The Sequester was Obama's idea!

"the right to bear arms shall not be infringed".

Liberal facists hate the constitution...as they know the founders crafted it to protect the decent folks from them...

Good grief the zealots are out early.  First of all the sequester is a piece of legislation passed by both Houses and signed by the President.  That little piece of reality makes it both their ideas and the point of it was to make the Congress do something.  It is not the President's Constitutional obligation nor duty to initiate the budget process nor to complete that process.  

For too long the Congress has been allowed by the media to get away with this idea that if the budget is out of whack or too much is spent here or there it belongs to the Pres.  Regardless of who is President budgetary issues are initiated in the House and whether controlled by Dems or Repubs the problems with the budget originate in that arm of government.  As one Republican noted during a recent oversight hearing, "We control the purse strings".  He was absolutely right.  The Pres. has made a proposal a grown up House should take it up compromise and adjust to something both parties can agree to and get it passed. 

I'm certainly not a liberal facist and "background" checks do not represent an infringement upon the "right to bear arms."  It was not the founding fathers idea that America would be an armed camp without security, without rules and laws and regulations.  Regulation are not "taking" it is regulating, controlling ensureing the public safety and promoting the ability of the public to attempt to reach those lofty goals of "life, libert and the pursuit of happiness.  As with all liberties there are responisbilities attached, some folks need to grow up and take upon themselves those responsibilities. 

The President was his standard self, peevish, petulant, and leading by way of threat.  This must make even the most die heard liberals long for the quiet dignity that was the standard approach of his predecessor, and many before him.

The sequestration, and all the "cliffs" we have had to endure have been the making of Chicago style hardball tactics.  The meme is basically this: give me what I want, or I will destroy you.  He had the ability to act without compomise in his first two years, because his party controlled the whole congress.  He got what he wanted, and the nation is weaker for it.  Trillion dollar deficits, flatlining economy, high unemployment, and rising health care costs.

He only had had to manufacture crises after the people got wise and delivered the House of Representatives to the GOP in 2010.  He still does not negotiate, but rather tries to force his way by creating a massive problem, and then threatening to blame it on the Republicans.  In this case, the GOP has the upper hand.  They ought not succumb to his gutter level brinksmanship, becasue they too were elected, by the people, to represent a different set of values.

Our nation needs a leader.  All we have is a thug.  Our economy is dying because of it.

Tp his supposed mandate: Gallup released a poll showing that the people think we are going the wrong direction in all but 1 categroy. Obama is the zealot, the road block, the divider.

POR Economics: Retail sales barely rose in January as tax increases and higher gasoline prices restrained spending, suggesting the economy got little help from the consumer at the start of the year.

Obama speaks of, “The greatest nation on earth . . . " but has contributed little towards his assumption.

For example, Obama's support for green emergy. Compare that China from having no green energy infracture in 2008, has built enough renewable energy to power every household in Canada four times over (Maclean's February 2, 2012, p.37). Obama invested millions in solar power manufacturers which ended with bankruptcies. However, Obama recouped pay-back with campaign contributions.

intersting:

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think it was a very effective address, he did what he had to do. It started with one sort of political objective, which was to get way out front on the sequester issues, the deadline coming up on March 1, painting the Republicans as the party of the rich, protecting loopholes and he is the defender of the middle class, Medicare, all of this other stuff. Important to do, he hit hard and he did it early in his speech when I presume he had the largest audience and the rest is sort an explanation of his political philosophy.

It's a philosophy of solidarity, one citizen helping another, that's the theme, that's how he ended, by describing all the good deeds these citizens had done, that the essence of Americans looking after each other and the heart of the speech.

The middle of the speech, was activist government which helps that solidarity, which is the glue and he talked about unbelievably sort of numerous initiatives which are all going to involve spending at a time of 16 trillion dollars of debt. So he didn't look as if he's that interested in solving the debt issue, but he certainly wants to get activist government back in the game.

###

KRAUTHAMMER: One of the things that these red state Democrats who are going to go up for re-election in the next year are scared to death about is precisely having to vote. And here was Obama saying over and over again, 'You deserve a vote. You want to be on the record.’ There are a lot Democrats who don’t want to be on the record on all of these issues and I think he will endanger them.

But I think he is looking for his legacy. He's not looking for a Senator here or there in the Congress. He wants to be remembered for a man who changed America, that’s what he said. [He] started with Obamacare, and now this litany of programs. You know, he says, 'you can’t cut your way to prosperity.' This speech is about spending your way to prosperity.

"Obama’s frustration is justified. His approach to deficit reduction is far more economically sound than allowing the sequester to take effect, and his argument has already prevailed at the ballot box.."

His approach to deficit reduction is to kick the can (of deficit reduction) down the road for another four years, ahppily adding $1 trillion more, per year to the debt. Some plan. That 51% of the American public bought such stupidity, does not mean those opposing Obama's fiscal foolishness need to kowtoow to it. The 49% of Americans well-informed enough to voate against Obama have a right to representation too, and obstruct the progressive stupidity is what is called for.

Globe says"It was Obama’s best shot to pressure the Republican majority in the House of Representatives to avoid the automatic trillion-dollar budget cuts known as the “sequester” that will take effect March 1. That combination of cuts in defense and social programs delivers too much medicine too soon: The economy would likely plunge back into recession, based on the federal cutbacks alone."..Now isn't that just AMAZING. Although Obama has been the Chief Executive of the country for more than 4 years, and the economy has been in a downturn, and Iran and North Korea are getting nukes,......Barack Obama and his agenda  isn't responsible for ANYTHING! 

"Miker6"  Get a grip. Obamacare, the 100 billion all are monies appropriated by Congress whether you approve of the appropriation or not.  The President can only propose the Congress disposes, you know like in the Constitution.

I am sick and tired of watching the Republican Party look dumber by the day, it is why I left why so many moderates left.  Every moderate I know gets called a "liberal" by the wing nuts who have gained control of the Grand Old Party.  

You bomb the comment sections with outrageious and stupid attacks upon the Pres. or upon Dems. or upon even moderate Republican's,  but what do you offer.  What does the Party as it is currently constituted offer.  Cuts, cuts, more cuts, tax cuts, dibilitating cuts to the economy, to the middle class and a helping hand to me and everyone else who is in better than average shape. 

The country has made it clear it wants Medicare, it wants Social Security, it wants government to act.  So many of you call yourselves, "conservatives" or Republican's but you are nothing more than Libertarians.  College freshman "libertarians".  You don't want to government to work, you don't want government at all.  And sadly if you got your way you'd be amongst those doing without.  It's pathetic and for the old Party it is terminal.

Here in Florida folks are trying to take the Party back but it will be difficult to be successful as the wealthy with their unlimited funding continues to sucker in the intellectual midgets that make up the Tea Party.  The "government keep your hands off my Medicare crowd", so dull they don't even know it is a govt. program.  Happily the end result can be nothing less than the destruction of the Party and it being re-constituted as the moderate financially responsible Party that it used to be. 

So Obummer scolds us like a school teacher, telling us whatever the govt. does is good for us. He tells his acolytes  we don't have a spending problem, just a revenue problem. HMMM, I guess he never learned to balance his checkbook. Yup, higher taxes and more govt. regulations will surely bring us out of the recession and into prosperity. In four years, when he retires to Hawaii, he will have presided over the destruction of capitalism in this country which for many Americans was the path to success. Remember, RICH people are the problem, they're EVIL. I don't understand why liberals hate the best and brightest our nation produces. Could one of you progressives explain your hatred of successful people to me?

"Moderates" got us into this fiscal nightmare. The Dems will spend like drunken sailors because that is how they buy votes. Unfortunately there are more takers than makers in this country, which is how the community organizer won. The takers will never vote for a candidate who tells them he/she will cut expensive welfare programs and stop giving them free cell phones, EBT cards, Section 8 housing,etc. Personal responsibilty is trumped by give me free stuff.

My hatred? I don't hate rich people, progressive liberals do. Liberals hate capitalism and successful citizens because they hate people who don't depend on the govt. for everything. Remember Liawatha and Obummers campaign theme, you didn't build that business, that factory, without the help of the govt so you should want to pay excessive taxes to help the lazy and useless. Now that's what a community organizer would think, not a capitalist who creates jobs. 

Yes, progressive liberals scare the masses into believing SS and medicare will disappear if we don't keep raising taxes and spending like drunken sailors.  

Once again, Globe keeps the same story, but CHANGES the HEADLINE to make it appear that it is a new story, and to push itsd opinion on you via the headline.   

  FEBRUARY 13, 2013...And since this is a "new" story, I have a"New" comment.  Why won't Obama use his "Tougher Tone" on IRAN and its nukes and North Korea and its nukes? AndWhy does the Globe give him a PASS on fOREIGN POLICY?