Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, February 28, 2013

Mark S. Mellman, The Hill: Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) recently opined that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) would be unable to keep his job if he compromised with the president and the Democrats on sequestration. The senator knows a great deal more about internal GOP dynamics than I do, but his assessment carries with it a considerable irony -- according to Johnson, Boehner only remains Speaker by continuing to make his party increasingly unpopular, ignoring the wishes even of grassroots Republicans.

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

Corky

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

In the latest Bloomberg poll, 16 percent more Americans express a favorable view of President Obama than offer an unfavorable opinion. The Democratic Party brand is, not surprisingly, less popular, but still, it is 4 points more favorable than unfavorable.

Where is the GOP?

Net unfavorable by 20 points! Just 35 percent hold a favorable view of the Republican Party, while 55 percent identified as unfavorable. And the GOP is 6 points worse off today than it was six months ago.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

"The Republicans' problem with the sequester goes back to two fundamental principles: voters don't want the cuts, and they reject the GOP "cuts only" formula.

Pew examined public views on 19 areas of government spending. In 18 of the 19 cases, majorities of Americans rejected cuts. Only "aid to the world's needy" proved an exception, but even in that category a plurality opposed cuts.

Not surprisingly, Republicans were more willing to cut than Democrats, but pluralities or majorities of Republicans opposed cutting funds for healthcare, environmental protection, scientific research, energy, the State Department, food and drug inspection, education, infrastructure, veterans and in seven other areas -- nearly all of which are on the chopping block if the sequester happens.

Not only do Republicans oppose the cuts their congressional leaders seem so anxious to embrace -- GOP members are also wildly out of sync with their own grassroots on basic strategy.

Congressional Republicans shout "no revenues" from the rooftops, refusing to consider closing loopholes for corporate jets and companies moving overseas. But Americans overall -- and Republicans themselves -- favor a balanced approach.

Just 19 percent of Americans endorse the Republicans' "spending cuts only" approach, with the rest favoring some combination of cuts and revenues. Only a minority of Republicans back their party's approach."

more at link

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 09:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

The GOP still has members in congress?

#2 | Posted by Tor at 2013-02-26 09:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, people really, really hate the Republicans.
You think they love the Democrats? Even Democrats do not get that perverse.

#3 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-26 11:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

#3 | Posted by Diablo

Gee, remember the glory days for the DR righties when they drooled over Rasmussen's convoluted +/- ratings when they showed Obama in the negatives.

#4 | Posted by northguy3 at 2013-02-27 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

If people don't like the GOP then, if history teaches us anything, the GOP will change.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2013-02-27 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's hard to keep a favorability rating when the media is preaching the "dont like the conservative point of view" on almost every freely reachable TV station and there's a black president that everyone is scared to criticize and disagree with because said Media will call them a racist.

The media is molding the debate and our society is just dumbed down and stupid.

#6 | Posted by boaz at 2013-02-27 03:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The media is molding the debate and our society is just dumbed down and stupid."

You go with that theory, and hopefully so will the GOP. The people are just too dumb to know what they want. Brilliant.

#7 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-28 08:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The Republicans' problem with the sequester goes back to two fundamental principles: voters don't want the cuts, and they reject the GOP "cuts only" formula.

The Democrats' problem with sequester goes back to two fundamental principles: They have spent like drunken sailors, and the have the ethics of a dog in heat.

apologies to drunken sailors for the comparisons.

Come on you libs wake up and see that there is a problem and start doing some responsible thinking. If this country goes bankrupt or has if it's credit worthiness is reduced even your pet media will not save you from the folks.

#8 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 08:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

Howard Dean YEAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW. "LET IT HAPPEN"

I agree with Howard. Once again the POTUS is using his Saul Alinsky tactics of chaos, deception and confusion. It's time to call the bluff. It's also good Woodward has weighed in to show the emperor wears no clothes. This is all about politics on Obama's part and very little to do with truth. During the great depression and other difficult periods of time the worse that happened with decreased spending were some furloughs. Obama is a fraud and finally the fraud will be unmasked when the increased government spending is decreased a smidgen.

#9 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 08:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

#10 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 08:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

#10 | Posted by paneocon

Smartest thing I've ever read from you.

NW Flag.

#11 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-28 08:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

YEAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW. "LET IT (Sequester) HAPPEN"

#9 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 08:23

Well, don't bother denying that the Right plays Chicken with the American public ever again.

You had better hope that you're correct about that "smidgen". But if what you want proves to hurt the country then Obama will take his licks but you people will be entirely discredited- viewed as fools, incompetents, anti-patriots, and worse.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 08:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 08:36 AM | Reply

What's telling me that this won't matter is that the stock market this time is not buying into Obama's BS like it did the fiscal cliff. First the markets catch on to this guy, then Bob Woodward and then finally maybe some of the "dumbed down" voters that supported him. Eventually maybe a lightning bolt will hit you Zed and you might even see truth.

#13 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 08:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

HAGBARD what is your issue?

#14 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 08:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

Smartest thing I've ever read from you.

NW Flag.

#11 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

lol

#15 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-28 08:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

What's telling me that this won't matter is that the stock market this time is not buying into Obama's BS like it did the fiscal cliff. First the markets catch on to this guy, then Bob Woodward and then finally maybe some of the "dumbed down" voters that supported him. Eventually maybe a lightning bolt will hit you Zed and you might even see truth.

#13 | Posted by matsop at 2013

You're not getting it. Whethyer you;re right or wrong you're playing Chicken. Its just that if there's a crash and burn everyone will lose their remaining doubts this is what you do.

#16 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 08:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

HAGBARD what is your issue?
#14 | Posted by paneocon

Right now my issue is that people should at least express a little gratitude for being given a Newsworthy flag.

#17 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-28 08:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'm getting it, Zed. If something isn't done about the deficits/debt we know there's going to be a crash of monumental proportions; at least now they're attempting to control it to a fire-cracker next to your front door. See, Obama's out of control spending in the early part of the administration has put us in the position of "pay me now or pay me later". That beaten up can could be kicked down the road further or finally some adults in congress may be standing up for the first time in their lives.

#18 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

The Wisconsin Republican laid out what he expects to happen next week: "We will pass an appropriations measure that gives the administration more flexibility. We had already negotiated spending bills with respect to veterans affairs, the military. And that will be part of this."

Paul added, "I think you'll see more flexibility for the military, for national security, and more flexibility for domestic spending. So that the president and the agencies can go after waste and inefficiency as the sequester takes place."

As for whether the president "moved the goal posts" asking for more revenue, Ryan said that Bob Woodward of The Washington Post was correct in that characterization.

"The president got the largest tax increase in American history eight weeks ago. Now he's trying to move the goal post and say instead of spending cuts which the sequester is, 'I need a bunch of tax increases' for this, as well to fuel more spending."

#19 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

#17 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

Newsworthy flag or nitwit flag?

#20 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 09:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Also, Zed, has it ever occurred to you your hero is up to his eye-balls in this sequester and is talking a good game but doesn't have a problem with it? Ever think all his "scare-mongering" is cover for himself with his base. Also, this could be the reason the WH is POed about Woodward since he showed Obama initiated this whole thing.

#21 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

Poor babes, whistling while flouncing past the elephant graveyard.

#22 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-28 09:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Don't any of you idiots know to end italics? Sheesh.

#23 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-28 09:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Paul added, "I think you'll see more flexibility for the military, for national security, and more flexibility for domestic spending. So that the president and the agencies can go after waste and inefficiency as the sequester takes place."

He may be right but he may regret giving the President the power to make those decisions. These guys are playing dirty but they always lose when they try to play checkers with Obama. They keep forgetting, he's smarter than they are. Ever since that Republican Retreat early in his first term he has been making them look foolish most of the time.

#24 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-28 09:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

#23 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN
#10 | POSTED BY PANEOCON

Sorry my fault and for some reason I can end them

#25 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 09:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

Also, Zed, has it ever occurred to you your hero is up to his eye-balls in this sequester and is talking a good game but doesn't have a problem with it?

#21 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:08 AM | Reply

If the Sequester were not dangerous, then no one would view it as a bargaining chip. "Your side" has been notoriously doing exactly that

#26 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

can - can't Sorry fixed.

#27 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 09:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

#26 | POSTED BY ZED

Zed does America have a spending problem?

#28 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 09:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's fasicinating to me, and I mean that sincerely, that the Republican Party seems to have decided that the economy of the United States of America is nothing more than something you can count coup on.

That is, you guys have convinced yourself, ONCE AGAIN, that the future has to enroll exactly the way you've imagined it would unroll. I've been watching you do this for years, starting with Iraq War II. Let's include the late presidential election.

#29 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

I want you GOP fellows to think hard, at least this once, about what might happen if you are just dead wrong.

#30 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

So I'm to assume that ZED doesn't think we have a spending problem.

Zed do you understand Base line budgeting?

The Budget Baseline Con

If the fiscal cliff talks make Lindsay Lohan look like a productive member of society, perhaps it's because President Obama and John Boehner are playing by the dysfunctional Beltway rules.

Here's the reality: Those numbers have no real meaning because they are conjured in the wilderness of mirrors that is the federal budget process. Since 1974, Capitol Hill's "baseline" has automatically increased spending every year according to Congressional Budget Office projections, which means before anyone has submitted a budget or cast a single vote. Tax and spending changes are then measured off that inflated baseline, not in absolute terms.

online.wsj.com

#31 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 09:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

about what might happen if you are just dead wrong.

#30 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:18 AM | Reply |

And Zed what will you do if we're "dead right"-----how about an admission that your POTUS is a con.

#32 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

And Zed what will you do if we're "dead right"-----how about an admission that your POTUS is a con.

#32 | Posted by matsop at 2013

You see, that's the thing. If you're right, then not much happens at all. No one much gets hurt, save for the president, who becomes somewhat politically embarrassed.

Its interesting to me that you don't see the asymetry to the two possible outcomes: disaster versus a week or so of GOP crowing.

#33 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

This can get interesting: If Obama knows there's little or nothing to the Sequester, and knows that the GOP knows that there's little nothing to the Sequester, then there was never any incentive for him to play a game of Chicken with the GOP at all.

So, you're going to have to assert that Obama is an irrational actor in this case, who just risks political capital "because". I think there is an irrational actor in this game, but that its not him.

#34 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

Of course he's an actor. He and his surrogates claimed the sequester was their idea, wanted credit for it, and then went out later and pretended it wasn't their tar baby and tried to pin it on others.

It's all theater.

#35 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2013-02-28 09:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well unfortunately in my opinion all I see is Obama campaigning spreading doom and gloom. I suppose he's trying desperately to make the GOP look bad, with the help of the state run MSM, in hope that the next elections will fill the house with a majority of his 'elite'.

Why would anyone, let alone the POTUS, want to ruin this republic? It has worked really well - most countries salivate profusely at the dream of being like "US". The speculation around the water coolers is that perhaps this is a preplanned recipe to purposely put up yield signs across all sectors of the American dream - thus pulling us down (reset us back) to the levels of other poorly managed countries. Equality? Only for the elite and only if they march in lock step toward their utopia no matter how obscure it may be.

In my opinion Obama, with this issue, is only worried about his perceived history - it can't escape him this time. He owns this sequestration because his regime implemented it. No matter how hard the misguided try to rewrite this part of history the truth will carry on through the hearts and minds of true Americans.

I find it difficult understanding how anyone with even a high school education would struggle at understanding this sequestration. It isn't budget cuts. In the simplest basic reality it only means that we are going to spend a little less than the amount of moneys requested over the next 10 years.

When I worked in a Government position and performed our annual budget request I was instructed that I had to request an addition 10% over last years budget. I objected, on various issues, and asked why. The senior's to me told me that we have to request more every year or we'll lose it. That made me wonder.. lose what? money we didn't need for items that were still within their usable life span? Since when does the government have to replace everything in 3 years? I couldn't run my business with that budgeting madness. I assure you it is widespread across all branches of the government. In my opinion if the Government entities would manage their individual budgets like we do at home or even in our private businesses they would find mega-billions to spare.

#36 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013-02-28 09:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

So, you're going to have to assert that Obama is an irrational actor in this case, who just risks political capital "because". I think there is an irrational actor in this game, but that its not him.

#34 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 09:42 AM | Reply

The man has been an actor his whole life. He knows the art of manipulation. The revised GDP came out for the 4th quarter and it wasn't as good as expected---0.1%----the sequester won't make much of an impact at all. This sail boat is dead in calm water and isn't going anywhere no matter what minor thing they do in Washington. This is a no growth or minimal growth economy and will stay that way for some time.

#37 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

"He owns this sequestration because his regime implemented it."

Never mind that Congress had to pass it and John Boehner said it gave him 98% of what he wanted. Just disregard the facts and believe whatever you want just like most right wingers.

#38 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-28 10:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

----the sequester won't make much of an impact at all.

#37 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 09:59 AMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Well, speaking as a citizen, that would be good news. Given a Sequester appears inevitable.

I'm thinking you never understood most of my points. No one wants to play a game they can't win. If all the GOP needed to do in this case was call Obama's "bluff", if it were always just as easy as that to make Obama lose, and Obama knew that (which you guys are asserting), then why play the game at all?

#39 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 10:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

I suppose he's (Obama) trying desperately to make the GOP look bad, with the help of the state run MSM, in hope that the next elections will fill the house with a majority of his 'elite'.

36 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013

You don't understand, either. Obama can't possibly make the GOP "look bad" unless he's dead right. If he's right, then the GOP gets nothing more than what its worked to have---Contempt.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 10:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Those numbers warrant soul searching among every thinking Republican."

They've both thought about it and decided that facts don't matter. The only thing that matters is protecting their rich owners.

#41 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2013-02-28 10:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Howard Dean; YEAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWW. "LET IT HAPPEN".

Let the contempt begin. Unfrock the Chicago thug. Do a reverse Saul Alinsky half Nelson on the "fear mongerer".

#42 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 10:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

Unfrock the Chicago thug.

#42 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 10:37

So "unfrocking a thug" is what you think you're doing here? Damn, then I guess its wonderful he's making it so easy for you.

The political right is unobservant, paranoid, and self-congratulatorily stupid.

#43 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 10:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Um Zed, the right is paranoid??? You must have missed all of Owebama's speech's for the last month.

#44 | Posted by fishpaw at 2013-02-28 11:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

#38 @danni

I have never advocated that I was a GOP or any political affiliation. I do however proudly stand up and proclaim to be an American.

Yet the facts remain - this sequestration is the results of the administration Bob Woodward: Obama Made Big Mistake on Sequester

#40 @zed

Point I was trying to make is that most of what I've heard from the POTUS, the MSM, and the man child Carney has been nothing more that doom and gloom - a consorted effort to pass blame upon the GOP and others.

#45 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013-02-28 01:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Boehner's job is to do what's right for his country not what's good for himself.

#46 | Posted by Tor at 2013-02-28 01:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

I do however proudly stand up and proclaim to be an American.

#45 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013-02-28 01:42 PM | Reply

Sam, thanks for your strong response to Danni and Zed along with taking your viagra daily.

#47 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-28 01:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Point I was trying to make is that most of what I've heard from the POTUS, the MSM, and the man child Carney has been nothing more that doom and gloom - a consorted effort to pass blame upon the GOP and others.

#45 | Posted by SamSpade at 2013

I understood your point. My point was that if things get bad because of the Sequester, and Florida Governor Scott is among those who think so, there will be no need for a "concerted effort to pass blame upon the GOP". Citizens will spontaneously gather in front of Republican Representative offices aremed with tar and feathers.

#48 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 04:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

You Republicans better sure as hell hope that nothing really bad happens because of the Sequester. You'd better hope that it all turns out like the Mayan Apocalypse: a big dud.

Because if the meteor hits people are going to be looking to blame someone. And people already dislike your Party for pulling some of the same little tricks within recent memory.

#49 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 04:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Um Zed, the right is paranoid??? You must have missed all of Owebama's speech's for the last month.

#44 | Posted by fishpaw at

Yes, the Right is paranoid. You people are virtually snakeeaters at this point, one notch below barking mad.

#50 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 04:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

You Republicans better sure as hell hope that nothing really bad happens because of the Sequester.
#49 | POSTED BY ZED

You Democrats better hope none of those released illegal immigrants doesn't go all Willie Horton on some poor person.

#51 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

You Democrats better hope none of those released illegal immigrants doesn't go all Willie Horton on some poor person.

#51 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 04

One might. That's the sort of result you get when you think you have no alternative but to burn down the house, and then act that way.

Republicans have been aching for a shut-down (or better yet, a wounding) of government for at least the last year. If this thing actually happens, most people are going to know who to blame, not that there won't be copious amounts of anger to go around.

No one thinks you're heroes, only yourselves. In your own minds your fighting the ugly giant Obama. Most of the rest of us see Obama as just another person and see you fellows as crazier than sacks of roaches.

#52 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 04:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Republicans have been aching for a shut-down
#52 | POSTED BY ZED

What? ON what planet would a Republican want a shutdown? Even when republicans are right they are wrong. Shutdowns have never worked out well for Republicans.

#53 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 04:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

No shutown. Nothing. If there were any chance of that, wall street would be reacting.

The Dow is trading at the 2013 high.

#54 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-28 05:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nah...republicans don't want the sequester...that law just came into being all by itself.....sorta like the virgin birth.

#55 | Posted by 1EyedMan at 2013-02-28 05:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

No shutown. Nothing. If there were any chance of that, wall street would be reacting.

The Dow is trading at the 2013 high.

#54 | Posted by eberly

the impacts will not be instant.

The 20% pay cuts will take about 30 days.

Now imagine you have to take a 20% pay cut by the end of the month and how that would affect your budget.

Now imagine how you would keep hundreds of thousands of your employees focused and motivated to do their jobs.

Now tell me nothing will happen.

#56 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-28 06:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

the impacts will not be instant. The 20% pay cuts will take about 30 days.

#56 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2013-02-28 06:06 PM | FLAG: Just got my DNC/White House talking points.

#57 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-28 06:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Barack Hussein Obama earned 65,000,000 or so votes just a few months ago. Backing out the fact that some of those retards actually loved him enough to risk prison to vote multiple times, can't they each send in about $1,200 apiece to save the country from the evils of this sequester?

In fact, let's start with these big-government wusscakes who are about to get furloughed. That's less than one week's pay for those useless morons.

Step up, DR libbies! How many of you are willing to pay an additional 1200 bucks to save the country?

#58 | Posted by uglyblinddate at 2013-02-28 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's less than one week's pay for those useless morons.

#58 | Posted by uglyblinddate at 2013-02-28 08:18 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


Therefore so much less money to give to your business. Or maybe you think that they just ate the money, rather than spent it on people like you.

#59 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-28 08:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama wants to tax me and give it to them. I prefer to keep the money, and let them earn it like I do, doing something for a living I value and am willing to pay for.

How much are you willing to have your taxes go up to save these government drones from having to have a little pay cut?

I bet I know the answer. Pretty close to zero, right?

#60 | Posted by uglyblinddate at 2013-02-28 08:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Also, Zed, has it ever occurred to you your hero is up to his eye-balls in this sequester and is talking a good game but doesn't have a problem with it?

#21 | Posted by matsop

Did it ever occur to you, that Obama wanted the sequester from the beginning and is making sure that it will happen. Asking the Repubs for something different forces them to do the opposite. By that Obama can reduce the costs for the military and the blame for it goes to ... exactly.

#61 | Posted by fribo at 2013-03-01 03:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

So you're saying that the repulicans are being played like a xylaphone?

...one that sounds like a beeeyotch when you play it....

OK...I will buy that. Tricked the [...] into cuts to the Pentagon they would never agree to - while cuts in services that would have eventually happened anyway.

So stand firm wingnuts....you are doing great!

#62 | Posted by 1EyedMan at 2013-03-01 05:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

You da man 1EyedMan....what up dawg?

#63 | Posted by drewinnj at 2013-03-01 11:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The Republicans' problem with the sequester goes back to two fundamental principles: voters don't want the cuts, and they reject the GOP "cuts only" formula."

~ The Hill.

Sorry Mr. "The Hill", but the voters outside of the Beltway don't agree with you.

If you are as stupid as you think we are, then you are believing the President when he says that public safety will be adversely affected. BullCRAP!!! That's a lie.

If the President allows this to happen, then it's HIS fault.

#64 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 11:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

The GOP's policy advancement of deep government spending cuts in the face of severe economic are fiscal and economic sabotage.

Obama is a wussie or closet Republican, but real blame for the sequester can be laid at the feet of the GOP House leadership, who used the unprecedented threat of default on the nation's debt to force $2.1 trillion of spending cuts. Period. Now the spending cuts that they demanded are poised to do substantial harm to our already depressed economy.

Perhaps most perversely, sequestration will increase the public debt-to-GDP ratio. Some congressional Rethuglicans have calculated that they should allow sequestration to occur because it maximizes the spending cuts they can extract and minimizes the revenue share of long-term deficit reduction. That corresponds with maximizing the economic sabotage Congress can inflict, short of forcing a self-induced sovereign debt crisis. Their calculus is a damning indictment of our political system's failure to uphold the social contract that had prevailed since the Great Depression that the federal government would target full employment and promote the general welfare of its citizens.

Specifically, Rethugs have objectively weakened the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), repeatedly filibustered routine extensions of emergency unemployment benefits, blocked aid to state governments, filibustered infrastructure investment, used extreme legislative vehicles like refusing to follow precedent on the typically pro forma votes to raise the debt ceiling to extract more economically damaging government spending cuts, blocked passage of a majority of the American Jobs Act (AJA), demanded counterproductive offsets to fiscal stimulus, and attacked the Federal Reserve's expansion of the monetary base and other policy responses intended to lower unemployment.

#65 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

#65 | Posted by nutcase

Sounds convincing enough, but you are wrong.

The Obama/Pelosi/Reid Agenda was wrong from the beginning. If it was allowed to be unleashed on us at it's full potential, then we would be in far worse shape.

The Republicans are heroes for filibustering.

Fundamentally where you are wrong is that you believe that the Government has the responsibility to bolster the economy. This is a fallacy and has proven to be wrong in the past.

#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Libertarian thinking is wrong and free markets are a myth. We have seen the consequences of Libertarian Greenspan's policies. Rethugs would rather Obama fail, than our country succeed. The correct word for that is treason.

#67 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't believe Obama is on the same page as Pelosi/Reid

#68 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 12:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Libertarian thinking is wrong and free markets are a myth. We have seen the consequences of Libertarian Greenspan's policies. Rethugs would rather Obama fail, than our country succeed. The correct word for that is treason.

#67 | Posted by nutcase

Let's see. I attack Obama's agenda for being extreme (Hope and Change LOL!!) and I am righteous in that because it happens to be true.

So, you are compelled to attack me for being extreme (probably because of my moniker). But where have I been extreme.

Let's take for example Ron Paul's comments on shrinking the Government. At the 30K foot level, that is not extreme at all since the Federal Government is the largest employer in the history of man. It can be shrunk.

The Republicans filibustering against growth? That's is indeed heroic.

I can tell that you believe that I am right because you can't argue against it. When you use words like Treason or Racists, that means you have no arguement.

#69 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rethugs would rather Obama fail, than our country succeed. The correct word for that is treason.
#67 | Posted by nutcase

Uh. You have it wrong.

If Obama fails with his agenda, the country succeeds. The last four years doesn't lie.

The economy was poised to bounce back, but because of the swing to the Left, Corporations had a huge layoff in 2008.

#70 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

The GOP's policy advancement of deep government spending cuts in the face of severe economic are fiscal and economic sabotage.

#65 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 12:17 PM | Reply

Your whole treatise points to why it's a good thing we have the government we have; if we didn't our deficits, total debt, and debt/gdp would be higher then ever. And your comment about "deep government spending cuts is a joke since it would consist of 2.2% of our total expenditures after an increase in spending for the year. There's nothing "deep" to the cuts and even calling them "cuts" is erroneous.

#71 | Posted by matsop at 2013-03-01 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't believe Obama is on the same page as Pelosi/Reid
#68 | Posted by nutcase

They were and that's why we are in huge trouble now.

#72 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

I love the real Ron Paul because he is honest and correct on two fronts; reducing Government interference in our private lives, and foriegn policy. However, if markets are not regulated, if cheaters are not prosecuted, the economy collapses for everyone except the cheaters and that is the current state of our nation.

While $2.1 trillion in spending cuts cannot possibly be 2.2% of our budget, even this huge amount is dwarfed by the bailout and our wars. That the same economists and military planners could be involved in $27 trillion bailouts, $5-8 trillion wars and at the same time be woried abotu a $16 trillion deficiti is ridiculous on its face. But that is the state of Washington's leadership. Its all a big lie. THere are only two issues i politics, money (who gets it) and morality (why who gets it). In order to pull the country out of the great depression Roosevelt invoked morality. Those discussions are non-existent today on any national scale. This is class warfare, the 1% stealing from the 99%. That is the one and only official Government policy.

#73 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 02:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

I love the real Ron Paul because he is honest and correct on two fronts; reducing Government interference in our private lives, and foriegn policy. However, if markets are not regulated, if cheaters are not prosecuted, the economy collapses for everyone except the cheaters and that is the current state of our nation.
#73 | Posted by nutcase

Yep. There are laws for this but they are not used.

You don't get it. Regulation is all about power for the few.

#74 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 02:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Regulation is about making it illegal to hit-and-run with a car or rob a bank, among other things. But the best way to rob a bank is to own (or control) one. Are you suggesting none of that? Get Real.

#75 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-01 03:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nutcase.

Read #74 again.

You are mistaken!

You have no clue, do you?

#76 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-01 04:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

I haven't heard a peep about cutting a few billion from foreign aid. Just for a few years, of course, until we get out own finances in order.

Surely some of our allies could step up to the plate and support themselves for a while.

#77 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-03-01 06:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Surely some of our allies could step up to the plate and support themselves for a while."

They would. The "just pretend" allies, not so much.

#78 | Posted by REDIAL at 2013-03-01 06:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Top Recipient Countries of U.S. Foreign Aid 2011 in $US millions

Afghanistan 12,924.40 2,659.00 (mostly military)
Israel 3,026.40
Iraq 2,147.60
Pakistan 1,700.10
Egypt 1,471.20
Haiti 1,263.40
Kenya 1,032.10
Jordan 850.80
South Africa 757.00
Philippines 610.80
Ethiopia 607.0

#79 | Posted by fribo at 2013-03-01 08:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

In the end, Republicans will gain support from the people for allowing the sequestration process to ensue. It is finally a real cut to the beast that is the federal government.

#80 | Posted by danv at 2013-03-01 09:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

It is finally a real cut to the beast that is the federal government.

#80 | POSTED BY DANV

Why do we, the people hate we, the people so much?

#81 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2013-03-01 10:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2013 World Readable

 

Advertisement