-
ObamaScare 2013
Automatic Spending Cuts. Can't call them "Budget Cuts" cause Obama won't allow a Budget to be passed. But I looked up when this automatic cut thingy was passed. August 2011!!!! Guess who was President then? Guess who had to have signed this law? Guess who is now blaming someone else for it?? Guess who is a scumbag?
Why are cuts ever bad?? Shouldn't any rational person expect some services (loosely used) to go away if spending is cut? If you don't do it Friday, when will you do it? You WILL do it someday, I assure you!!!
Anyway, this is what it is:
What is the sequester?
It’s a package of automatic spending cuts that’s part of the Budget Control Act (BCA), which was passed in August 2011. The cuts, which are projected to total $1.2 trillion, are scheduled to begin in 2013 and end in 2021, evenly divided over the nine-year period. The cuts are also evenly split between defense spending — with spending on wars exempt — and discretionary domestic spending, which exempts most spending on entitlements like Social Security and Medicaid, as the Bipartisan Policy Center explains. The total cuts for 2013 will be $109 billion, according to the new White House report.
100 Billion divided by 16 Trillion = SIX TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT
That's how much of the National Debt that this would 'cut'............
-
From what I've read, it was actually his idea when they were negotiating the deal.
-
Then why fuss so much now?
This guy is a piece of work.
Wouldn't this country run better without any 'leaders'? Seriously???
-
Much like the people I was meeting with this week, they move from ignorant stubbornness to willful stupidity on a regular basis. And stay somewhere in that range 99% of the time.
BKB
-
I've been watching this stuff on the various 'news' channels and I gotta admit that I'm totally confused over who is doing or not doing what to who. You guys down there are starting to get me worried.
-
Frankly, I don't think anybody's going to notice.
-
It was supposedly offered up by the Obama administration to settle the debt ceiling stalemate in 2011. The idea was to put something in place that was so bad that neither side would let it happen. That's worked out really well. Did you see where Bob Woodward of Watergate fame was in his opinion threatened by an Obama staff member that he would "regret" writing a story indicating that it was all their idea?
-
-
-
Here's who will get hurt the most: the party with the most lobbyists affected by the sequester.
Wait and see if this ain't true. That's who'll 'blink' first.
BKB
-
HAHAHA
No doubt, true.
And I expect that blinking is what you'll have to do to keep from missing any impact of this.
-
Reminds me of the Godfather.......'and remember, the one who comes to you with this Barzini meeting, he's the traitor...'
BKB
-
And Bob woodward is a liar, IMO.
BKB
-
Well, I wouldn't say that. The word threat is in there. But after reviewing it, I do not think the sender of that email meant to threaten Woodward in the sense that he is saying, not at all. I think the writer meant "threat" way less ominous. Ominously. Ominusly. Omm......less severe.
-
Woodward is still to this day living high off the hog on watergate and that was essentially handed to him. He was dead wrong on WMDs, part of the Valerie Plame debacle (and not the good part either) and has been caught stretching shit like this on every one of those deals. He's a friggin liar. But that ain't what pisses me off. What pisses me off is it means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. Nixon wouldn't threaten 'em, he'd just sic the IRS on them and was boldfaced about it.
BKB
-
I defer to your demure expression of such things.
