Keukasmallies Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Good article on the give and take of sequestration; describes techniques that are readily transferable to all sorts of crises...unfortunately. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/opinion/brooks-the-dc-dubstep.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 It is unsurprising that these tools are more interested in playing games than doing their jobs. The idiots keep re-electing these pieces of trash because they're too stupid to see beyond the empty rhetoric and look at what's going on. I'd root for crashing and burning, but I don't think it will force the electorate act any more intelligently at the polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 great article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 He does have a chance to lead the country into a budget showdown with furloughed workers and general mayhem, for which people will primarily blame Republicans. Not in this area. Every federal employee I know subject to furloughed (which is all of them) blames both sides of the aisle. Also, everyone realizes: it's happening. Sequestration will happen. No elected official in DC wants to avoid it at this point, since it's too juicy an opportunity to point fingers at the other guy. And the real damage doesn't even start until April, and only REALLY gets going in September, so there's "plenty of time" for Congress to go on more vacations while pointing fingers at the other guy for being a panic monger... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) So anyone who is paying attention right now knows the sequestration NOT a cut in spending, but a reduction in the amount of new spending. For all the bluster about the horrific things that are going to happen, you need only be of the smallest mind to believe any of it. To listen to the president, all hell is going to break loose. Of course, this is all a bunch of crap, but don't bother CNN with this little truth, as they get in on the Obama message of doom and despair. Headline: Budget cuts: I'm losing my job next week http://money.cnn.com....html?hpt=hp_t1 We really live in embarrassing times. Edited February 26, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Come In Peace Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 So anyone who is paying attention right now knows the sequestration NOT a cut in spending, but a reduction in the amount of new spending. For all the bluster about the horrific things that are going to happen, you need only be of the smallest mind to believe any of it. To listen to the president, all hell is going to break loose. Of course, this is all a bunch of crap, but don't bother CNN with this little truth, as they get in on the Obama message of doom and despair. Headline: Budget cuts: I'm losing my job next week http://money.cnn.com....html?hpt=hp_t1 We really live in embarrassing times. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/26/sequester-fears-take-mainstream-media-hysteria-to-new-heights/?intcmp=HPBucket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 And now the DHS is releasing incarcerated illegals in Arizona in anticipation of the budget cuts? It's impossible to get more spiteful and petty than this administration. Is the WH hoping people will die at the hands of these prisoners so as to make their point? Doesn't seem so far fetched to me. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/26/illegal-immigrants-released-detention-centers-sequ/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) The danger here, that no one, certainly not either "side", seems to get is the nothingburger effect. What happens when nothing happens? Consider: if the unemployement rate drops .01% we already know that the idiot left will blame the Republicans, and, if it goes up by .01% we know that the idiot right will take credit for cutting spending. However, really, nobody is going to pay attention...unless that change is 3-4 points. What happens when it isn't? Should we do another sequester? I mean come on, according to each side, defense spending, or entitlement spending, is what is holding us back. Well, fine. Apparently not enough peple are still alive who learned the hard lesson of what happens to us when we let our military slip. Fine. You'll just have to learn the hard way. More kids are going to die next war, but they will be your kids, instead of your grandfather's buddies. Who will be blamed? Who cares? Will you when your kid comes home in a box because he only had basic training and a few weeks of AIT? War isn't going away, whereas, Medicare was never part of the human condition and therefore it's completely assinine to put an = between them. But, so what? If this is the only way to get spending under control, and get people to take spending seriously, scew it. What happens to the these politicians when reduced spending with no effect...is proven? If we were to continue down the current path of spending, there's no guarantee that we'd have the cash for operations anyway. So, if this is the ONLY way to get DC under control, I'm all for it. Besides, it's far past time for Europe and Japan/Korea to handle their own business. Why should we be their defense budget? Let Germany pay 100% for its own defense, same with Sweden, and let us see just how quickly their socialist paradise lasts. Comparing them to us...is the work of an idiot. Edited February 26, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 The danger here, that no one, certainly not either "side", seems to get is the nothingburger effect. What happens when nothing happens? Consider: if the unemployement rate drops .01% we already know that the idiot left will blame the Republicans, and, if it goes up by .01% we know that the idiot right will take credit for cutting spending. However, really, nobody is going to pay attention...unless that change is 3-4 points. What happens when it isn't? Should we do another sequester? I mean come on, according to each side, defense spending, or entitlement spending, is what is holding us back. Well, fine. Apparently not enough peple are still alive who learned the hard lesson of what happens to us when we let our military slip. Fine. You'll just have to learn the hard way. More kids are going to die next war, but they will be your kids, instead of your grandfather's buddies. Who will be blamed? Who cares? Will you when your kid comes home in a box because he only had basic training and a few weeks of AIT? War isn't going away, whereas, Medicare was never part of the human condition and therefore it's completely assinine to put an = between them. But, so what? If this is the only way to get spending under control, and get people to take spending seriously, scew it. What happens to the these politicians when reduced spending with no effect...is proven? If we were to continue down the current path of spending, there's no guarantee that we'd have the cash for operations anyway. So, if this is the ONLY way to get DC under control, I'm all for it. Besides, it's far past time for Europe and Japan/Korea to handle their own business. Why should we be their defense budget? Let Germany pay 100% for its own defense, same with Sweden, and let us see just how quickly their socialist paradise lasts. Comparing them to us...is the work of an idiot. I just realized...I didn't miss you. Not at all. Did anyone miss OC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I just realized...I didn't miss you. Not at all. Did anyone miss OC? So much so....that you didn't feel it was necessary to reply, huh? Did you forget? I've had your number for years. A few months off doesn't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I just realized...I didn't miss you. Not at all. Did anyone miss OC? I thought TYTT was OC only sober. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I thought TYTT was OC only sober. Ah yes, another guy whose number I've so thoroughly had for years adds his autonomic response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 So much so....that you didn't feel it was necessary to reply, huh? Did you forget? I've had your number for years. A few months off doesn't change that. No you haven't. ****, you just admitted you didn't even have YOUR OWN number for the past several months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Come In Peace Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 No you haven't. ****, you just admitted you didn't even have YOUR OWN number for the past several months. Love him or hate him, that was hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Obama's Next Move The next two or three weeks should be interesting. Barring some sort of last minute compromise, the sequester will come into effect. Given the size of the federal budget, the actual effects of cutting a few billion -- not from the budget as it existed in 2012 but from its projected increase -- should be trivial. But it is in the power of the President to make it painful; and, if this President is true to form, he will make it as painful as possible. Everyone has seen this before at the state level. The legislature trims the projected budget, and the Governor, intent on expanding patronage, responds by declaring an emergency and by cutting access to state parks, library hours . . . you name it. The point is to rally the public against the legislature by cutting popular items while carefully protecting the pork that sustains the Governor's political party. This sort of irresponsibility is, I suspect, what we will soon see at the federal level. The difference is that Obama will be more brazen and audacious than any Governor has ever been. I will be flying to New York on Friday to give a talk at the annual meeting of the National Association of Scholars. I would not at all be surprised if there is a shortage of TSA personnel managing the security lines and if the Air Traffic Controllers are in such short supply that things grind almost to a stop. If my guess is right, it will be Obama's calculation that he can soon bring John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and the Republicans in Congress to their knees. If he makes the attempt and they cave, you can kiss even the most modest attempt at fiscal responsibility goodbye. The name of the game for our President is to force a crisis that will eventuate in massive tax increases -- first on high earners and then on the middle class more generally. The Republicans are at a disadvantage. Obama commands the bully pulpit and our partisan press will make sure that he is heard loud and clear. The Republicans do not have a standard-bearer. There is no one authorized to speak for them, and their leadership in Congress, while canny, is anything but eloquent. Senator McConnell, whom I greatly admire, is the master of mumbling, and John Boehner, whom I also admire, is quiet and plain-spoken. That is one problem. There is another. CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC are not going to give the Republicans a platform. They will broadcast Obama's remarks over and over again. They will shut out our representatives. What this means is that it will take courage for the Republicans to stand their ground. They and everyone who supports their stand must speak up or much will be lost. The common thread should be simple: "The sequester cuts nothing from last year's budget. It cuts very little from the projected budget for 2013. The President has it in his power to keep things running smoothly, and the misery being inflicted on our fellow citizens is entirely his doing." http://ricochet.com/...h.b5XfTslF.dpuf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 (edited) No you haven't. ****, you just admitted you didn't even have YOUR OWN number for the past several months. Yes I have. For. Years. (One word sentences seem to be all the rage here lately, so I'd figured I'd try it out) As for the rest? WTF? I been busy, and yeah, too lazy to actively pursue fixing the problem, but also, unlike you, this really isn't one of the top 3 things that drive my life. If your wife wanted to punish you: taking away your TSW privileges, or just limiting them to the football board? Wouldn't that be #1 on the list? Tom's wife's friend: What's the matter? Tom's wife: Tom has taken up whittling during his punishment time. Tom's wife's friend: So? That's seems like a relatively harmless pastime. Tom's wife: He has made litte stick figures and carved little handles into them. He spends entire nights yelling at them. It's gotten to the point where even I think this conner...is an idiot, and that ...lybob is incapable of abstract thought. I have forgotten who is being punished here. Love him or hate him, that was hilarious. For. Years. Edited February 27, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 (edited) The final irony comes from the sideshow over whose idea all this was to begin with. Bob Woodward says it was Obama and Obama says it was the Republicans. Truth is Obama could have scored a big win in historical terms by standing proudly behind this idea and adding: “I expect the heads of each department to exercise maximum discretion and restraint in targeting the cuts to the least vital areas.” Who would have criticized him for that? He would only have earned accolades. Instead of the accolades Obama spoke to the acolytes and the Kool-Aid drinkers. He wooed the wards of the state and fought Woodward. Too bad, because we could sure use some leadership in Washington, D.C. . Edited February 27, 2013 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Cain Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 It should comedown to simple arithmetic that you can't grow government spending faster than inflation & the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 So it turns out the devil is in the details, and the WH attempts to scare the hell out of American citizens is either a blatant attempt to create fear, or he really is just too stupid to understand the law he signed. http://online.wsj.co...cleTabs=article According to Mr. Obama and his budget office, the sequester cuts are indiscriminate and spell out specific percentages that will be subtracted from federal "projects, programs and activities," or PPAs. Except for the exemptions in the 2011 budget deal, the White House says it must now cut across the board regardless of how important a given PPA is. Food inspectors, say, will be treated the same as subsidies for millionaire farmers. Not so fast. Programs, projects and activities are a technical category of the federal budget, but the sequester actually occurs at the roughly 1,200 broader units known as budget accounts. Some accounts are small, but others contain hundreds of PPAs and the larger accounts run to billions of dollars. For the Pentagon in particular, the distinction between PPAs and accounts is huge. This means in most cases the President has the room to protect his "investments" while managing the fiscal transition over time. This is what happens when you think you're electing a leader, but you really just elect a guy who can read well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 CNN Money breaks down the end of the world as we know it, discussing seven items that will really hurt because of the cuts formerly known as "a reduction in the increase in spending." These in include "Granny wont get her lunch" and "Your preschooler could be stuck at home. Yes. They actually wrote that. Way to stay on message, CNN! Keep this up and you may be able to get an interview with the president BEFORE The Morning Zoo Radio Show! http://money.cnn.com....html?hpt=hp_t1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts