Sequester?

[callmeslick]

[off in La La land again huh slick. the sequester was about spending not about tax increases.

how nice of you to gratuitously insult me, but it merely shows the weakness in your argument. The sequester was only an emergency provision in a bill designed to generate DEFICIT REDUCTION. Nothing was limited in that bill around spending vs. taxes. Read it for yourself if you doubt me. The Congress was supposed to establish 1.6 Trillion in DEFICIT REDUCTIONS over a 10 year period. If they failed, the mandatory sequestration kicked in, and here we are....

stop listening to the Presidents lies

don't call others liars when you are spreading bullshit yourownself....

[Pudfark]

Here is a little interesting word for word read on the topic.
Don't cheat, read it all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... _blog.html

[callmeslick]

old news to anyone who was paying attention when it happened. It was designed, primarily by Jack Lew to FORCE Congress to act. Lew underestimated the unwillingness of Congress to act in the public interest. By their inaction, Congress chose the sequester option which they had voted for. Smokescreens about who proposed what first, or personal BS around who said what to Bob Woodward are just that, smokescreens. The fact is, the sequester is here, either allow Obama to execute the cuts, or get going with the budget.

[CUDA]

stop listening to the Presidents lies

don't call others liars when you are spreading bullshit yourownself....

the President said that he didnt propose the sequester. he did, he knew it. he lied. and it wasn't until after some Democrats came out and said yes he did propose the sequester that the Whitehouse press secretary admitted that yes they did propose it. the President lied. FACT. so would you like me to stop there or should I start going back on every factually proven lie that he has said? It could take a few pages. just own up and admit that the president lied and then we can get back to his use of scare tactics and not the truth on the cuts.

[Pudfark]

Is that your way of saying "Obama had no part"?

Cuz, that ain't what's wrote there.

Standing by for your credible educational link to refute.

Edit: All for Slick

[callmeslick]

stop listening to the Presidents lies

don't call others liars when you are spreading bullshit yourownself....

the President said that he didnt propose the sequester. he did, he knew it. he lied. and it wasn't until after some Democrats came out and said yes he did propose the sequester that the Whitehouse press secretary admitted that yes they did propose it. the President lied. FACT. so would you like me to stop there or should I start going back on every factually proven lie that he has said? It could take a few pages. just own up and admit that the president lied and then we can get back to his use of scare tactics and not the truth on the cuts.

never disagreed that the White House participated in those negotiations, so maybe a lie, if he made that claim. Still, a pointless piece of trivia compared to dealing with the sequester now that it is here, and no way removing the fact that you lied to Buzz twice when claiming that revenues were part of the bill's intentions, and the GOP chose the sequester option rather than change the tax code.

edit--I cannot find a link to Obama ever stating that they didn't propose the sequester, only that they didn't think Congress would allow it to take place.
So, CUDA, some links to his exact words, from the President himself, would be nice.

[Buzz]

Sorry I missed this, but slick covered it.

Cuda, you're out of touch of the facts. Stop the bias against Obama, and look at what's really going on.

Keep in mind that Obama can't pass a bill. It's up to the House and Senate to do that. Something they can't seem to do lately.

[Barfly]

The tax 'loopholes' that Obama needs to grow government, may disproportionately benefit wealthier Americans, but they affect most other working Americans, and that's where the math shows the bulk of his revenue generation MUST come from. Tax deductions on mortgage interest, deferrals on investment into personal retirement funds like 401K and IRA, tax 'breaks' on employer provided healthcare plans etc, will negatively impact many, and negatively impact the economy more than a reduction in federal spending. This bait and switch crap blaming the rich then forwarding policy that affects every working person is going to backfire, even with much of the LIV group that elected him, when they see the effect of less disposable income. Not to mention the decrease in purchasing power from inflationary monetary policy.

[Buzz]

I agree. The answer is there, but how do we get them to agree with a sensible plan?

[Barfly]

I agree. The answer is there, but how do we get them to agree with a sensible plan?

I don't think there's anything we can do, other than watch while it get's bad. As a traditional Conservative, now mostly Libertarian, I see the Republican leadership making small attempts to give slack/compromise with the Dems/Obama, and Obama just sayin' that ain't enough and yanking as hard as he can on the rope. All the big players in this game suck, some more than others, and they are all screwing us. The few that mean well and do well, are invisible that noisy morass in DC. My family grew up, went to school in the DC area, grandparents were government insiders if you will, and it was obvious our central government was too big, too corrupt, too distant and too unaccountable decades ago.