Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/24/2013 5:51:23 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1571446

what are you talking about Obama wants the cuts to go thru. in 2011 he said he would veto any bill trying to stop them

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/24/2013 6:02:04 PM
From: Alighieri	Respond to of 1571446

It is the latest meme on the Right. They tried sticking Obama with the blame. That didn't work. So this is the next straw they are grasping at. I am sure part of the calculation is that if nothing bad happens, they can point to it and "told you so!". If bad things do happen, then it was because Obama mis-managed it. I am pretty sure this won't work, their teflon coating has been scratched and everything sticks to them, even things that realistically aren't their fault. Fortunately, those cases will be rare. These cuts are coming only from discretionary spending...so it's not insignificant despite what fox noise has been selling to its audience. There is a fellow there, stewart varney, a brit, who has been making a lot of noise but doesn't seem to know the difference or chooses to ignore it. Al

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/24/2013 6:02:38 PM
From: TopCat	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571446

"The problem with being a perpetual whiny-baby is they never can learn." That's right and it's Obama who is being the "whiny-baby".....

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/24/2013 6:21:23 PM
From: i-node	4 Recommendations Respond to of 1571446

>> They tried sticking Obama with the blame. WTF? There is not one BIT of doubt about whose idea the idiotic sequester was. It was documented and reported contemporaneously. Why the hell are you dolts running away from a policy YOUR IDIOT PRESIDENT created?

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/24/2013 7:36:27 PM
From: FJB	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571446

Did Breitbart create the sequester via a hack of the White House? Bob Woodward calls Obammy world's biggest liar. washingtonpost.com

To: combjelly who wrote (700729)	2/25/2013 11:45:35 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1571446

George Will: The sequester: Yet another crisis manufactured by liberalismIt's obvious that whatever government's size, liberals feel it's barely big enough to forestall mass suffering. Even during this desultory economic recovery, one industry thrives -- the manufacture of synthetic hysteria. It is, however, inaccurate to accuse the Hysteric in Chief of crying "Wolf!" about spending cuts under the sequester. He is actually crying "Hamster!" As in: Batten down the hatches -- the sequester will cut $85 billion from this year's $3.6 trillion budget! Or: Head for the storm cellar -- spending will be cut 2.3 percent! Or: Famine, pestilence and locusts will come when the sequester causes federal spending over 10 years to plummet from $46 trillion all the way down to $44.8 trillion! Or: Grass will grow in the streets of America's cities if the domestic agencies whose budgets have increased 17 percent under President Obama must endure a 5 percent cut! The sequester has forced liberals to clarify their conviction that whatever the government's size is at any moment, it is the bare minimum necessary to forestall intolerable suffering. At his unintentionally hilarious hysteria session last Tuesday, Obama said: The sequester's "meat-cleaver approach" of "severe," "arbitrary" and "brutal" cuts will "eviscerate" education, energy and medical research spending. "And already, the threat of these cuts has forced the Navy to delay an aircraft carrier that was supposed to deploy to the Persian Gulf." "Forced"? The Navy did indeed cite the sequester when delaying deployment of the USS Truman. In the pressure campaign against Iran's nuclear arms program, U.S. policy has been to have two carriers in nearby waters. Yet the Navy is saying it cannot find cuts to programs or deployments less essential than the Truman deployment. The Navy's participation in the political campaign to pressure Congress into unraveling the sequester is crude and obvious, and should earn the Navy's budget especially skeptical scrutiny by Congress. The Defense Department's civilian employment has grown 17 percent since 2002. In 2012, DOD spending on civilian personnel was 21 percent higher than in 2002. And the Truman must stay in Norfolk? This is, strictly speaking, unbelievable. The sequester's critics correctly say it is not the most intelligent way to prune government; priorities among programs should be set. But such critics are utopians if they are waiting for the arrival of intelligent government. The real choice today is between bigger or smaller unintelligent government. Obama, who believes government spends money more constructively than do those who earn it, warns that the sequester's budgetary nicks, amounting to one half of 1 percent of gross domestic product, will derail the economy. A similar jeremiad was heard in 1943 when economist Paul Samuelson, whose Keynesian assumptions have trickled down to Obama, said postwar cuts in government would mean "the greatest period of unemployment and industrial dislocation which any economy has ever faced." Federal spending did indeed shrink an enormous 40 percent in one year. And the economy boomed. Because crises are government's excuse for growing, liberalism's motto is: Never let a crisis go unfabricated. But its promiscuous production of crises has made them boring. Remember when, in the 1980s, thousands died from cancers caused by insufficient regulation of the chemical Alar sprayed on apples? No, you don't because this alarming prediction fizzled. Remember when "a major cooling of the climate" was "widely considered inevitable" (New York Times, May 21, 1975) with "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation" (Science magazine, Dec. 10, 1976) which must "stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery" (International Wildlife, July 1975)? Today, while Obama prepares a governmental power grab to combat global warming, sensible Americans, tuckered out with apocalypse fatigue, are yawning through the catastrophe du jour, the sequester. They say: Cry "Havoc!" and let slip the hamsters of sequestration. George Will is a columnist for The Washington Post. He can be contacted at: georgewill@washpost.com