 2011 timeline. In April, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said it was the president's position that raising the debt limit "shouldn't be held hostage to any other action." On May 11, Austan Goolsbee, then Obama’s chief economic adviser, said that tying a debt-limit increase to spending cuts was "quite insane."

On May 16, the United States went into technical default, but the Treasury Department was able to string things along a few more weeks. Tim Geithner made it clear that the real problem would hit August 1. A key moment, as Scott Lilly of the Center for American Progress wrote in The Huffington Post, came on May 31. That's when the GOP-run House voted on Obama’s request for a "clean" debt-limit increase. It failed, and all 236 Republicans voted no.

All this time, and right on up to August 1, Republicans were screaming for deep budget cuts, and the administration was saying no. But the Republicans had the leverage because it actually seemed plausible they were crazy enough to push the country into default. And so at that point, at least according to Bob Woodward in his new book, Jack Lew, then the budget director and now Obama’s nominee for Treasury secretary, originally came up with the notion of sequestered cuts. Or maybe it was Gene Sperling. The White House's idea was based on language from the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit-reduction act. It was also the White House’s notion that if the "trigger" was hit, what would kick in would be not only automatic budget cuts but also automatic revenue increases (an idea Republicans refused to go along with).

So fine, the White House proposed it. It did so only after months of Republicans publicly demanding huge spending cuts and refusing to consider any revenues and acting as if they were prepared to send the nation into default over spending. In other words, this was the administration's idea in much the way that it's a parent's "idea" to pay ransom to a person who has taken his child hostage. There was a gun to the White House's head, which was the possibility of the country going into default.

And then, when it was all put into legislation, it was the Republicans who passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 in the House, with 218 of them voting yes. So even if administration officials proposed it, it would have remained just a proposal if those 218 Republicans hadn't supported it (no House Democrats backed it). Most Republicans agreed at the time that the sequestration trigger was a good thing—that it would force everyone to get together and agree to a path forward and a long-term budget deal.

Let's say that I’m having a dispute with a neighbor I don’t really like or trust about some invasive weeds infesting both of our properties. We consider a range of options and then finally he proposes a solution that isn’t very appetizing to either of us—it's expensive, might kill a lot of grass, say, or a couple trees. It’s not exactly desirable to either of us, but I endorse his suggestion and share the costs of implementation of his plan. If it ends up killing grass or trees, am I really then on firm moral ground in pointing my finger and saying, "Hey, it was your idea, bub"?

I guess maybe conservatives think that way, but of course I don't. I assented to the plan. I share responsibility for the consequences. Where my little analogy collapses is that in my hypothetical, my neighbor and I are more or less equally affected by the negative outcome. The Republicans' ace card is that they know, or they hope they know, they are not equally affected. Austere cuts will harm the economy, and the blame will fall on the president.

Normally yes. But the majority of the people are onto them. And it sure isn’t going to be looking very responsible to people, as the March 1 sequestration deadline approaches, for Republicans to be going before the cameras and saying that the cuts are unfortunate but necessary medicine, or whatever formulation they come up with. They've wanted these spending reductions for two years. It hardly matters much who invented the mechanism for the cuts. What matters, as the Republicans will find out, is that the people don’t want them.
_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
#1388114 - 02/20/13 03:49 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 5856
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: twocats
Nope, that's called a mistake. All people make them, but only the wise admit them and learn from them. You should try it some time.


Nope I make them all the time.

I appreciate you clearing that mistake up. It is always good to put a thread based on false information to rest.

My only suggestion would be to google the information before you post a cartoon with obvious lies.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1388122 - 02/20/13 04:13 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: cwjga]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9177
Loc: CNY
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: twocats
Nope, that's called a mistake. All people make them, but only the wise admit them and learn from them. You should try it some time.


Nope I make them all the time.

I appreciate you clearing that mistake up. It is always good to put a thread based on false information to rest.

My only suggestion would be to google the information before you post a cartoon with obvious lies.

In that case, my suggestion to you, would be to use your brain stem before throwing around accusations like 'liar' and what have you.
_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
#1388128 - 02/20/13 04:43 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
Offline

Senior Member

Registered: 01/16/12
Posts: 7644
Originally Posted By: twocats

Say what you want but who signed the bill into LAW...Ahahahahahahahahahah...OBAMA!

Top
#1388162 - 02/20/13 10:31 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 7307
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: twocats
the deep defense cuts that are scheduled to make up half the sequester


The "cuts" which are not cuts, just a reduction in the rate of growth, are shown in green. The "deep" defense "cuts" would be half that green line.


Top
#1388166 - 02/20/13 11:04 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: sands]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11876
Loc: NYS
Well, I guess that's not a big deal at all, is it?

Thank you for the info.
_________________________
GOP bumper sticker:

SUPPORT SOME OF OUR TROOPS

Top
#1388169 - 02/20/13 11:35 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: twocats]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 7307
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: twocats
Well, I guess that's not a big deal at all, is it?

Thank you for the info.


Not quite the huge crisis the media makes it out to be. But then again, what is.

Top
#1388230 - 02/21/13 11:52 AM Re: Sequestration [Re: sands]
SportsRef1 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/30/03
Posts: 3197
Loc: Seneca County

Top
#1388233 - 02/21/13 12:35 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: SportsRef1]
Rascal Offline
Gold Member

Registered: 06/05/00
Posts: 17022
Loc: Brewerton, NY, USA
Quote:
The sequester will trim roughly $42 billion to $85 billion in 2013, or perhaps two percent, from the federal government’s $3.8 trillion 2013 budget.


Even after the latest round of tax increases Obama is worried about a 1-2% cut in spending when we need a 33% cust in spending.

Obama is the one who will not compromise, because that would also mean cuts in social programs.

let's go over the cliff. It's the only way to initiate any sort of cuts which are sorely needed.

Top
#1388235 - 02/21/13 12:36 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: SportsRef1]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 10950
Loc: Somewhere out there
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/...-sequester?lite

Yesterday we asked this question about the political back-and-forth regarding the looming automatic budget cuts that are set to take place on March 1: What if the sky doesn’t fall? But here’s the opposite question: What if it does? And if that’s the case, Republicans stand to pay the steepest political price. It’s not even close right now. For starters, look at the numbers from the first two national polls taken after the State of the Union. The new USA Today/Pew poll: “President Obama starts his second term with a clear upper hand over GOP leaders on issues from guns to immigration that are likely to dominate the year… On the legislation rated most urgent — cutting the budget deficit — even a majority of Republican voters endorse Obama's approach of seeking tax hikes as well as spending cuts.” Also in this poll, the president’s approval rating is at 51%, while the approval for congressional GOPers is at 25%. And here’s Bloomberg’s poll: “… Obama enters the latest budget showdown with Congress with his highest job- approval rating in three years [55%] and public support for his economic message, while his Republican opponents’ popularity stands at a record low [35%].” So these are the numbers when the White House’s P.R. campaign to avert the sequester has only begun and before the expected layoffs and furloughs.
_________________________
DON'T GO NEAR CAYUGA NATION! IT'S TOO DANGEROUS!


Top
#1388236 - 02/21/13 12:38 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: kyle585]
Rascal Offline
Gold Member

Registered: 06/05/00
Posts: 17022
Loc: Brewerton, NY, USA
Quote:
even a majority of Republican voters endorse Obama's approach of seeking tax hikes as well as spending cuts


What spending cuts is Obama proposing?

Top
#1388263 - 02/21/13 01:50 PM Re: Sequestration [Re: Rascal]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9177
Loc: CNY
Originally Posted By: Rascal
Quote:
even a majority of Republican voters endorse Obama's approach of seeking tax hikes as well as spending cuts


What spending cuts is Obama proposing?

Here:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/14/news/economy/obama_budget/index.htm
_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
Page 1 of 18 1 2 3 ... 17 18 >