Actually Washngton is a place where the Policticians themselves don't believe in what they are saying. 

You know what grates on my nerves? Big time, loudmouth corporate shills. 

"...President Obama loves to take swings at Congress...his attempt to politicize the process has been counterproductive." Sheer mendacity. At most, there is equal blame for both parties, and never forget, under the Constitution, the budget is Congress' reponsibility, not the POTUS'. Had speaker Boehner been a real leader, one able to deliver votes, this matter could have been settled 18 months ago at the 'golf summit', but in order to be a leader, one needs followers, and he simply does not have them. Congressional disfunction is in part a consequence of nationwide gerrymandering that has made congressional districts virtual heredity fifedoms, reducing election anxieties, and diminishing the Speaker's ability to control his troops, and thus we stumble forward without any national vision beyond the next continuing resolution.

Geolovely:  Speaker Boehnor has passed two budgets, which coud have addressed the issues, and prevented sequester.  They were not ever considered by the senate.  Clearly, the end game here for the Democrats is winning the House in 2014.  They have no interest in solving the problem.  President Obama has never stopped campaigning.  It is all about the politics for him and his side.

Well John for once actually writes a pretty decent column.  He stuck to the politics of the issue which is what this is all about.  I noted Graham and McCain yeasterday opening the door on the big deal and for once John is probably right.  Saner heads do want to cut a big deal.  The fact is both sides have the capacity to cut a big deal and now is a good time to do it. Will they?

The answer to that is can Boehner pull the House together.  In all likelihood it plays out with the Senate passing legislation and hoping that Boehner lets a floor vote go through.  The two House plans previously passed were based on the Ryan Budget which had neither the polictial nor public support to have any chance of passage.  Both parties realize that at this point the House is completely dysfunctional and Boehner merely trying to keep his head.

The Repulicans wish to keep the House but cannot control their caucus.  So Senate Republicans will take the lead cut the sane deal that has always been there, more revenue, entitlement reform and hopefully save the House's bacon.  That's if the House will let them do it.

The problem with Republicans, using Sen Sununu's analogy, is that they think they have an infinite number of strikes. Their game is never to get to first base.  They care little of relieving human suffering unless the mishaps fall into their own back yard.  Well then that suffering is a major crisis.  In reality there is no compromise in deciding what is the right thing versus the wrong thing to do.  The former takes reasoning not ideology and is based on solid evidence.  When citizens are out of work, you put them back to work productively with government money if you have to.  This step becomes critical when the private captains of industry hoarding unspent dollars, will not.  The so called risk takers do not want to take risks on the most industrious, productive workers on earth.  The fax machine, the internet, public transportation, highways, police, fire fighters, teachers, public buildings, and who knows what else could come out of government sponsored basic research, is what has led to prosperous times in the past.  Regulating those who take advantage of these developments assured its continuation.  Unnecessary unfunded wars, unpaid for medicine programs, devastating tax cuts undercutting government revenues, coupled with greedy, unethical financiers and bankers is what the public understands caused our current predicament.  Somehow Republicans in Congress haven not gotten this message and continue wanting to impoverish large swaths of their fellow Americans.  The yearly growth of wealth is so lopsided, the imbalance inhibits further advance in our GDP.  Too many dollars lay idle in too few hands that the unused potential impedes greater wealth.  Those who are wealthy are only shooting themselves in the foot because if they invested the cash they would be even richer, but so would everybody else.

Heres a newsflash..John Sununu makes a statement supporting conservative ideology

John, nobody wanted you as senator and nobody cares about your opinion now.

Well, John, like several other readers, I'd like to thank you for finally writing a column I can respect.  I don't necessarily agree with all your points, but it's well written, on point, makes some cogent and accurate observations, and summarizes the problem nicely.  I think you may have made a strategic error in panning Abbott and Costello's routine (which I personally find hilarious), but this is a quibble.  Nicely done.

That said, I do find some things to disagree with you about.  (Act surprised).  Bluntly, I am not at home to accusations of politicization of any issue from a member and spokesman of a party which has missed NO opportunity to score political points. When your members stand in opposition to the Violence Against Women Act, you have poor footing for any future allegations of using any issue for political gain.  Furthermore, as at least one other reader has observed, it is the responsibility of the House to create and pass a budget, not that of the President.  I do recognize that some may find this an overbroad reading of the phrase "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House...", but regardless, I feel the House is specious when it says "We passed several budgets, and they (the Senate and/or the president) failed to concur, so we will just sit here and sulk until our preferences are made law over their objections, or until the government grinds to a halt, or, in this case, until sequester cuts which everyone DID agree on take effect, whereon we will pretend we didn't know what effect this would have, and will loudly blame everyone except us".  I agree thpresident is not *exactly* covered in glory and goodness in this matter.  He is not, however, covered in quite as much excrement as Congress is, and you know it.  No amount of spin should distract anyone from the fact that Congress has abandoned its duty to the nation to govern wisely and well, instead using its power and pulpit to whinge loudly that it isn't getting it's way and pointing the finger everywhere but at itself.  I practice addiction medicine, and the behavior of congress right now is very much like an addict that has been caught with drugs in his system.  "it wasn't my fault!" they'll say.  "Someone offered them to me!"  My answer is the same as it is now: it is your responsibility to manage your own recovery.  If someone offers you drugs, you *can* refuse.  AnFodor Congress, too, they *can* say they will work with anyone necessary to make the nation continue to run without disruption, unless disruption is their goal.  Which sit may, in fact, be.

If your family's issue with the routine is that they've heard it (far) too many times, I can acceot that.  However, if it's because they don't appreciate the brilliance of it (perhaps because it's not sufficiently sophisticated for you and them), is suggests  a congentital deafness that explains a lot.

Obama wants more taxes and higher spending. True or false?

I rarely agree with John but this was a good and balanced column.

Who is removing comments?  None of mine were dumped but I noted a couple of responses by others deleted.  I may not like what someone says but I hope we are not going to have someone who starts deleting all the time.  We went through that once and I for one don't like to see people deleted simply because you don't like what they say.  How about a little maturity out there.

I'm surprised no one said anything yet about what Bob Woodard said. It has already been stated in many places by many pundits that the sequester was NOT the president's idea. And in any case he didn't vote for it. Congress did. I stopped reading this article when the writer repeated that overblown piece of misinformation. The article lacks any credibility if that is the level of discourse provided by this author.

As far as "Who's on First"? Our President isn't even at the game.