The polls seem to support the idea that Republicans are to blame. Or rather: they will be blamed.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What does this snarky comment have to do with the sequestration discussion?
I'm still have not a clue as to what democrats propose that we do as an alternative to sequestration. All I have heard is that the Republicans better do what the President wants or they are to blame if the sequestration goes through!
A lot if you read the last few comments and others throughout this thread. Who do you think will be paying the price for cuts in social security defense spending where the VA budget comes from and of course medicaid and HHS for the food stamp program. It is never the well off that pay the price it is always those who cannot fight back and are least able to bear the brunt of cuts. I would support this if the taxes were raised to cover some of this, say the cuts Obama wanted originally and if they searched the budget for wwaste, I beleive that these two measures if not watered down would save a lot more than what people are discussingWhat does this snarky comment have to do with the sequestration discussion?
I'm still have not a clue as to what democrats propose that we do as an alternative to sequestration. All I have heard is that the Republicans better do what the President wants or they are to blame if the sequestration goes through!
Yes they would, and rightfully so. The republicans control the House, and that is where the budget is approved and the laws are passed. Notice how the conservative/republicans in this thread have made great efforts to blame Obama for the idea but continue to give the House a pass even though this is their job? This is the same disingenuous attacks Obama has had to face since day 1.The polls seem to support the idea that Republicans are to blame. Or rather: they will be blamed.
Yes they would, and rightfully so. The republicans control the House, and that is where the budget is approved and the laws are passed. Notice how the conservative/republicans in this thread have made great efforts to blame Obama for the idea but continue to give the House a pass even though this is their job? This is the same disingenuous attacks Obama has had to face since day 1.
A lot if you read the last few comments and others throughout this thread. Who do you think will be paying the price for cuts in social security defense spending where the VA budget comes from and of course medicaid and HHS for the food stamp program. It is never the well off that pay the price it is always those who cannot fight back and are least able to bear the brunt of cuts. I would support this if the taxes were raised to cover some of this, say the cuts Obama wanted originally and if they searched the budget for wwaste, I beleive that these two measures if not watered down would save a lot more than what people are discussing
FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME, THESE ARE NOT CUTS!.
THEY ARE REDUCTIONS IN THE INCREASE.
Yes they would, and rightfully so. The republicans control the House, and that is where the budget is approved and the laws are passed. Notice how the conservative/republicans in this thread have made great efforts to blame Obama for the idea but continue to give the House a pass even though this is their job? This is the same disingenuous attacks Obama has had to face since day 1.
The republicans have proposed a number of alternatives to the sequester, but they have been rejected by the democrats and Obama. The democrats seemingly have no interest to come up with their own alternative set of cuts.
A lot if you read the last few comments and others throughout this thread. Who do you think will be paying the price for cuts in social security defense spending where the VA budget comes from and of course medicaid and HHS for the food stamp program. It is never the well off that pay the price it is always those who cannot fight back and are least able to bear the brunt of cuts. I would support this if the taxes were raised to cover some of this, say the cuts Obama wanted originally and if they searched the budget for wwaste, I beleive that these two measures if not watered down would save a lot more than what people are discussing
Obama own this. The sequester was the White House's idea according to Bob Woodward. Obama himself defended the sequester in 2011. Make him decide on what to cut.
Course, the Liar-in-Chief will STILL blame the Republicans for HIS decisions and his sycophants and LIVs will buy into it.
Yeah, and if we are bringing tropps home shouldnt there be cuts?So...why are the Republicans freaking out about "defense" spending? It is still being "increased" just not as fast as they don't need. Those ingrates!
Lets see who holds the majority in the house, of thats right the Republicans, so they could push through their plan if they really wanted to and give people an alternative to discussThe republicans have proposed a number of alternatives to the sequester, but they have been rejected by the democrats and Obama. The democrats seemingly have no interest to come up with their own alternative set of cuts. As the head of State, I would think that Obama would want to provide some leadership and broker some sort of comprised deal. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening.
The republicans have proposed a number of alternatives to the sequester, but they have been rejected by the democrats and Obama. The democrats seemingly have no interest to come up with their own alternative set of cuts. As the head of State, I would think that Obama would want to provide some leadership and broker some sort of comprised deal. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening.
As I said earlier give Obama all his program and then you can blame him if it fails. The Republicans block everything and vote for nothing, you can argue with that all you want and the american people will still see through it, the next election for congress will be interestingTax increases were negotiated during the first half of the fiscal cliff negotiations. So talking about additional tax increases is a non-starter. We are talking about cuts. We need $85 billion in identified strategic cuts in place of the $85 billion proposed in the sequester.
Now the question is can the democrats come up with no less than $85 billion worth of cuts as an alternate to the sequester.
There it isObama own this. The sequester was the White House's idea according to Bob Woodward. Obama himself defended the sequester in 2011. Make him decide on what to cut.
Course, the Liar-in-Chief will STILL blame the Republicans for HIS decisions and his sycophants and LIVs will buy into it.
Excellent post. Crybaby Democrats in Washington, Obama being the crybaby-in-chief, are plying politics with America's future, placing political power and control ahead of what is best for America.pol·i·tics
[pol-i-tiks]
noun ( used with a singular or plural verb ) 1. the science or art of political government.
2. the practice or profession of conducting political affairs.
3. political affairs: The advocated reforms have become embroiled in politics.
4. political methods or maneuvers: We could not approve of his politics in winning passage of the bill.
5. political principles or opinions: We avoided discussion of religion and politics. His politics are his own affair.
Also
cry·ba·by
[krahy-bey-bee] noun, plural cry·ba·bies, verb, cry·ba·bied, cry·ba·by·ing.
noun 1. a person, especially a child, who cries readily for very little reason.
2. a person who complains too much, usually in a whining manner.
verb (used without object) 3. Also, cry-ba·by. to cry or complain easily or often.
I thought it was Obama freaking out about defense spending. He was crying to us about an aircraft carrier has already been delayed because of the potential effects of sequestration.So...why are the Republicans freaking out about "defense" spending? It is still being "increased" just not as fast as they don't need. Those ingrates!
[serious];62477796 said:So have democrats:
A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit | The White House
Republicans, however, are simply proposing getting everything they want.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?