Sequestration... Get ready. - Page 14 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

dynalow · #**196** 03-02-2013, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

I do not believe he has any desire to do the "right thing" which is an across the board spending cut of at least 10%............everybody.

Nobody wants to pay any more taxes............therefore he has an obligation to cut expenses. He refuses to do that for all the reasons known.

I wonder which department's budget gets hit with the money being spent on the "auxiliary" war fighting equipment we will soon send to Syrian rebels????

How many teacher furloughs might that money be saving???

The effective Executive gets the right things done.
Peter Drucker

Outside of being CinC, one can argue that his limited executive skills have accomplished little. Nancy & Harry ran his first two years (one might say ran over him for two years).
His last two? Well..............what has been accomplished besides massive can-kicking, blame-gaming and name-calling? Maybe I've not been paying attention the last two years. Let me know.

The effective Executive gets the right things done.

MS Fowler · #**197** 03-02-2013, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

Those dreams that you have every night will consume you. Next thing is that you'll be imagining Obama as the Devil Incarnate.

You fail to grasp that he has few options if he wishes to keep his numbers up in the short term. People like receiving money.

Is that what a President is elected to do?--to keep his approval number sup in the short term?
I'd prefer LEADERSHIP, of " the buck stops here" mentality. Obama isn't the first President to avoid/ evade responsibility for his actions. That doesn't mean I have to like it.

t walgamuth · #**198** 03-02-2013, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

You still believe he has a desire to cut spending by 10%?

If so, do you have a shred of support for what you believe?

If he really was willing to cut spending, the GOP would be right on board with him.

He's not.

We do not agree that he is not trying to do the right thing. A desire to cut spending by 10% is a moving target. Any cuts by the government will slow the recovery so tend to be counterproductive. I see his actions as trying to walk a thin line between reducing the defecit and keeping the economy growing. I happen to think he is doing about all that can be done without raising taxes.

is he trying to please the voters? of course. having support of the majority of the public is essential to being able to govern even if you are not ever going to run again.

cmbdiesel · #**199** 03-02-2013, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Air&Road

Obama this afternoon, in one of his most arrogant appearances to date, said that the people cleaning the Capitol building will have less pay. Afterwards, Stephen Ayers, Architect of the Capitol said that this is totally untrue.

The Emperor just continues to make things up.

He is so convinced that he and only he, knows what's best for the country that he can't recognize that the spending cuts, or more accurately, the cut in the rate of spending GROWTH, is a good thing for the country. He is doing something good for the country, but too full of himself and his jaded ideologies to recognize and take credit for it!

What really deserves a laugh is that you completely discount the points raised by one political hack, and completely swallow the points raised by one on the other side of the aisle...

Newsflash - they are all lying/spinning/manipulating every factoid they get their hands on

cmbdiesel · #**200** 03-02-2013, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

The President is being very true to his bedrock belief that America is an evil, oppressive colonialist country that only got wealthy by stealing the wealth of others.
Not my belief, but clearly it is his. He is taking advantage of his position to cause as much hurt to as many people as he can.

you got some real serious partisanship issues.

Can you see anything with those blinders on?

cmbdiesel · #**201** 03-02-2013, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynalow

How dare anyone question the Petulant One!

Bob Woodward says White House told him he would regret criticism

Quote:

Originally Posted by Air&Road

Yes, over the years Woodward has proven himself to be one of those rare liberals who are Intellectually Honest beyond reproach.

Maybe doing a little research before believing the spin would be good.
This little brouhaha does not live up to the hype.

Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com

From Gene Sperling to Bob Woodward on Feb. 22, 2013
Bob:
I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.
But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)
I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is different. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.
My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.

Gene

From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013
Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob

Woodward is just another political hack trying to raise his speaking fees with free publicity.

cmbdiesel · #**202** 03-02-2013, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

You still believe he has a desire to cut spending by 10%?

If so, do you have a shred of support for what you believe?

If he really was willing to cut spending, the GOP would be right on board with him.

Right up to the point of 'where'.....

I doubt there is a single R who would agree to 10% across the board.
They would have their own little list (just like the D's) of programs that would be off limits....
They are all a bunch of lying DB's without a shred of integrity.
Even if such a cut were passed, it would never happen.
Which ever side was in power would change the rules to protect their fiefdoms.

dynalow · #**203** 03-02-2013, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Maybe doing a little research before believing the spin would be good.
This little brouhaha does not live up to the hype.

Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com

From Gene Sperling to Bob Woodward on Feb. 22, 2013
Bob:
I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.
But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)
I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is different. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.
My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.

Gene

From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013
Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob

Woodward is just another political hack trying to raise his speaking fees with free publicity.

True. Woodward did an about face. So do I.
However, he didn't get into this detail when I watched him on Wolf Blitzer Wed. The story's never over till the last chapter's been penned.

I don't know about the hack part, but he's clearly fallen a few pegs on the ladder.

MS Fowler · #**204** 03-02-2013, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

you got some real serious partisanship issues.

Can you see anything with those blinders on?

I am not the blind follower that you appear to be.

Brian Carlton · #**205** 03-02-2013, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I am not the blind follower that you appear to be.

Unfortunately, you tend to be the blind follower............blind to anything that is not GOP.

In the current discussion I agree with you, however there are strong forces that prevent the Administration from doing what we both agree is necessary. Unfortunately, you do not understand these forces because they are beyond your ability to comprehend them.