Skip to comments.
The Democrats have lost on sequestration
Washington Post ^
| Friday, April 26, 2013
| Ezra Klein
Posted on 04/28/2013 12:41:42 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
1
posted on
04/28/2013 12:41:42 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
To: SunkenCiv
"He couldve vetoed it from the home of an jobless worker who just saw her benefits cut."How can one who is jobless be called a worker?
2
posted on
04/28/2013 12:45:18 PM PDT
by
gorush
(History repeats itself because human nature is static)
To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...
[Zero] couldve vetoed the FAA bill while standing at a Head Start thats about to throw needy children out of the program. He couldve vetoed it from the home of an jobless worker who just saw her benefits cut.
Yeah, that makes sense -- Zero ordered the very cuts which made his stupid ass look stupid, and defying Zero would have caused the Demagogic Party's fingernail-thin grasp on power to vanish overnight. The cancellation of SOME of OBAMA'S ex cathedra cuts to PUBLIC SAFETY was their Hobson's Choice. They lose small (for now) instead of losing big.
3
posted on
04/28/2013 12:45:27 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: SunkenCiv
4
posted on
04/28/2013 12:46:52 PM PDT
by
cardinal4
(Constitution? What Constitution?)
here's a file from the drive, from February:
The Obama Tax Hike
to go withThe Obama Recession
5
posted on
04/28/2013 12:48:09 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: SunkenCiv
Cuts to programs used by the politically powerful will be addressed, but cuts to programs that affects the politically powerless will persist. I guess that means that the people on food-stamps are politically powerful.
6
posted on
04/28/2013 12:48:22 PM PDT
by
Carry_Okie
(An economy is not a zero-sum game, but politics usually is.)
To: SunkenCiv
President Obama couldve vetoed the FAA bill while standing at a Head Start thats about to throw needy children out of the program. He couldve vetoed it from the home of an jobless worker who just saw her benefits cut. Why? He already won re-election. Now Obama is just about coasting the rest of the way, working via executive orders to get what he wants.
7
posted on
04/28/2013 12:49:21 PM PDT
by
montag813
To: SunkenCiv
They can still blame Bush?
Pray for America to Wake Up
8
posted on
04/28/2013 12:50:55 PM PDT
by
bray
(Surviving to spite Obama)
To: SunkenCiv
Democrats had other choices, of course. Of course they did. They could have told their President to get lost when he thought up the idea of sequestration in the first place.
9
posted on
04/28/2013 12:51:04 PM PDT
by
Colonel_Flagg
(Blather. Reince. Repeat.)
To: gorush
How can one who is jobless be called a worker?It's a Democrat Party thing - you wouldn't understand ...
10
posted on
04/28/2013 12:57:02 PM PDT
by
Ken522
11
posted on
04/28/2013 12:59:21 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: SunkenCiv
Only a ‘Progressive’ would call a decrease in the RATE of increase a ‘cut’ in spending.
We’re so screwed.
To: gorush
How can one who is jobless be called a worker?You obviously are ignorant of basic Marxism.
Spend a few bucks and get up to speed.
Point one: "Worker" in commiespeak does not refer to one who works.
13
posted on
04/28/2013 1:05:31 PM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
-
Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers... [Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform]
- ...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said. [Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance]
-
One day after announcing on his radio show that he is "truly considering" running in 2014 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by New Jersey's Frank Lautenberg, Rivera amped up his message today in a television interview and a column on the Fox News Latino website... a moderate Republican who is fiscally conservative but also supports gay marriage and Roe v. Wade... [Geraldo Rivera declares himself a 'moderate Republican' as he eyes U.S. Senate run]
14
posted on
04/28/2013 1:07:21 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: SunkenCiv
The pain of sequestration will be concentrated on those who lack political power.i.e. the taxpayer, the most politically powerless entity in the country. The forgotten man.
15
posted on
04/28/2013 1:08:59 PM PDT
by
central_va
(I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
To: gorush
What a loser of an article.
Democrats had other choices, of course. As Politicos Glenn Thrush pointed out on MSNBC Friday, President Obama couldve vetoed the FAA bill while standing at a Head Start thats about to throw needy children out of the program. He couldve vetoed it from the home of an jobless worker who just saw her benefits cut.
So basically, they are saying that he could have been a more vicious harmful demogague and politically won? Shame on them. The problem is the economy and the mismanagement by the Obama White House.
To: SunkenCiv
Most of the voters and ALL of the media have no idea that the sequestration was a not a cut in the budget, but rather a reduction of the projected budget increase.
It's the republicans who lose on that count. They seem unwilling to stand up and tell the truth.
17
posted on
04/28/2013 1:11:26 PM PDT
by
Baynative
(Lord, keep your arm around my shoulder and your hand over my mouth.)
To: SunkenCiv
The Democrats have lost on sequestration Note to RNC: Stand your ground
To: SunkenCiv
He couldve vetoed it from the home of an jobless worker who just saw her benefits cut. So much to say, so little time....
an jobless?
jobless worker?
...
To: SunkenCiv
In effect, what Democrats said Friday was that in any case where the political pain caused by sequestration becomes unbearable, they will agree to cancel that particular piece of the bill while leaving the rest of the law untouched.
not new, that was abomacare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson