Amazing that this story and others that are critical to the administration is posted at this time rather than the 9:00 a.m. slot reserved for the rat pack from the DDI.

Dear Mr. President,

You got your Tax Increase now it is time for you to do some CUTTING…..

Yes, we know it is CONGRESSES job to send you the Budget and Your job to Approve or Disapprove it….. Since Congress is unable to do its job it is up to you as our Leader to step forward and get the job done…..

Dear Congress,

1. Filibusters have to be continuous and filibuster must be present....

2. Majority must be present to be in session

3. No more Super Majority, You know 51 % is majority 60 % is BS.....

4. Quit the Pork, 1 Bill per item.....

Yes, cuts are in order. However before you touch your so called entitlement programs lets address some additional costs.....

1. Runaway spending by Home Land Security
2. Runaway cost of Public Sector Workers
3. Runaway costs of Foreign Aid
4. Runaway cost of Military Hardware
5. Runaway cost of CONGRESS
6. Runaway cost of EPA
7. Runaway cost of TSA

When this is done then we can talk about Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, and unemployment…..

If the President is so concerned about the Sequester than why would he just two days ago say "now is the time" "now is the time" for immigration reform which means...11+million illegal immigrants would be granted amnesty...which means 11+ mouths to feed off the Government dole.

He says one thing and does another the whole while the uniformed or seemingly stupid public falls for it time and time again. Owebama doesn't accept responsibility for any action and seems to to be manipulative of the situation at large. We have a revenue problem, we don't have a spending problem, We have paying for it problem, yes we have spending problem. I mean really if the White House doesn't have iota own reality TV show it really should because I would watch it. Wait...I am living it every day and this reality show sucks!

I can only think of one thing right now and that is how Dr. Ben Carson schooled the President at the prayer breakfast. I have seen videos of the Owebama getting snubbed by the Russians and not shaking his have by four diplomats, but to be educated on everything this current administration is doing that is 'opposite and divisive' of everything they 'should' be doing was a golden moment for this whole country.

ObamaCare will soon be mirroring "Logan's Run" and our seniors will soon be entering the 'Carousel' amid the decisions of the death panel. Even he mentioned the rising costs these seniors will attribute to health care. Science fiction is being confirmed as science faction with this current administration.

And finally the creme on top is not advocating stiffer penalties for criminals who use guns in violent crimes...no this President will put 100% of the people in harm by affecting 99% of law abiding citizens with stiffer gun regulations which will lead to confiscation in the future (history shows this). We abort babies, criminalize large sodas, and penalize law abiding citizens whom by definition have a 2nd amendment as the reason this country exists today!!

We are in a Twilight ZONE and its here in America. DR, BEN CARSON FORT PRESIDENT...the only person to make sense in five years now...no...twenty years now. Please watch the prayer breakfast with Dr. Carson on youtube you will be enlightened or your money back...wait...we have no money, so just do it for your country because you care!

Sane. I hate to tell you this, but, it is not Obamas job to come up with anything, it is our Lovely Congresses Job. they all came up with the deal that should happen on March first, everyone agreed, Let it happen. Our Politicians will not cut where things should be cut, so, let the Sequester happen. I cant wait until the Warmongers buddies get there cuts. Our congress is a do nothing Congress, and that is probably a good thing. Most of our congress are fools. Sane, remember this, Congress first, Senate Second, and if both houses agree, send to Obama for Approval or Veto, Got it. If Obama wants to, he can come up sith suggestions to go before Congress and the Senate, but, it is not in his Job Description to do so.

It is clearly congress, and particularly Boners house that is not passing a budget worthy of consideration. The sequester at worst was an agreement between congress and the president. How can these unscrupulous azzhole republicans try to pass the blame on to the president when they are the ones not doing their job? They control the purse strings, they pass the budgets not the president. I also know the president is right, it is time to close the loopholes that these rich S.O.B.s have. It is time for the very richest in this country to step up and pay for the mess their idiot republican representatives created. The borrow and spend republicans are the problem not the cure.

There will be nothing left by the time hes through.... We have no policy in place since the administration has taken office that is currently working or worth the record TRILLIONS of dollars they've spent putting us where we are at... Hats off to the republicans at least now they are standing some ground , even if its the concrete setting up around them.... The world is looking at the U.S. , is that laughter We are hearing now ?

Why is it that Liberals insist on calling the rich "SOB's". They achieved the "American Dream" and they employ people like you and me. So that we can WORK to achieve ours. Those rich "SOB's" are the ones still investing in this country. Liberals would rather believe in this Eutopian world that Obama paints for them - rather than the truth. Obama will spend the next four years blaming everyone for his failures - and for those of us that can handle the truth - He has yet to show up for work. He is as checked out today as he was before the election.

At the end of his four years when everything is not all flowers, unicorns and sunshine - where will he be - on a plane headed to Hawaii...still blaming George and the Republicans.

His only "plan" for this country - is to see it fail. He just may get his wish...

As usual,

Too many voters embrace feel-good propaganda that they want to hear instead of learning the basic facts about issues they care about. They should do a better job of calling out dishonest politicians -- and shunning media outlets that stoke political food fights.

http://money.msn.com/investing/11-things-wrong-with-congress

DoctorLogic,

Do not call yourself something you are NOT (proven by your post), Logic.

Causative Timeline:

1. President Obama in his President's Proposal to US Congress Demanded the Spending of Previously Not Budgeted For $2.1 Trillion.

You don't even know what that $2.1 Trillion was spent on do you DoctorLogic. You tell me what the $2.1 Trillion was spent on and when, then we will have an adult conversation AFTER you do the Actual Research.

2. To pay for the Spending of Previously Not Budgeted For $2.1 Trillion as Demanded by President Obama, President Obama in another President's Proposal to US Congress demanded "Across the Board Budget Cuts" of previously budgeted for Programs (like Medicare, Social Security, "Old People Programs that the Old People already paid into, etc.), Projects (like the US Army Corps of Engineers Infrastructure Projects within the US, etc.), Agencies (like FEMA, Department of Education, Veteran's Affairs, etc.), chopping the Benefits and Entitlements of the "47%" (2012 actual 49%, 2013 update 51%).

Name the short title and the date of President Obama's President's Proposal demanding "Across the Board Budget Cuts", DoctorLogic,

The Repugnants start attempting to negotiate with President Obama for smarter Austerity Measures, he refuses, and continuely harps on his "Tax The Rich", "Rich Pay Their Fair Share"; the Repugnants keep saying that Taxing the Rich will only pay for 8 days, as well as hurt the Rich US And Foreign Business Investors for the US.

3. The Super Committee is formed to attempt to Find the Money to pay for President Obama's Demanded Spending of $2.1 Trillion, they cannot find $1.2 Trillion. As pressure to achieve something President Obama gives US Congress another President's Proposal to US Congress as a Demand that if they cannot find the money then "Automatic Sequestration".

Name the short title of President Obama's President's Proposal to US Congress and the Date DoctorLogic, Demanding "Automatic Sequestration".

Basically, the Waitress arrived with the bill of $2.1 Trillion for the meal that President Obama ate, and now he is looking for everyone else to pay.

Also DoctorLogic, Fill in the blanks:

Federal Spending:

____% Entitlements

____% Defense

____% Discretionary Spending

____% Interest (like Interest on Loans from China)

Before you even attempt illogical name calling:

From President Obama's 2013 Inaugural Speech:

We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/21/16626094-obamas-inaugural-speech-the-full-text?threadId=3650897&commentId=73569137#c73569137

I love it when liberals tout the Obama line that he has already reduced the deficit by 2.5 trillion through a combination of spending cuts and raising taxes on the top 1%. But there have been no spending cuts associated with Obama's claim, and this 2.5 trillion is nothing but an estimate of reductions through 2022. Even these so called spending cuts are nothing but reductions in planned future spending increases. Since the 2.5 trillion is dubious because of which baseline is used, and so far out it is nothing but a pipe dream and a talking point. As for the tax increases on the 1%, well at least for this year the amount it will raise was spent on Sandy Relief, so already that 2.5 trillion in estimated deficit reduction is being chipped away. Besides Nancy Pelosi says it is a false argument to say Washington has a spending problem, and of course Obama is going to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. This is what you call Democrats in denial.

How this developed is quite clear. Republicans wouldn't compromise on fiscal matters in 2010, so it was all shoved off into 2011. Republicans wouldn't agree to a balanced approach in 2011, so it was all shoved off until after the 2012 elections. In the bargain REPUBLICANS ALREADY GOT MORE SPENDING THAN TAX INCREASES;

As part of the 2011 Budget Control Act, Obama agreed to spending reductions of about $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. If you count the interest, the savings is actually $1.7 trillion. Boehner should have no problem remembering the details of that deal: As Greg Sargent points out, Boehner at the time actually gloated about the fact that the deal was "all spending cuts."

And now, with this latest offer, Obama is proposing yet more spending reductions, to the tune of several hundred billion dollars. Add it up and it’s more than $2 trillion in spending cuts Obama has either signed into law or is endorsing now. That’s obviously greater than the $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue he’s seeking. (And that doesn't even take into account automatic cuts from the 2011 budget sequester, which Obama has proposed to defer, or savings from ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.) So, yes, Obama’s proposal is unbalanced—but not in the way Republicans seem to think. If Obama were proposing a truly balanced plan, he’d be calling for even more tax revenue or even less spending reduction.

http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/110606/obama-deficit-reduction-offer-spending-cut-tax-increase-boehner#

The end result is that President Obama has already signed into law a faster deficit reduction than any time since the end of WWII and if Republicans get their way it will create exactly the austerity programs that have crashed the economies of Europe;

Believe it or not, the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.

In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

If U.S. history offers any guide, we are already testing the speed limits of a fiscal consolidation that doesn't risk backfiring. That's why the best way to address the fiscal cliff likely is to postpone it.

While long-term deficit reduction is important and deficits remain very large by historical standards, the reality is that the government already has its foot on the brakes.

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2KsMSOfkG
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

So enough whining about "not being serious" about the deficit...IT'S ALREADY FALLING, and about as rapidly as the economy can stand for now. For proof of that look no farther than Q4, in which the difference between expansion and contraction was ALL in government spending reductions.

Why would we put our faith in Republicans, who created 30 years of middle class stagnation culminating in a world economic collapse?

We HAVE cut spending....

NO.

We've simply cut the increases in spending.

Only in liberal la-la land does reducing an increase in spending equate to a 'spending cut'.

.

According to the Democrat leadership, "we don't have a spending problem".

"Socialism is great, until you run out of other people's money"

.

Let's hold their feet to the fire. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Let the sequesters happen. This was a deal agreed to by the GOP so they could get an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts For The Wealthy. They were threatening to destroy our nation's credit rating, and in fact did hurt it (costing us more on our debt). The GOP wants ALL cuts to come from social programs for the poor and middle class, and have refused to budge from that position despite bi-partisan support for Simson-Bowles. Well now it's put up or shut up time. The President should take no calls from the GOP and just let the sequesters take effect. The military/industrial complex, who are the GOP backers, will go completely insane. It is time for the "Party of NO" to cease to exist. In the mid-terms we need to vote every Republican up for re-election out of office. That is the only way this country will ever function again.

John B.: Thanks for your facts and the sources. You are correct on all counts. However, there will be very little reading done by those who have full animosity for President Obama. Their view of economics and the steps necessary to strengthen the U.S. can never surpass the color of our President, sorry to say. To be so mired in the dregs of the repub/tparty song and dance lessens any chance of moving our country forward. We have a President that has no time for the pettiness coming from Congress; a President that looks for advances now to secure our future, yet little can be done because of the repub/tparty need to obey the manifesto of big money to destroy our President.

We must rid Congress of the repub/tparty whose platform is one of deceit, whose base is devious at best. Every year elections are held at the local and state levels. Get involved, get informed - vote.

“We’re weeks away from the president’s sequester,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Wednesday morning on Capitol Hill. “And the president laid out no plan to eliminate the sequester and the harmful cuts that will come of it.”

Note: "...the president's sequester". Many do not understand that the sequestration idea originated in the Obama White House. It was put in a bill and Obama signed it. He owns it.

Obamas lies & poor policies are starting to come back & there there's not many more people to blame.

Obama was handed a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit budget, the deficit is now 800 billion and change, all you brainiac right wing dolts, there is the math. Deficits have been cut. Don't let facts bother you, go listen to reruns of Rush. You won't get any facts there.

Sane..."He got taxes on the rich..."

Obama raised taxes on every American by printing money causing every American's dollar to be worth less. And that includes the poor, people on welfare and Dr. Logic. He also increased payroll taxes on everyone working, even the poor.

And yes, Obama has cut some spending, but nothing that amounts to anything of significance in the long run. Obama doesn't have the guts to make the big cuts, because he is a failure as a leader. He is afraid that doing the right thing might cause the Democrats to lose votes.

Lets just call bovine excrement on republican, Obama can't do a damn thing about stopping the sequester. That is congress's baby. Presidents do not make the budget and Boner is just playing politics, as usual, and nothing else. Boner is the failure. Congress has a approval rating in the teens and over half the country know Obama has done a good job. That should be enough said.

Happy Valentine's Day...y'all

What keep you up, this Valentine's morning?

Johntho

Did Obama agree or not to the sequester? Was it not his own idea?

Oh, please tell me exactly how you can determine what the budget deficit is when you don't have a budget to begin with.

And I'm not supporting EITHER party, but in fairness the House HAS sent budget proposals to the Senate. It is Harry Reid that refuses to bring them to the floor for a vote. Whether up or down is irrelevant, he won't let them see the light of day for discussions.

Only liberal loons would actually beleive that the overall budget was cut. Sure we cut .000000001% of this and added 1% of that, this is the fuzzy math the Dems are noted for. What we have is a bunch of frightened little whiners who live off government handouts fearing that some of it may go away.

the sequestor is a GOP valentine's day gift to us... so..the GOP doesn't really understand love!!

“In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn’t agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars’ worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year,” the president said in his State of the Union address.

Republicans AND democrats presented a BILL to obama. obama signed it which makes it a LAW. So here is obama throwing his fellow democrats under the bus but trying to blame the republicans for the sequester.

obama made a deal to get what he wanted - an increase in the debt ceiling. Now he doesn't like the deal he made with congress and is trying to deflect blame to the republicans. He reminds me of a 3 y.o. - it's their fault that I'm not getting my way.

I applaud the congress for their efforts to try and keep the red ink pen out of obama's hands because we all know he is unable to man up to his agreements without this leverage. Maybe he will park AF1 long enough in the DC area to do his job - present congress with a reasonable budget proposal (something he hasn't done for the last four years).

Get real thats just stupid and you better hope whomever put those ideas in your head is not your financial advisor cause they are out to make a damn fool of you and it appears they have succeeded

The sequestor is a typical result of US politics, if Congress starts on something, it can finish...no political will, no political skill.

The GOP has mistakenly blamed the debt and deficit on the DEMs, but medicare prescription drug benefit, especially the 2 unfunded wars, and ever more....the recession (thus falling revenues) all contribute mightily to this fiscal crisis which can be solved only slowly. Before it's solved, everyone is blaming it on everyone else, just as you people here.

Good job earth girl, you have put your finger on the problem which is racism. Obama has a good agenda for the country. The republican parties only agenda is to demonize Obama.

How quaint that liberals now tout what the 2013 budget deficit is now only 800 billion as claimed by Johntho. I assume he got that number from the budget passed and signed into law by Obama? Wait, Democrats don't have the government running on a budget, just one spending resolution after another. So the reality of the deficit for 2013, it's anyone's guess. Of course in typical liberal fashion Johntho didn't provide proof, and he punctuated his claim with insults and name calling. Maybe Johntho also believes that we are now all going twice as far on a gallon of gasoline, even though that target doesn't supposedly happen for another 12 years.

a typo alert for #1.29

The sequestor is a typical result of US politics, if Congress starts on something, it can/can't finish...no political will, no political skill.

Sorry.

Thinker you can't think, it isn't Obama's debt ceiling, it isn't Obama's sequester, its all on congress and yes that is republican and democrats. However it was the republicans holding the country hostage that prompted the sequester. They should just pay the bills that they ran up. That is not the presidents job.

Doctor Logic --- "sequester" was an O'Bama creation and not the GOP's. The idea of a "Super Committee" was an O'Bama creation, not the GOP. When you have no funds and are facing a major debt, you cut your spending, you don't just "print more money". O'Bama has not only refused to cut spending, he has increased Government spending with his greatly increased Entitlement Programs. O'Bama doesn't govern, he travels around the country and gives people promises and doomsday For every dollar the Tax & Spend Democrats supported, they have supported more spending 10 fold.prophecies if he doesn't get what he wants. All he is doing is trying to deflect his total failure as President, it is always someone elses fault. There are several Psychiatric diagnosis that fit this behavior. O'Bama is using the "Scare to Voters to Death" philosophy, constantly give the Welfare crowd, the Aging Crown, Kids Programs visions of catasrophe and make yourself the Savior, and people will vote for you. The Welfare crowd is afraid that they may have to actually work. The Aging Population is afraid of changes to Medicare. O'Bama has already increased out-of-pocket expenses for Medicare and the Aging isn't even aware. The Aging Population sees O'Bama as a "Savior". Raise the ost of Medicare by 1 cent, and the Aging population cries that's too expensive and they have to choose between paying their bills or no buying the Medications. The current population on Medicare is by far the wealthiest age group. O'Bama likes to tell people that teachers, Fireman,Police, etc. will loose their jobs. In actuality, most of that funding is the responsibility of the States. While the Government will fund specific Grants in Aid, the States pay for the Majority of the cost. Next comes the threat to Head Start and Schools. O'Bama tells people that if if is not allowed to complete his agenda Head Start will disappear. His own staff have stated the Head Start is a failed project and there is no accountability for the funds. California was caught using money for Breakfast for Kids money to give Free Breakfast to anyone that came through the door. Again, the States control these funds. O'Bama is a Socialist Dictator who emulates the likes of the Socialist Dictator Karl Marx. Everyone that can do a search on the Internet or read, knows what happened to Karl. O'Bama has always used "Divide and Conquer" as a way of getting his programs funded, regardless of the cost and actual necessity of the Programs. O'Bama needs to be removed from the Office of President. He knowingly breaks U.S. Lawsand uses the U.S. Constitution as a door mat to wipe off the mud. If you want to see what America will look like under O'Bama reign, look at Russia. He has started a Revolution in this country and if he is not stopped that Revolution will be knocking at his door wanting his head.

Congress has passed a budget every year.....It never gets brought up for a vote in the Senate because Whore House Harry Reid refuses to let it be voted on. So then you get continuing resolutions with automatic spending raises for every government department.

Johntho, quit regurgatating Press Secretary Carneys BS talking points (you won't get facts there either). 2012 deficit was 1.1 trillion and has been over 1 trillion for the last 4 years. Google "2012 federal budget deficit". You'll see numerous articles CBS, NBC etc... that state that its been over one trillion each of the last 4 years.

We have added over 6 triilion to the national debt during the last 4 years. Even if we do what the President wants we won't have a balanced budget until 2020 long after Obama's out of office. By then the national debt wil be over 20 Trillion.

We can't keep kicking the can down the road!

Look stupid, yeah you rick, budget or not, which by the way is congress's baby, spending is a little above 800 trillion. Just because there is no budget does not mean we are not spending stupid. The cuts have came from many places, one thing is the Iraqi war has ended. That was a George W. Bush drain, of course you probably blame Obama for that too. stupid.

As far as gas, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? We are getting better mileage stupid, remember cash for clunkers. It had a side effect of getting some gas guzzlers off the road thus raising the mileage. Of course don't let facts get in the way of your bigotry.

You know a guy has no credibility when he/she plays the race card.

No inspiration like desperation.

So stop hating Obama for his race then.

NO NO spending cuts how dare you mention such a thing. Obama has a plan to make us all rich.

You don't believe Obama but believed Romney could cut revenue 500 billion a year, spend 200 billion more a year on the military that no military leaders even asked for and 100 bilion a year or so for a new space program. Why do you right winger demand a democratic president balance the budget but were never concerned that Bush borrowed an average of 700 billion a year over his 8 years and Romney promised even more. Name anything Bush did to reduce deficit spending over his 2 terms.

My goodness, going on another vacation. Didn't he just come back from Hawaii?

Obama is meeting up with his rich friends in Florida.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/02/obama-to-vacation-in-palm-beach-156970.html?flv=1

Taxpayers money wasted again while the victims of Hurricane Sandy still struggling.

Congress has passed a budget every year.....It never gets brought up for a vote in the Senate because Whore House Harry Reid refuses to let it be voted on. So then you get continuing resolutions with automatic spending raises for every government department.

A republican budget that has no chance of passing. What would be the point in voting on a budget they know won't pass? If republicans submit a budget were willing to compromise maybe they can get one that wll pass. Nah, it'll never happen.

JohnB... Still trying to place blame on the republicans?? Republicans had no power in 2009 & 2010, did pass legislation in 2011 despite obamas continual efforts to keep poking them in the eye then and into early 2012.

Since ol' harry effectively kept most house past bills from any senate debate throughout 2011 and 2012 I have to assume that you are acting as someones lap dog in playing the same record over and over. I see that you even ignore that the senate (under democrat control) has yet to even submit any budget as required by the 1974 budget act.

As for the sequester let it happen. Why? Because it amounts to only about 3% of our total expected expenditures, and while the economy will take a hit, it won't be a significant hit.

Rather than trying to spin anything into what obama or congress for that matter, why not tell the real story on the deficit glide path you seem to be so enamored with? You know the one where the so called cuts are nothing more than a small slowing in the rate of goivernment expenditures.

What amazes me is obamas proclivity to want to kick the can down the road on the sequester + his rhetoric on continuing the growth of government without supporting revenues. His past insistance that the republicans spell out what that all he wants to do is to always have divisiveness within congress.

Several business leaders and economist have been interviewed on BloombergTV this part week. The takeaway is that the sequester will likely happen, it will not have the catastrophic effect that politicians say it will and that the politicians can still pick and choose specific funding allowances rather than just an across the board equal cut. In the business world it is called prioritizing.

One even made the "gasp" observation that spending cuts have been made by past administrations and congresses and that taxes have been increased as well. Yet we are still here today.

Trying to blame only the right is just inane JohnB.

Come on Johntho sing along to the tune from the Rocky Horror Picture Show, lets play the race card again. Insults, name calling, race card, blame Bush, really is that all you have after more then four years? We know you don't need proof to spew the same talking points, which is why Obama feels no need to deliver. Cash for clunkers now has us going twice as far on a gallon of gas, that one is priceless. Even if the Obama claim at the SOTU had nothing to do with cash for clunkers, but this mythical mileage increase set to take affect 12 YEARS FROM NOW! Cash for clunkers, wasn't that part of the clunker Obama called a stimulus? With the not so shovel ready jobs? Or all the green we flushed down the toilet on green energy? Well Johntho you are rude, display no class, offer no facts, and are obviously a true believer. But here is a fact about the Obama recovery, if it were going any slower it would be going backwards, wait it did last quarter so never mind. Say Johntho, don't two quarters of negative growth in a row constitute a recession?

@ Johntho

I could care less what color the presidents skin is, or anyone else skin color. I don't like where the president is taking us. PERIOD Stop being a complete idiot

Why must the Boner always pollute the air wwith his lies?

Boehner Not Budging on Sequester Until Senate Acts

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer rejected the notion that the sequester was the president's idea, pointing to a budget proposal drawn up by the Republican Study Committee as the inspiration for the sequester.

"That is dead flat wrong. It is the policy included in their Cut, Cap and Balance bill as a fallback if we don't succeed," Hoyer, D-Md., said during a briefing Monday. "It is not our policy."

House Republicans passed legislation in the 112 th Congress twice to offset the across-the-board cuts, but after the Senate refused to consider either measure, those efforts expired at the end of the last session of Congress. Now, with a slightly different balance of power after the November election, Congress is essentially starting from scratch.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/blogEntry?id=18492025&sid=77&cid=77

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Furthermore, the Boner says he is listening to the American people. Obviously, not in this case or any other for that matter.

I think the Republicans will technically let the sequestration happen (even though, or because, they know it will hurt the economy) and then work on "fixing" the problems they've created before many of the cuts actually take effect. The Teaparty is a ball and chain not only the Republican Party, but on all of America.

Johntho - It's ridiculous to put the blame for a failure to pass a budget on Republicans not offering a budget "worthy of consideration;" that's not how it works. If the Senate doesn't like the Republican plan, it is up to them to come up with their own budget and submit it for a vote. The two budget proposals then go before a committee to come up with a compromise plan. However, if the Senate does not pass a budget proposal of their own, then there is nothing to compromise with. It is not president Obama's fault that a budget has not been passed; it is not the fault of the House; it is the fault of the Senate. Harry Reid has said before that he would not even allow a proposal to come up for a vote - even though Democratic members of the Senate have come up with budget proposals. You can't come up with a budget if half (Senate) doesn't want to play.

It's also ridiculous to portray the sequestration as "at worst was an agreement." It was not simply "an agreement;" it was a LAW - Budget Control Act of 2011 - passed by Congress and signed by President Obama. BOTH sides are at fault for the sequestration that will happen. You are right that the Congress has to come up with alternatives for the cuts, and the House has - TWICE; they were not passed by the Senate. The Republican's have offered changes and the Democrats wouldn't accept; yet, the Democrats have not offered any alternatives indicating changes that they WOULD accept. Funny how president Obama was quite willing to jump in and negotiate changes in the tax increase portion of the 2011 act; yet he doesn't want to get involved in the sequestration portion.

I also know the president is right, it is time to close the loopholes that these rich S.O.B.s have.

Then you are agreeing that the REPUBLICANS are right. The Republicans have been offering to close loopholes - "tax reform" - from the time of the 2011 debt ceiling debate all the way up to last December's negotiations to avoid the automatic tax increases. It's funny how president Obama wanted NOTHING to do with it back then. He was so hell bent on raising taxes on those who already pay their taxes that he didn't want to consider the Republican plan to go after the cheats who avoid paying income taxes in the first place.

So the answer to your question about how they can blame the president is probably the same as the reason that you can blame the Republicans.

Doctor - It's quite untrue to say that raising the debt ceiling has never before been an issue. It has been a contentious issue for many of the 100 or so times that it has come up. Arguments over funding govt. spending has resulted in govt. shutdowns twice during President Reagan's presidency, once during Bush, Sr., and the two longest during Clinton's presidency. So, rhetoric aside, it's usually a big deal.

Let's see now;

The 'Sequester' calls for about $1.2 trillion in Deficit reduction over 10 years ($120 Billion per year) - all in 'cuts in spending'.

The Republicans gave Obama his 'tax increase on the 'rich' for about $600 Billion over 10 years ($60 Billion per year).

It would seem that the Republicans have already done their part in providing HALF of the deficit reduction through tax increases - with NO SPENDING CUTS.

So why doesn't Obama agree to 'compromise' with the Republicans and provide the OTHER HALF of the deficit reduction with real spending cuts. He still resists ANY spending cuts.

In fact, the Republicans have reduced the needed 'sequester' spending cuts from $1.2 Trillion to only $600 Billion over 10 years.

Obama TALKS compromise, but his 'actions belie his words'.

Larry-367607

says "A republican budget that has no chance of passing. What would be the point in voting on a budget they know won't pass? If republicans submit a budget were willing to compromise maybe they can get one that wll pass. Nah, it'll never happen."

Lets see how is the process suppose to work? The president sends his budget to Congress, which Obama missed his deadline again this year. The House passes a budget, which they have done every year under Republican control. The Senate passes a budget, which they have not done for the past four years under Democrat control. The Senate can reject the House budget, pass their own budget, and then send it to committee to iron out the differences. Which is how the process is supposed to work. The House is not obligated to send the Senate a budget that will only be voted on if it will pass. Bills never have to be presented in that fashion, but Democrats seem to have forgotten how Congress is designed to work. The House passes a bill, the Senate passes their version, we meet in committee to iron out the differences. Seems simple enough even Democrats should be able to understand it.

Obama requested the 'Sequester' spending cuts.

Congress gave Obama what he asked for.

Obama signed his requested 'Sequester' spending cut bill.

Obama owns it, as well as the 'unintended consequences'.

Let the cuts begin.

Dr logic,

I spell it this way because of my severe doubt that either is true. However in all your ranting above you did put forth one true statement.

"Flatly put, the sequester is stupid policy."

I agree but what you didn't state was that this was Obama's baby.

He thought it up, gave it to congress, got it passed and now he want a retroactive abortion. TOO LATE!It's your baby, raise it. Don't be handing it off to some nanny. Take responsibility for it. It was your brilliant idea. I'll bet you thought if you did this the Republicans would NEVER let these kinds of cuts come to the DOD. Well, maybe they should and then they can do like you and go on another campaign trip like you're on right now and tell everybody "Hey, we hate this is happening but it it's President Obama's idea." "He's the one who thought this would work" How about we put the blame for this right on the doorstop of the guy who thought it up?

...if the tail fits...

DoctorLogic, you talk a good talk, but your words are messed up. When you brag that OB DID have a budget PASS, it was, in fact the budget of 2009, which was PROPOSED BY BUSH, NOT OB! The pres makes a proposal FOR THE NEXT YEAR, which Bush did in 2008. Congress is required by law to pass a budget EVERY YEAR, yet hasn't done so since 2009. It is to be approved by BOTH houses, then signed by the pres. The House approved it on time, but the Senate was 5 1/2 months late approving it. All OB did was sign Bush's budget.

You speak of OB's starting point being 1.1 trillion dollars, you left out a few pertinent details - Obama is on the FOURTH YEAR of trillion dollar deficits, going up to MORE than Bush's (1.3 trillion dollar deficit 2011). All he did this time, is REDUCE by 2% his usual deficit, which is always in the trillions. It's the same trick stores do when they want to attract customers in - they RAISE the price of an item, then REDUCE it, and call it a sale. That's an old trick, and you bought it, hook, line and sinker!

Obama is nothing more than a slick lawyer. He knows how to twist words around, to fool the listeners. And he's doing a good job of that.

Jontho, you need to stop insulting people, and get YOUR facts straight. You talk of "getting better mileage", but you have NO IDEA what you're talking about. The crap they're ADDING to our gas - ethanol - is giving our cars WORSE mileage, and ruining our engines - except for BRAND NEW CARS - just look in ANY automotive store (Napa, Pep Boys, etc.), and you will find a NEW ADDITIVE that you must buy to COUNTERACT the ethanol. Buy a new chainsaw, lawnmower, generator, and they'll tell you to NEVER put ethanol gas in it. You great approval of "cash to clunkers" shows you've been sucked in just like DoctorLogic. That's nothing more than a game the govt. is doing to get rid of older cars, and get you to buy NEW cars (stimulating the economy). It doesn't add that the governments - state and federal, are MAKING people get rid of cars on their property, or the govt. tows them away, and CHARGES the property owner. I had a dozen antique cars stored on my property (1925 - 1948), which I was parting out for a rather nice extra income, when I was told to clean up my property. I ended up selling them in one lot, for an absolute loss over what I PAID for them. I also have three antiques (1918 DB, 1924 DB,1928 Whippet), which I HAD to put in a garage, so they couldn't be seen by my neighbors - I had to build TWO garages. So, your "savior" has done nothing but cost me more money. I am on medicare, and I DO know how much OB has ALREADY increased my cost for it.

It seems strange that OB created "Obamacare", when we ALREADY had MEDICAID, which could have been upgraded at far less cost. Now we have TWO entitlement programs - by the way, Medicare and Social Security are NOT entitlement programs, because we put into it ALL OUR WORKING LIVES! the only reason SS is in trouble, is because our government noticed some time back, that SS had a large surplus, and moved THAT MONEY TO THE GENERAL FUND, SO THEY COULD SPEND IT! They NEVER put a penny back!

When is John Q. Public going to realize that our government DOES NOT KNOW how to BUDGET, SPEND, SAVE or BORROW? That makes as much sense as loaning money to a drunk.

The CBO is only allowed to use the numbers provided to it by Congress. Congress provides it with the numbers that will result in the bottom line it wants. That is why the CBO initially said Obamacare (and Medicare) would be paid for. Of course we learned after Obamacare was passed that in fact it would not be paid for as budgeted in the bill. And we all know Medicare has over $20 TRILLION dollars in unfunded liabilities.

Anyone who knows how the CBO works, knows its numbers are suspect.

Broad, vague outlines, (no specifics), delusional pandering and pontificating - and again no budget and no leadership. Obama is just plain lazy.

Oquester is coming thank you for your failed leadership obama. Wake up liberals its time to wake up!!! Be honest with yourselves and realize this presidents failed policies aren't helping the economy, don't believe every lie MSN and obama tell you. Think logically for a change.

If we had a leader in the white house it would not even be an issue. Sadly we do not all we have is a social reformer who is totally clueless about anything else.

Dr. Illogical :

Flatly put, the sequester is stupid policy.

The sequester was Hussein's idea, in order to manipulate Congress in the past.

the wolf is at the door; when sequester was passed in 2011; both party's praised the effort; they were required to come up with a plan to cut spending and balance the budget and also propose a budget(which the administration sent to the senate, demo controlled and they shelved it); over 2 trillion has disappeared , 2,000,000,000,000., and no one knows where it went(Benarke at the hearing refused to tell congress what happened to the money); now that no plan has been proposed, the administration is threatening to stop social security payments, cut the military to the bone, and suspend all infrastructure payments to the states(welfare and aid to illegals will not be touched);

WE HAVE A LACK OF GOVERNMENT PROBLEM.

ROY WILSON-336103

Obama requested the 'Sequester' spending cuts.

Congress gave Obama what he asked for.

Obama signed his requested 'Sequester' spending cut bill.

Obama owns it, as well as the 'unintended consequences'.

Let the cuts begin.

That's awesome. Since Obama signed it, he's left holding the bag but the House and Senate get off scott-free when they are the ones who drafted this?

Let's not actually focus on solutions. Let's just focus on blame. The House, the Senate and the President all look like idiots during this. When political finger pointing becomes more important than real solutions, that's a sign of real problems.

Underground bunkers are being built, food is being stored, weapons and ammunition are being collected and chaos is anticipated.

What is driving this pandemonium?

Is it Armageddon, the Rapture, Mayan prophecy (again) or a rogue comet headed for earth? No, it’s something much more apocalyptic.

Sequester!

After a 2 month delay, the “end of the world as we know it” will be upon us. Voices on both sides of the political spectrum are warning of a disaster on near Biblical proportions. The Federal government will be subjected to a $965 billion reduction (GASP!) in projected federal spending over the next ten years.

Barrack Hussein critically warns “workers being laid off, kids kicked off Head Start, and food safety inspections cut.” Democrat Representative Linda Sanchez states that “Draconian cuts to critical domestic programs could devastate our current economic recovery.” National news stories are predicting the calamity that will be “devastating to national parks.” Warnings that the sequester would dismantle the military and the crippling effect these reductions will have on our nation’s security, have been made.

This is what happens when we allow the immeasurable incompetence we have in Washington today. This is what happens when we have no budget for FOUR (4) years! This is what happens when our government becomes the bloated unsustainable bureaucracy we have today.

But, as the article explains, 43 percent of Americans oppose letting the sequester take effect and 22 percent favor the automatic cuts. I can guarantee that 95% of these people have no idea what the “sequester” even means. What’s more terrifying is the 35% of Americans that have no opinion. This can at best be explained as, they have no clue. This is the shame of the American electorate.

The sequester is in many ways a lazy alternative to actually doing the hard work of budgeting. Of course we’re all taken back to last year and those dramatic back and forth negotiations between Barrack Hussein and Tammy Faye Boehner. The hand-wringing and teeth gnashing was incredible. In the end the symbolic “can” was dragged out once again and kicked down the road in typical Beltway fashion. A reprieve was given but judgment day is soon upon us, again. But is this devastating? Crippling?

Hardly.

First of all, the sequester is a “cut” to federal spending only in the “Washington” sense of “any reduction from baseline increases is a cut.”

THESE ARE NOT REAL CUTS!!!!!!

The reality is, even if the sequester goes through, the federal government will still spend $2.14 trillion more in 2022 than it does today. The sequester would reduce domestic discretionary spending by $309 billion over 10 years, but annual spending on these programs will increase by $90 billion over that time. If we will be spending more in 2022 in domestic programs than we are today it’s hard to see too many children starving in the streets. We will however continue to have our children graduating illiterate, but I digress.

Most importantly, entitlement spending, the fastest growing portion of the domestic budget, will hardly be touched by the sequester. It will continue to increase at the astronomical, unsustainable rate that is causing all our fiscal problems. Of course neither Barrack Hussein nor Tammy Faye Boehner has the balls to do what is right for the country. It’s all about maintaining their power grabs and maintaining their respective majorities.

Defense spending will decline initially, but on an inflation-adjusted basis, will never fall below 2007 levels. By 2015 it will begin rising again, surpassing 2012 levels ($554 billion) by 2019 and reaching $589 billion by 2021. Overall, annual defense spending will average $540 billion over the next ten years. By comparison, the United States spent, in 2013 dollars, an average of just $435 billion per year on defense during the Cold War (1948–1990), when we faced a much greater conventional threat. (This is only base defense spending, and does not include war spending $90 billion in 2014).

Of course yesterday Barrack Hussein once again referred to the “deep” cuts. There’s nothing “deep” about these cuts in the bigger scheme of federal spending. The current baseline calls for the federal government to spend $44.8 trillion between now and 2022. The sequester would reduce this by roughly $1.16 trillion (including reduced interest payments). That amounts to less than 2.6 percent of projected spending over the next ten years. In fact, over those ten years, the national debt would still increase by $8.5 trillion, reaching $24.9 trillion in 2022. And this is all assuming that future Congresses don’t undo the cuts in the out years.

For 2013, the only year that we know definitely counts, the sequester would slow the growth in federal spending by just $85 billion, from an expected budget of $3.55 trillion — less than a 2.4 percent reduction. When you consider that the federal government borrows $85 billion every 28 days, it’s hard to honestly call the sequester “Draconian”.

Domestic discretionary spending would be reduced by just $28.7 billion, out of a projected $587 billion. In following years, the difference from the baseline would run just an average of $35 billion. Entitlement spending, meanwhile, would barely be trimmed, it would be cut by just $14 billion in 2013, roughly 0.7 percent of our projected spending this year. That rises to a $23 billion reduction in 2022, which is still insignificant.

Isn’t it sad that we can diminish $23 billion dollars as insignificant? If this doesn’t scare event the most government worshipping Liberals/Progressives, they deserve all the hardship it will bring if continued.

After 10 years, even including the sequester, federal spending will still consume 22.9% of GDP, much higher than the last 70 year average of 19.8%. During Clintons last year, in 2000, government spending was as low as 18.2%, yet somehow we were able to have safe food, schools were open and dead bodies weren’t strewn all over the streets.

So, the sequester is by no means this two-headed monster that both pathetic political parties are whining about. Yes, it is flawed policy but it’s all we have to reduce government spending.

It is far too small and does nothing to really shrink government. It is, however, a first step. If Republicans can’t take even this tiny step it’s unlikely that they will demand the real Draconian steps and austerity needed to fix our economy and become prosperous again. We know that Barrack Hussein, and the Liberal/Progressive cabal, is too cowardly to do what is best for our great Republic.

If Boehner abandons ship and starts waving his white flag of surrender to reduce, eliminate or once again postpone the sequester our economy will continue to spiral out of control and the ratings agencies will once again lower our bond ratings. Once that happens the snowball effect will be quick and harsh. Unfortunately most Americans are in no position to weather this next real economic collapse.

The end of the world as we know it won’t happen if the sequester is allowed to happen, it will if we don’t let it happen.

My money is on incompetence from government once again.

To Johntho and everyone else out there accusing people of being racist:

Isn't Pres. Obama's mother white? Isn't Pres. Obama's father black? So who is it that you claim is being racist???? Is it the Black unsatisfied citizens because he's half-white, or is it the White unsatisfied citizens because he's half-black?

I am confused.

Repojam,

Actually the sequester was negotiated between Biden and McConnell and then adopted by Congress. It was drafted with the Presidents approval and the way he wanted it, but as you say they are all responsible.

jerry l-1335133

Actually the sequester was negotiated between Biden and McConnell and then adopted by Congress. It was drafted with the Presidents approval and the way he wanted it, but as you say they are all responsible.

It's just the Budget Control Act at it again. Let's make a situation so bad that we'll all work together to avoid it. They agreed to do that. Now instead of avoiding the situation, let's point fingers.

It doesn't matter if McConnell and Biden negotiated it. Both sides (BOTH) thought enough of it to pass it through the House and to pass it through the Senate. When over 500 people were involved in this and let it pass and now those same people want to pass the blame around for this?

Pathetic.

Riddle me this- Why is it that the President doesn't get called a hypocrite for firstly putting the sequestration into the original fiscal cliff agreement and now no longer wants it and is blaming it on the GOP???

I'd have a modicum of respect for the guy if he just said, "You know, I made a mistake. I thought sequestration was a good idea but clearly it's not the time and we need to move away from it and figure out a better way." You know that he'd never admit a mistake, let alone a flaw in his perfection, so that will never happen.

This was BO's baby. Both sides had versions drawn up and this is what we got.

Even though this year will have actual cuts, after this year the cuts come from " proposed increase in spending". Say they proposed a seven percent increase in spending, now under this they get 5% increase in spending. Through Washington speak after this year there won't be any actual cuts. What DC prceives as a cut is actually just increasing spending at a smaller amout. DOH!

BO may feign shock at Pentagon cuts, but other than an obsession with raising taxes this is a close second cutting the military. He and most all Dems dream of this.

We need tax increases and spending cuts. GOP you bunch of fricken whiners, do the cuts across the board, no sacred cows. Quit your gd bitchin and get it done.

Simply put Obama care is going to bankrupt us! who is going to pay for it, the rich?? those that are still working?? it will cause more employers to lay off people so who will pay into the tax program?? OH I forget the rich. Wake up people and smell the rose's we the middle class will if employed pay for it we always have and always will. but right now that will not happen as there is not enough of us to do the task.

It's time to do away with 'Baseline Budgeting', wherein politicians ASS/U/ME that spending increases will occur automatically, which allows politicians to increase spending and call it a 'spending cut'.

If a Budget calls for more spending next year than this year, it should be called a SPENDING INCREASE and should be justified.

Interestingly when Obama says that he agreed to a 'cut in spending' that affects only future years, it is completely meaningless unless it's a cut in spending for the NEXT YEAR as part of current budget negotiations because each new Congress gets to set the actual spending budget on an annual basis.

That means that when Obama says "I cut spending by $1 Trillion" but it is all in 'future years', it is just 'smoke and mirrors' because those future years' Budgets will actually be determined by Congress when the time comes - for example, any 'Base Line Budget' for 2015 that Bush agreed to in 2008 has no validity for limiting Obama's spending requests when the 2015 Budget gets debated in a few years.

It's time to 'call a spade a spade'.

And, no - that's not 'racist' - see below for the Etymology of the phrase

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19970115

ROY #1.52

Because Obama owns the GOP. He is smarter than all of the GOP clowns put together. Isnt is ironic that Obama seems to get most of what he has wanted on every single issue. Why? Because the GOP is short sighted and continuously paint themselves into a corner.

You do not need to worry about Obama destroying the GOP, the GOP are imploding all on their own.

RedRover ... Bo increased taxes 3 weeks into office, increased taxes in Obamacare, increased taxes in December. We pay MORE than the Clinton era now, so how much more should we raise taxes?

The only way out of our hole is to grow the economy. How will raising taxes on businesses encourage them to expand?

Roy i bet most people don't know what baseline budgeting is and how it sucks for the people. They actually think things are getting cut. Silly people LOL Somebody actually started a bill i think in the senate to get rid of baseline budgeting, and you can imagine how that went.

ROY WILSON-336103

It's time to do away with 'Baseline Budgeting', wherein politicians ASS/U/ME that spending increases will occur automatically, which allows politicians to increase spending and call it a 'spending cut'.

If a Budget calls for more spending next year than this year, it should be called a SPENDING INCREASE and should be justified.

The time for this was too long ago. Tying spending increases to inflation increases and to cost of living increases all to call it no change when it actually costs more needs to be reviewed heavily and put to a stop as well. Honest accounting is going to be needed if we actually want to become fiscally healthy.

We can't even get an honest accounting of change. How are they supposed to have an honest discussion, assuming they wished to, when you can put more funding towards something but not label it as a spending increase? If it's justified (i.e. yes, cost went up this year for transport, oil was up an average of x% over the year, so this cost is explained) then we can acknowledge it and move forward.

The more I think about it though, I think they might easily justify anything. With the amount of waste we are used to seeing, it wouldn't shock me to see them justify the waste just to justify it.

Double-Standard Obama:

Obama's Treasury Secretary Nominee Gets Free Pass on Cayman Islands Investments

By Katie Pavlich - 2/14/2013

Remember when Mitt Romney was repeatedly berated by President Obama and his campaign team for having perfectly legal investments in the Cayman Islands? As a reminder:

Romney has large investments in notorious overseas tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. He had $3 million stashed away in a Swiss bank account that was closed in recent years for fear of political embarrassment.

It turns out, President Obama's former Chief of Staff Jack Lew, who has been nominated to replace Turbo-Tax Timonthy Geithner as Treasury Secretary, also had large investments in "notorious overseas tax havens like the Cayman Islands." Not to mention Lew took a huge bonus in 2009 just after the financial collapse from a bank that was bailed out by taxpayers. Even Dana Milbank at the Washington Post can see the irony:

It’s a bit, well, rich that Obama chose as his new Treasury secretary a man who received a big corporate payout for dubious work and who socked away money in the Cayman Islands.

This awkward fact pattern forced a role reversal Wednesday on Capitol Hill, as Obama’s nominee, Jack Lew, came before the Senate Finance Committee for his confirmation hearing. Republicans expressed outrage about his compensation and his investment — in other words, giving him the Mitt Romney treatment. And Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), an outspoken foe of offshore tax havens, helped Lew defend himself.

In Washington, where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit.

Lew, who was White House chief of staff while Obama’s campaign was pummeling Romney over his pay and taxes, received a $945,000 bonus in January 2009 after a brief tenure at Citigroup — just as the bank announced huge losses and took a taxpayer bailout. Lew also invested $56,000 in a Citigroup venture-capital fund registered in the Cayman Islands — registered in the very building, in fact, that Obama labeled “the largest tax scam in the world.”

So, when President Obama talks about "closing loopholes" for the rich who can afford fancy accountants who "take advantage of" the tax code, is he talking about Democrats too? Or just rich and evil Republicans? Mitt Romney never took a bonus from a company bailed out by taxpayer dollars, but Obama backed Jack Lew did.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/02/14/obamas-treasury-secretary-nominee-gets-free-pass-on-cayman-islands-investments-n1512372/print

"In Washington, where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit." How true!!!

Red, if BO owns the GOP that means all legislation falls directly on him.

hs321 .... the Dems only care if its a republican doing it. One of their own does the double of "Caymen tax havens" and getting a bonus from money funded by us taxpayers to bail out Citi. 2 big whammies that would have been front page news (like Mitt). But since its one of their own you hear crickets. And they whine of hypocrisy LOL

Oh yeah it is the Republicans standing in way of spending as suggested by RedRoverRedRover were liberal so bend over. Which is how compromise works in liberals minds. Need you be reminded that so far Democrats have cut nothing, and offered no cuts? There isn't a single proposal on the table everyone can read from Obama or the Senate Democrats to cut any spending. Even these pretend cuts Obama claims to have already made, are reductions in planned future spending increases, none of which have taken place, and we won't know until 2022 if they ever do. But let us not forget what Nancy Pelosi said just last Sunday, it is a false argument to suggest that Washington has a spending problem. It would seem Democrats are confused about the spending problem, or whether there should be cuts or not. So to get it done, we need actual participation from Obama and the Senate Democrats, as so far talk hasn't solved anything.

BigATC

Red, if BO owns the GOP that means all legislation falls directly on him.

100% correct. If they didn't have the fortitude to resist legislation they did not agree with from passing a chamber of Congress that they control, that is the fault of the President.

With any luck the next round of presidential candidates will soon come out so it will help our us take our minds off the failing inept obama, as we need real hope, and a light at the end of this 8yr dark tunnel.

Silver lining: this extraordinary sentence "And the president laid out no plan to eliminate the sequester and the harmful cuts that will come of it.”

Finally, the conservative world is admitting that cuts are harmful. After the false and incorrect cries of the last 4 years that "we have a spending problem" and "we need to cut spending to let the economy grow" and many other specious statements, with their nose stuck in it, the GOP politicians are finally admitting that spending cuts cause harm.

Thank God. I've been saying it for 4 years, and finally I got through to Boehner.

Now if I could only get Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and our conservative posters to understand...

RedRoverRedRover "ROY #1.52 Because Obama owns the GOP. He is smarter than all of the GOP clowns put together"

We'll see who's 'smarter' if Obama's brilliant 'Sequester' bill backfires on him.

The Republicans seem to have maneuvered things pretty well by voluntarily passing 'tax increases on the rich', so now the heat's on Obama to agree to some REAL spending cuts or have them forced upon him by his own machinations.

Down below someone wrote, when pressed for what to cut, " I would start with all Aid to All Illegals, No more Free Food, No more FREE telephones, No more Free housing, No more college Grants to Illegals, No more Free Healthcare for anyone, especially Illegals. All of that would tally up to about one Trillion per year."

This is the quality of conservative thinking. It is really the result of Fox News and others preying on the worst in mankind (jealousy, selfishness, lack of empathy) to create resentment and anger, and then profit off of it.

It has made conservatives mean-spirited and stupid. Worse, it has made them believe that a totally impossible thing is what we should try (cutting spending drastically to balance the budget).

"so now the heat's on Obama to agree to some REAL spending cuts"

This is the quality of conservative thinking. We can't come up with any practical spending cuts, so we'll wash our hands of the responsibility and make Obama do it. It's got to be easy. Just cut a trillion dollars out of the aid to illegals, Obama.

GWB Rambo mentality cost us a Nation, what was in the GOPTP water, maybe Rubio can tell you !!!

Who owns the 'sequester'?

Pretty simple: Senator Patty Murray, WA...under the direction of this administration. Just listen to her comments before these 'meetings' began.

She is just like the rest of this administration from the president on down. Nowhere to be found when the results of their crap hits the fan and, when you do find them, they're blaming someone else.

Looks like someone woke the savage O'Bama boys & girls & baby killers.

noncoms "so now the heat's on Obama to agree to some REAL spending cuts"... We can't come up with any practical spending cuts, so we'll wash our hands of the responsibility and make Obama do it."

Since Obama is 'supposed' to be our leader, why shouldn't he 'take the lead' instead of blaming other people and finding excuses for doing nothing about the crippling debt he's building up to pass on to our children?

When 'austerity' is forced upon us, like it has been for Greece, Obama's response will be "It's someone else's fault".

He'll be remembered best for his "Leading from Behind" motto, which in warfare would be likened to cowardliness.

Of course yesterday Barrack Hussein once again referred to the "deep" cuts. There's nothing "deep" about these cuts in the bigger scheme of federal spending. The current baseline calls for the federal government to spend $44.8 trillion between now and 2022. The sequester would reduce this by roughly $1.16 trillion (including reduced interest payments).

Or Federal government has been so FOS for so long - You are absolutely correct.

What needs to occur is the President/Congress/Senate and government employees need benefits and entitlement modifications to come in line with thier budget.

Reduce retirement benefits, reduce wages, freeze $ increase

Reduce Health insurance to Ocare NO FEDERAL Health or life Insurance Purchase your own like everbody else.

All areas of the above need to be on the table, reduce the costs due to poorly operated Federal Government and budget BS over the years. If you want to have effective government spending and budgets this must occur. Many businesses have done this is the last couple of years due to the economy and business profit model. OUR government Just spends away waiting for the money tree to grow - Well if you haven't learned money doesn't grow on trees you FOOLS. Our government are thieves if these things don't occur. Get inline with the current general econonic conditions of the US, you are not your own ecomomy with the fed creating money manipulating your dream world.

"No one said it's his responsibility alone. We've just pointed out accurately that the only reason it exists is his insistence on it," Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said Wednesday. "Given that fact, he, more than anyone, has responsibility to do something about it. And they've done nothing."

I don't understand why Republicans continue to go after the President when it's Congress' job to write and pass bills. All the President can do is sign them. Congress holds the nation's "purse strings".

Further, no matter how many times President Obama sets forth his "agenda" on the public record, the GOP comes back and pretends that they don't know what the President "wants".

I feel Republicans are trying to manufacture "blame" and are trying to somehow soil this President's spotless reputation and all the good President Obama has done for the American People, in an attempt to shift attention away from what horrifying "leaders" and what "domestic terrorists" Republicans turned out to be during the last Republican Administation.

The ONLY way the GOP could try to harm this President is for Republicans to continue to wreak havoc on the United States Economy and the American People, and that is all I see Republicans doing, wreakign havoc, creating arguments, and complain, complain, complain.

Roy,

Obama put Medicare on the table in his State of The Union address. He is forcing the GOP to give up their "sacred cows" DOD and Prescription Drugs. We'll see who wins this fight, I am hoping that neither party wins, which means the American public wins.

American Girl,

The sequester was negotiated by Biden with the blessing of the President, which makes him 1/3 responsible. His administration wrote the bill that was passed by both houses. You can try to blame the GOP but the Democrats have controlled at least 2/3rds of the government for the last 6 years so they have to accept most of the blame for problems if they take credit for all of the successes.

wilsonarden331 Good grief!! Peddle your @!$%# elsewhere!

reading all the comments... Nothing is going to be easy. There is blame on both parties even still. So why can't pink slips be given now? Washington gets paid big bucks and they do absolutely nothing. Who came up with those fancy salaries if they work for We The People? *shakes my head*

As for the folks that are retired and on Medicare, it is turning their world upside down. I hear it every day when things that used to be covered are no longer.

RedRoverRedRover "Roy, Obama put Medicare on the table in his State of The Union address"

You're joking right?

When Obama says he will 'put something on the table', what he REALLY means is "If you give me what I want, we'll TALK about what YOU want, so long as YOU take the blame."

I see that you have a hard time differentiating between 'rhetoric' (We'll cut the Deficit in half by the end of my first 4 years'), and Reality (4 straight years of $Trillion PLUs Deficits).

TO: JOKER and a Mid Night -T who wrote:

What needs to occur is the President/Congress/Senate and government employees need benefits and entitlement modifications to come in line with thier budget... [and] NO FEDERAL Health or life Insurance..."

Reduce retirement benefits, reduce wages, freeze [all payroll] increase[s].

It other words, take all the money away from American Workers including any pay raises, all their retirement money, their pension money, and hey you forgot to rob the poor, how about taking away those "food stamps" too?

We know what happens then because Republicans did this same thing before under the last Republican Administration, Republicans will cut off the only revenue the United States receives, which is from taxpayers, there'll be no tax revenues to pay any of the bills the United States already has, and Republicans will once again start the 3rd Great Depression.

How many times, exactly, will Republicans continue to return to their same exact "recipe for disaster"?

TO: jerry l-1335133 who wrote:

"American Girl, The sequester was negotiated by Biden with the blessing of the President, which makes him 1/3 responsible. His administration wrote the bill that was passed by both houses. You can try to blame the GOP..."

What is it with Republicans, can't take responsibility for your Republican Administration, demand that we stop blaming Bush who actually is to blame, so now that we stopped, Republicans want to start?

The reason the Sequester "passed" is because Republicans voted for it too, and Vice President Biden cannot either write or pass any bill, that is the job of the United States Congress and is therefore Cognress' RESPONSIBILITY.

Republicans ONLY keep mentioning the President and Vice President because of Republicans' thurst to sully the President's name because the last "president" Republicans installed turned out to be a Domestic Terrorist.

Why is it that Liberals insist on calling the rich "SOB's".

As a liberal, I have never called myself a SOB. We are the ones who support the country; liberals are in the richer states and tend to be in the higher income brackets. What irritates us is that people who pay LESS are the ones who whine the most.

American Girl-724855 "Republicans' thurst to sully the President's name because the last "president" Republicans installed turned out to be a Domestic Terrorist."

Domestic Terrorist??????????? Gee, I wonder if maybe you just identified yourself as a left wing extremist?

By the way - what is a 'thurst'?

This whole conversation is stupid. At a time when the economy is really fragile, and interest rates are at historic lows, and unemployment remains stubbornly high, NOW is the time we want to shrink the economy through spending cuts?

Why? So that we have more layoffs? The economy shrank 0.1% in January due to spending cuts in the defense budget. Do we want more unemployment, so that we can have less tax receipts so that we can have an even bigger spending problem in the future?

To reiterate the Conservative position on this, it would be "We demand immediate, substantial cuts to the federal budget and when we get them the negative consequences will be the fault of Barack Obama."

Responsibility without accountability...the Conservative model for success.

American Girl,

I did blame both parties which you refused to do even though they have controlled 2/3rds of the government for the last 6 years.

TO: jerry l-1335133 who wrote:

"American Girl, I did blame both parties which you refused to do even though they have controlled 2/3rds of the government for the last 6 years."

Well, but your beloved Republican Domestic Terrorists LIED to Congress and to the American People, so why should I blame anyone except the liars, especially since those lies eventually led the entire country into a Trillion Dollar useless War and the 2nd Great Depression?

American Girl has only one perspective; "Republicans have evil intentions and Democrats have angelic intentions".

The idea that both parties might have good intentions - just different views on what's best for the Country, is a concept that is completely foreign to her.

Bye - I have some work to do - 'Have a nice day' :)

What needs to occur is the President/Congress/Senate and government employees need benefits and entitlement modifications to come in line with thier budget.

Reduce retirement benefits, reduce wages, freeze $ increase

Reduce Health insurance to Ocare NO FEDERAL Health or life Insurance Purchase your own like everbody else.

Or grow the economy so that we take in more money, while at the same tax rate.

Because if we do any of the things you suggested above, the economy will shrink, people will pay less taxes. You aren't going to save any money and will quite likely make things worse.

I realize that all the Right-Wingers simply HATE the idea of helping people because, apparently, anybody who needs help is lazy and stupid and a moocher, but the bottom line is these stupid, lazy people are part of the economy, and you cut them off, you are hurting the economy, and yourself.

American Girl,

Why is it when people blame the President the Democratic answer is you can not blame him it is Congress that writes the laws but when people say the Democrats controlled 50% of Congress for 4 years of Bush and 100% for the last two the Democrat response is to blame Bush.

You cannot have it both ways either the President is the leader of the nation or a follower.

Some on here are claiming that Obama bears no responsibility for creating a yearly budget.

I would refer them to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921.

That Law REQUIRES the President to submit a proposed budget to the Congress for debate, reconcilialtion, and approval.

That Law also created the Office of Management and Budget, as a part of the Executive Office of the President, to assist the him in creating his budget proposal.

The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 mandated the creation of a Congressional Budget Resolution.

This is a JOINT resolution that is produced House and Senate Budget Committees. It that does not require Presidential signature and does not carry the authority of law.

The problem is that Obama has NEVER presented a complete (written) budget proposal. He has only put forth disjointed suggestions - and Harry Reid has always blocked any Senate action on the budget process since Obama has been in office.

The spending cuts already done are real. The GDP went down slight because of the reduced spending in just winding down the wars. It was projected that the sequester cuts will cause another recession and declining GDP, reducing overall government spending and subsequent dependent private sector spending and resulting joblessness. Those of means can weather this decline, but the middle and lower class will not, since cuts will usually mean their jobs and not the top management. Cutting someone's salary 10% who earns 1 million is not as painful as one who earns 50 K a year. Real reductions in spending by those who actually buy goods and services will restart the cycle of decreasing revenues rsulting in decreasing jobs.

"... GOP leaders also no longer acknowledge their own role in pushing the measure through Congress. Boehner told CBS News at the time of the deal that he was happy with the agreement, and “got 98 percent of what I wanted.”

Republican ongoing political strategy: "Lie and deny".

The Republicans will once again own this next recession if the sequester kicks in. The reason is because if Obama does what the Republicans want and cut spending, it will lower the GDP. If the sequester kicks in, it will also lower the GDP. Obama wants spending cuts offset with new income to reduce the impact of loss government spending to cushion the economy and keep it from going into the "reduced spending = loss jobs = reduced spending = lower profits = reduced jobs, etc", cycle.

Just like in the last recession, I intend to capitalize on those who will lose their jobs and have their homes and businesses foreclosed providing me and my peers with new opportunities to profit. The weathly always profits from someone else's turmoil.

don't they realize that they are playing with peoples lives here, if the sequester cuts go through, a lot more people are going to loose their jobs and unemployment goes up, economy goes further down the toilet.

Why don't they cut their incomes to reduce spending? Another idea, for everyday past the budget deadline that goes by, their salaries are cut 20%, that is what will happen to a lot of the folks employed by the government, pay is cut by 20% and are furloughed one day a week.

Obama, YOU OWN SEQUESTER! What a little pantie-waist, lying, lily-livered, puke for POTUS. From day 1 his agenda has been to transform the US into his idea of a socialist country. He's never had any intention of working with conservatives, but only to propose wedge issues and lay political traps to demonize his opposition at every opportunity. His latest, 4 year old preschool. Study after study has shown NO long term benefit from these programs, that those who have been in these programs loose whatever advantage they had within a year or 2. Conservatives will oppose this and be branded anti-education. Even if it provided value, wheres the money coming from to pay for it? How did we ever educate people prior to these programs? Yet education was more effective in past generations. Nothing new proposed by the federal government has work, but instead made us dumber.

If the President is so concerned about the Sequester than why would he just two days ago say "now is the time" "now is the time" for immigration reform which means...11+million illegal immigrants would be granted amnesty...which means 11+ mouths to feed off the Government dole.

Yep paying some fat socialist lady to tie the shoes of welfare kids is the ticket to world economic domination.

What we have is a bunch of frightened little whiners who live off government handouts fearing that some of it may go away.

The Welfare crowd is afraid that they may have to actually work.

the administration is threatening to stop social security payments, cut the military to the bone, and suspend all infrastructure payments to the states(welfare and aid to illegals will not be touched);

Just cut a trillion dollars out of the aid to illegals, Obama.

I would start with all Aid to All Illegals, No more Free Food, No more FREE telephones, No more Free housing, No more college Grants to Illegals, No more Free Healthcare for anyone, especially Illegals.

Noncoms says: This is the quality of conservative thinking. It is really the result of Fox News and others preying on the worst in mankind (jealousy, selfishness, lack of empathy) to create resentment and anger, and then profit off of it.

Let's be honest. Isn't this what Republicans are really concerned about? Conservatives are really saying, it's those who are 'different from us" that cause the real problems. It's those 47% that really bring our country down. They are easy to blame, they don't have a lot of support, and we can very easily wrap all this bad economy around their necks. There's no reason to look at ourselves, when we have "them" to blame.

The House passes a [budget] bill, the Senate passes their version, we meet in committee to iron out the differences. Seems simple enough even Democrats should be able to understand it.

If that is true, then what happens with the President's budget?

The problem is that Obama has NEVER presented a complete (written) budget proposal. He has only put forth disjointed suggestions - and Harry Reid has always blocked any Senate action on the budget process since Obama has been in office.

Fool, actually, the President has submitted a large, bound budget, as required by law, each year of his Presidency.

After the President submitted his budget, the Republicans passed, in the House, their own budget, that was strikingly different from the President's (imagine that). Harry Reid never brought the Houses' version up for a vote because it would never have passed, and even if it did, the President would have vetoed it and it would not have been overridden in the Senate. Also, the Senate never voted on Obama's budget because it would never had passed the House, and why should he lock in Democratic votes for a budget that had no possibility of passing the House (that's how politics work).

The same thing has happened every year Obama has been President, so, Republicans try to make a big deal about it, saying the Senate has never passed a budget, but, like most things the Republicans do these days, they end up falling on their faces.

foolishness abounds "The problem is that Obama has NEVER presented a complete (written) budget proposal. He has only put forth disjointed suggestions - and Harry Reid has always blocked any Senate action on the budget process since Obama has been in office."

In all fairness, that statement is only half true. Obama HAS submitted Budget proposals for the last 4 years, but they typically have been ignored because they were totally unrealistic - In fact, Obama's previous Budget proposal was rejected by every Senator - even every Democrat that voted.

The part of your statement that is TRUE is that Harry Reid has indeed blocked every Budget that has been passed by the Republicans in the House - in fact, he won't even allow that proposed Budget to be debated in the Senate because by blocking a vote, he is able to keep up the high level of spending as under the 'Stimulus' bill year, after year, after year despite the stimulus money already having been spent. He does this with last minute 'Continuing Resolutions' which lock in spending at those high rates allowed under the 'Stimulus' bill, without having to address those 'out of control' entitlements that the Democrats love so much.

StoptheCannibals-2908428 " After the President submitted his budget, the Republicans passed, in the House, their own budget, that was strikingly different from the President's (imagine that). Harry Reid never brought the Houses' version up for a vote because it would never have passed,"

Making excuses for Harry Reid?

The original House and Senate Budgets virtually NEVER agree, which is why the House Budget (where it starts by law) is normally passed first, and then debated and AMENDED by the Senate, and then a Joint Conference Committee meets to resolve any differences. THAT'S THE NORMAL PROCESS.

The problem is that the President has met HIS obligation to submit a proposed Budget, the House has reviewed it and then made their own 'adjustments' to it and then passed THEIR version and sent it to the Senate for their review. For the last 4 years Harry Reid has said, in effect "I like this extra spending from the stimulus bill, so I'll just ignore the House Budget, which allows me to keep that high rate of spending, even though the 'stimulus' spending was supposed to end in 2010".

Waiting until the last minute to pass a 'Continuing Resolution' which allows continued spending at the same level as the previous year, allows Reid to keep up the spending without having to justify it.

That's the REAL reason that spending has not gone down in the last few years despite the end of the 'Stimulus' spending in 2010. - Obama and Reid get new 'stimulus' spending year, after year, after year, and demonize the Republicans for proposing cuts back to normal levels.

People we are in trouble. We have three groups of people who can't or won't agree and they are all politicians trying to use, and steal our money, then tell us it's for our own good and they don't have a lot of time to do it in. Save the Children, I think there will be a lot of AZZ and baby kissing coming up. In the end it's our fault we voted!!!!!!!

Let's just let the 'Sequester' cuts go thru and see what the results are?

We added $535 Billion to spending in just Obama's first year alone (2009).

I have a hard time believing that just reducing that huge amount of extra spending increase by a miniscule $85 Billion could be that drastic.

Roy how many families you willing to take care of???

bubba-1946427 "Roy how many families you willing to take care of???"

Mine. Of course Obama wants anybody that pays income taxes to also 'take care of' all of those families on welfare as well - you know, the ones that voted for him overwhelmingly.

It's a little known fact that Obama won the the 'welfare vote' (those eligible for welfare making an average of less than $30,000 per year) by a margin of about 12.9 million votes (22.3 million votes for Obama vs 9.4 million votes for Romney), and Romney won the other 75% of votes (the ones that paid the income taxes to support those on welfare) by a margin of 8 million votes. The net result was a 4.9 million vote margin for Obama - thanks to those on welfare. Perhaps you didn't notice those Democratic ads that implied that "Romney will take away your food stamps".

Now Obama wants to 'reward' those on welfare with more 'freebies' - at taxpayer expense. We simply cannot afford the idea that we need to keep giving more, and more, and more to those who will not or cannot take care of themselves - mostly because of the poor decisions that they themselves made in their lives.

There's been times over the last 48 months that Barack Obama - looks in the mirror - and says out loud -

"I still can't believe they don't know what's going on!"

"It doesn't seem real - this is happening way too easy"

Marcus D-4300696 "There's been times over the last 48 months that Barack Obama - looks in the mirror - and says out loud - "I still can't believe they don't know what's going on!" "

Proof positive that you can fool most of the people ALL of the time.

Proof positive that in the eyes of Conservatives the only problem with our democracy is that the wrong people vote.

Not exactly the American way...

We could avoid a lot of these last minute spending anomolies if they would pass a freakin budget.

Even John Boehner admitted to the Press that the Sequester is a very bad idea. Unfortunately, the Fiscal Libertarians and Tea Partiers in the GOP want it to happen solely to reduce the size of the public sector -- no matter what the cost to the American People.

The House has passed TWO bills to replace the sequester....the Senate and OBAMA have come up with ziltch! Who has done their work and who hasn't?

And what was in those two bills?