Sequestration Stance

The anticipated cuts, or more accurately, the slow down in growth rates of federal government spending as a result of the Obama endorsed Sequestration HAS to happen, and if the GOP folds, they will hasten their own demise. Despite the doomsday rhetoric of President Gloom, a 2.4% cut in spending will hardly make planes fall out of the sky, and will be a needed lessen in fiscal restraint that the federal government, and Obama ironically imposed on themselves in 2011. It’s important to note that even after the $85 billion in cuts, the federal government will still be spending more in FY2013 than they did in FY2012, yet Obama and the Democrats will have us believe that the federal government is so lean, so efficient, that the only choice they have will be to lay off first responders and allow children to go hungry – which should also tell you a lot Obama’s priorities. First of all, he doesn’t acknowledge that most first responders are paid for by their local municipalities and not by the federal government, and rather than scale back the Dept. of Education, the Dept. of Energy, or the Dept. of Labor just to name a few of the incredibly bloated federal bureaucracies, he will choose to release prisoners, and let children go without Head Start Programs. Is it possible to have a more divisive, more bitter, more incompetent President, with more contempt for America? I don’t think so. Think about this – wages have been stagnant, if not in decline since 2008, gas prices have nearly doubled, taxes have gone up, GDP has been revised to .1% in Q4 2012 and not expected to be much better in Q1 2013, grocery prices are increasing as a result of fuel prices, unemployment is 8% and really 10%+ if you’re actually counting and business investment in new facilities and employment is on hold. So Obama expects all of us to make do with less, but despite almost doubling federal expenditures in the last 4 years, he wants us to believe that any slight reduction will result in chaos and force him to cut children off. As I said, the sequestration cuts MUST happen but with spineless leaders like McConnell and Boehner, I am not holding out much hope.

One last item to note, our resident liberals have been awfully quiet on threads related to spending, unemployment, and the overall economy, but bring up gay marriage and they are out in force. Just exactly how Obama wants them to be – distracted by issues of little consequence.

25 thoughts on “Sequestration Stance

  1. bardolf2 February 28, 2013 / 11:27 am

    “First of all, he doesn’t acknowledge that most first responders are paid for by their local municipalities and not by the federal government, and rather than scale back the Dept. of Education, the Dept. of Energy, or the Dept. of Labor just to name a few of the incredibly bloated federal bureaucracies, he will choose to release prisoners, and let children go without Head Start Programs.” – Cluster

    First of all, the GOP’s unwillingness to cut back a little on the overseas daycare that the defense budget has become means that the sequestration will be short.

    Second of all, nothing wrong with ending Head Start. ROI is negligible as the CATO Institute has amply documented. If prisons are full, no problem, just release anyone who is in there for drug possession, a crime Obama himself admits to committing in his ghostwritten book.

    The real problem with ending Head Start is that it takes cheap labor or potentially cheap labor out of the market place. Ending the war on drugs would potentially cut back in profits for the alcohol and tobacco industries.

    Ann Coulter has a good article about GOP pandering with taxpayer money and hits the nail on the head when she says “Amnesty never shows up in polls as a top concern of Hispanics. It’s a top concern of employers, not workers — which isn’t going to do much to help Republicans shed that “Party of the Rich” image.”

    Ann’s problem is that she falls for the notion that spending trillions of dollars building schools in Afghanistan is making the US safer. That’s not her fault, she grew up in a family where her dad followed Russian spies around shopping for baubles and thought he was winning the Cold War.

  2. Retired Spook February 28, 2013 / 12:55 pm

    Even the Hufftongton Post gets it.

    President Barack Obama is pulling out all the stops to warn just what could happen if automatic budget cuts kick in. Americans are reacting with a collective yawn.

    They know the drill: Obama raises the alarm, Democrats and Republicans accuse each other of holding a deal hostage, there’s a lot of yelling on cable news, and then finally, when everyone has made their points, a deal is struck and the day is saved.

    Maybe not this time. Two days before $85 billion in cuts are set to hit federal programs with all the precision of a wrecking ball, there are no signs that a deal is imminent. Even the White House conceded Wednesday that efforts to avoid the cuts were unlikely to succeed before they kick in on Friday.

    Still, for all the grim predictions, Americans seem to be flipping the channel to something a little less, well, boring. They wonder, haven’t we been here before?

  3. Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) February 28, 2013 / 1:38 pm

    I must admit that I might have had it wrong; I felt, and still do to some extent that sequestration gives a giant win to Obama and the dimocrats, since the cuts give them what they want; cuts to the military and a weapon to bludgeon Republican with (terminal preposition aside).

    My feeling was that Republicans should make the best deal available that does not include new or expanded taxes. As demonstrated by our resident broken clock in ‘dolf’s rambling libertarian screed, there are many (many!) areas in which waste and abuse can be cut, or more specifically growth curtailed. Yet sequestration, in its current form does not allow for discriminant pruning ~ only across the board cuts.

    Some, although a much smaller amount than Obama’s sycophants would have us believe, of the increases in spending are necessary costs which must increase; partially because costs go up and partially because of Bernanke’s Printing Press. In any event, like any business, budgetary planning includes these increases simply stating that X% be cut is unreasonable, illogical and in some cases unlawful (see: unfunded mandates).

    The best deal possible preserves the amount of the cuts (reductions in growth), gives the budgeteers the flexibility to find the reductions at a higher level, and includes no new or expanded taxes.

    A deal must be done. It is in more in our interest to get it right then score political points.

    Gird your loins for the inevitable squealing “The Republicans Sold Us Out!” and “Boehner is a RINO!” regardless of how the deal is struck. I would remind my fiscal conservative fellows that we hold no majority in public office, lost the elections, and, if we are true fiscal conservatives recognize the realities and deal with it.

    A compromise beats a defeat any day.

    • Retired Spook February 28, 2013 / 2:35 pm

      Yet sequestration, in its current form does not allow for discriminant pruning ~ only across the board cuts.

      I think we’re way beyond pruning, Count.

      • The Return of Rathaven February 28, 2013 / 3:07 pm

        Trimming the Federal Budget to save money is like trying to trim nose hairs to look like a mustache.

      • neocon01 February 28, 2013 / 3:24 pm

        it’s all BS and showman ship.

        alinsky, marx, cloward & piven…..right on schedule.

        enjoy the ride to hell…..SOON!!

    • bardolf2 February 28, 2013 / 4:08 pm

      “I must admit that I might have had it wrong.” -Count de money

      There is one advantage in making half of the $$ that the bloviating Count takes in on an annual basis. One has less turf to protect, especially if it is taxpayer’s money. NPR and PBS could easily get by without taxpayer support, the military bases in Europe and the rest of the free world would be in sore trouble.

      The Count doesn’t know which game is being played so he doesn’t realize his side has already been defeated. When you have to give in constantly to what the other side demands that is another name for losing. Call it a compromise if that goes well with single malt scotch.

      • neocon01 February 28, 2013 / 5:54 pm

        Dr. baldork

        did you see your U tube vid I postsd?

      • neocon01 February 28, 2013 / 5:56 pm

        Dr. B


        The Daily Chuckle

      • neocon01 February 28, 2013 / 6:06 pm


        not only butt ugly, but DUMBER than a box of rocks……..SFN

        Maxine Waters Warns 170 MILLION Jobs Could Be Lost Due to Sequestration Cuts

      • bardolf2 February 28, 2013 / 6:14 pm


        Yes I did, made me laugh for 10 minutes. Leslie Nielsen came to mind almost immediately!

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) February 28, 2013 / 6:46 pm

        That’s mo-NAY!

        It’s nice to read an academician who finally recognizes that I protect the taxpayers’ money. Now if he’d just admit how much of that taxpayers’ money he wastes on the arithmetic classes he teaches these institutions could get back to their main purpose; keeping me in Dominican cigars and Scotch whiskey.

        I see ‘dolf is buying into the histrionics perpetrated by the Obama Administration; a 2% reduction in the growth rate means oversea military instillations “in Europe and the rest of the free world” will have to man the parapets with paper mache weapons and cardboard cut-out sentries. Simple math seems to challenge our poor ‘dolf; if a military base in a foreign theater is compromised by giving them more money today than yesterday, then fire the commandant.

        It is good that he can demonstrate his critical thinking skills by defining “losing” before the outcome has been announced; must be from all those Libertarian victories we’ve seen in the past 40 years. How’s that stubborn intransigence working out for you guys? Stopped the War on Drugs cold did ya’? Put an end to occupational licensure once and for all? I see you’ve cut off all foreign aid and gained open borders and abortion for all without restriction or interfer3ence. Please, lecture us about the successes gained from no compromise, I’m sure we’d all love to learn from the libertarian triumphs.

        Winning! That’s the ticket.

      • bardolf2 February 28, 2013 / 8:26 pm

        Count de Monay

        Take all the remedial math courses offered at your esteemed institution. Multiply by amount the state pays per student in these courses and then by the number of students. Subtract off the pay of the grad students and a little for utilities. The big remainder is what keeps you in cigars, not hypothetical savings that you discover.

        How about you going to the university higher ups and proposing that all the remedial courses be farmed out to the community colleges to save the taxpayers? Because that’s where your scotch money comes from these days.

        As for Libertarian wins, the prison population is decreasing for the first time in 3 decades. Marijuana will be decriminalized across the country by the end of the decade since all the wilting nannies like yourself will be in the old folks home eating pudding. The open border ‘problem’ is done if one considers that more Mexicans are returning to Mexico than coming to the US. That just means you’re going to have to cast your net pretty far to find someone to change the bedpan for cheap when it comes time.

        Last I looked the Cold War was over, Europe is self selecting a historic exit with the demographic choices. You want to have US bases in Spain then you’ll just have to live with Obama taking your well earned moola.

      • Cluster February 28, 2013 / 8:59 pm

        Count and Barstool,

        You both have a lot to learn from this guy:

        Thomas Butler can take you to school on the study of double-dipping in New Jersey. Since he retired as a school superintendent 18 years ago, Butler has held 23 jobs as an interim or temporary chief at public school districts in 12 different counties. While continuing to draw six-figure salaries from taxpayers, he has pocketed $1.2 million in state pension checks.

        – See more at:

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) March 1, 2013 / 7:27 pm


        I’ll have retirement from my days as a teacher (CALSTRS) and retirement from my stint as a state government employee (CALPRS) as well as my Roth IRA, annuities and 403(b).
        We are all called back as “consultants” at full salary for 6 months at the end of the remaining fiscal year, then 6 months of the new fiscal year after “officially retiring” all the while collecting full retirement benefits (listed above) Social Security and are taxed at the lowest possible rate since we’re only working part time.

        We need to be called back because otherwise we’d have to pay for our own computer porn, and we can’t have that. Not as long as we can find suckers working harder every day to pay their “fair share.”

      • Cluster March 1, 2013 / 7:56 pm

        Who knew that the new generation of entrepreneurs would be government employees? LOL. Great gig if you can get it.

  4. Cluster February 28, 2013 / 8:44 pm

    I was reading through some articles and this paragraph just jumped out at me because of the last sentence and particularly ONE word:

    The liberal media’s effort to demonize Sen. Ted Cruz continues. On last Friday’s episode of PBS’s Inside Washington, the mostly left-leaning panel of journalists piled on the criticism of the junior senator from Texas. The attacks were focused on Cruz’s questioning of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during Hagel’s confirmation battle. Moderator Gordon Peterson presented the topic like this: “The Tea Party activists love this guy for being so aggressive. I’m wondering how this aggression so early in his career plays on in the Senate.”

    The word obviously is career. Serving in politics should not be a career and that folks, is a huge part of our problem. Too many people see it as a career.

    • Cluster February 28, 2013 / 8:51 pm

      Of course the other point to take from this excerpt is that liberals just despise opposition to their agenda. Liberals would be thrilled if we would all just keep our mouths shut, obeyed their mandates and accepted all their theories. Freedom and democracy is just too messy.

      • Amazona March 2, 2013 / 10:39 am

        Custer, you are right. The Left is (are?) such a bizarre example of contradictions, it is hard to keep track.

        They rail against “racism” and find what they call right-wing racism in every innocent comment. They claim that the most innocuous statements are really “code” for racism. They condemn millions of Americans for what only they can discern. But at the same time leaders on the Left engage in militant, virulent, racism, not only wallowing in it, not only having it the cornerstone of the church the President attended for decades, but overtly and publicly calling for the death of Americans because of the color of their skin,

        They squeal about what they call “discrimination” yet they engage in discrimination day in and day out. What it comes down to is that you can discriminate against anything the Left does not like, support or associate with, but any time you take a position that is contrary to Leftist agendas ‘discrimination’ suddenly becomes an ugly word, and a pejorative.

        They preen about their “inclusiveness” yet they exclude, openly and with pride, everyone who does not fall into their tight little circle of personal belief and political agenda.

        In the same vein, they demand and celebrate “diversity”, which they define as being exactly like they are.

        We are now hearing a lot of talk about the need for education, education this and education that, but none of this ever includes the very necessary reform of our public education system to strip it of its political indoctrination aspect. And while the Left claims to be all about “choice” somehow this “choice” never includes the choice of parents in what kind of education their tax dollars will buy for their children.

  5. Jeremiah March 1, 2013 / 7:53 pm

    So, Obama is going to cut benefits and pay to those who work, but those who are on the welfare system, who don’t work, will continue to get theirs. He expects the entire nation to be subservient to his every wish and desire. A fascist state, indeed.

    I refuse!

  6. Cluster March 1, 2013 / 7:58 pm

    Anyone listen to the petulant child today (otherwise known as the President) admit that the sequestration cuts would not be the apocalypse that some people had been describing?


    Does he mean himself? What a moron.

    • M. Noonan March 1, 2013 / 10:32 pm


      What disgusted me most was the sound bite I heard where he says, “most people around here believe I’m being reasonable”….

      • Cluster March 1, 2013 / 11:04 pm

        Obama is just a compete embarrassment. Words simply can’t describe the disdain I have for that idiot.

      • Amazona March 2, 2013 / 10:23 am

        But Mark, he was right! As long as you understand that “around here” means the West Wing and the networks.

Comments are closed.