White House caught lying about sequestration

Quote from Radeck : Krauthammer: Obama ‘overshot’ sequester consequences, only left out ‘pestilence, earthquake, brimstone and plague’ [dailycaller.com] Media Turns Against Obama's Sequester Narrative [breitbart.com] the lie is unraveling. This reminds me of a saying: "bullcrap can get you to the top, but it won't keep you there". Obama's bullcrap campaign got him to the top, but after a never-ending 6-year campaign, even the media leftists are starting to smell that something isn't quite right.

Funny stuff

Quote from bridgeburner : Every administration in the history of the nation has lied at some point. It's intellectually dishonest to try and make it seem like this one is somehow worse. They're all liars. It's how politics works.

It's a shame that so many but the lies.

Quote from bridgeburner : Really? The Bush Administrations dishonesty about Iraq lead us to a war which caused the deaths of thousands of american soldiers. Name 1 thing Obama did that you consider worse than that?

And many prominent democrats led us into that war too.
fark them all.

Quote from Radeck : I asked the question if I needed to link (again) to the democrat quotes about Iraq...you didn't answer directly, but your response is a clear answer that yes, I do, even though this has been presented on TP many times before...but the leftists lie about Bush lying keeps being repeated by those who are either unaware of history, or know very well that they are lying, but keep repeating it simply because it achieves a political agenda....so here it is...again http://www.davidstuff.com/politic...quotes.htm

This deserves its own thread. I wasn't aware of how many democrats were pushing Bush to attack Iraq because of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. I knew they supported it but that they were actively pushing for it, is not very well known IMO. All you hear is "Bush's war", "Bush's fault".

Quote from 124nic8 : Apparently not long enough for Clinton's prediction to come true....

Apparently not. That could only be verified by invading. So, we invaded.

Quote from Krazen1211 : Apparently not. That could only be verified by invading. So, we invaded.

"Only"? Hardly.

OTOH, we could have gathered real intelligence instead of relying almost exclusively on a nut called "Curveball."

But they were just looking for an excuse, not real evidence.

Quote from Radeck : Hail Armageddon [washingtonpost.com] Charles Krauthammer article on the faux calamity if sequestration.

Quote : “The worst-case scenario for us,” a leading anti-budget-cuts lobbyist told The Post, “is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens.” Think about that. Worst case? That a government drowning in debt should cut back by 2.2 percent — and the country survives. That a government now borrowing 35 cents of every dollar it spends reduces that borrowing by two cents “and nothing bad really happens.” Oh, the humanity! A normal citizen might think this a good thing. For reactionary liberalism, however, whatever sum our ever-inflating government happens to spend today (now double what Bill Clinton spent in his last year) is the Platonic ideal — the reduction of which, however minuscule, is a national calamity. Or damn well should be. Otherwise, people might get the idea that we can shrink government and live on.

"The problem with sequestration, of course, is that the cuts are across the board and do not allow money to move between accounts. It’s dumb because it doesn’t discriminate.

Fine. Then change the law. That’s why we have a Congress. Discriminate. Prioritize. That’s why we have budgets. Except that the Democratic Senate hasn’t passed one in four years. And the White House, which proposed the sequester in the first place, had 18 months to establish rational priorities among accounts — and did nothing."

Douchebags.

You'd think Obama and Senate Democrat supporters would be embarrassed by now. Yet they say nothing.

Quote from Deusxmachina : [I]Douchebags. You'd think Obama and Senate Democrat supporters would be embarrassed by now. Yet they say nothing.

not only are they not embarrassed, but they actually have the arrogance and disgusting lack of character to blame the republicans for their screw-ups, instead of taking responsibility for their failures....the House GOP passed TWO, not one, TWO, budgets that address sequestration...the Reid senate and WH just ignored them. Then the GOP offered a THIRD offer to allow the president the unprecedented (and imho unconstitutional) authority to decide where and how to make the cuts, and Obama spat in their face.

THREE offers from the GOP, and NOTHING in return from the dems, at least a counter-offer or start of negotiations, NOTHING...and then the liar-in-chief has the gall to have a press conference where he blames the republicans...

that's what happens when you have a president with ZERO leadership skills, and nothing but constant campaign mode, rather than actually even trying to run the country or actually do his job....he's too busy taking all the perks with vacations every 4 weeks (and separate ones for him and his wife at that, so we have to pay double for Secret service, etc), concerts at the white house, all at the tax-payers' dime, with no cuts, his salary and expense budget safe from sequestration, all the while raising taxes on EVERYONE by 2% after promising not a dime of increased taxes to anyone earning less than 250k, and crying wolf about a 2% reduction in the increase to spending.... a bigger loser and incompetent charlatan I have not seen in that office in my lifetime.

Quote from Radeck : that's what happens when you have a president with ZERO leadership skills, and nothing but constant campaign mode, rather than actually even trying to run the country or actually do his job....he's too busy taking all the perks with vacations every 4 weeks (and separate ones for him and his wife at that, so we have to pay double for Secret service, etc), concerts at the white house, all at the tax-payers' dime, with no cuts, his salary and expense budget safe from sequestration, all the while raising taxes on EVERYONE by 2% after promising not a dime of increased taxes to anyone earning less than 250k, and crying wolf about a 2% reduction in the increase to spending.... a bigger loser and incompetent charlatan I have not seen in that office in my lifetime.

Agreed!

Lol! And that's not the funniest part. The funniest part is...there wouldn't be ANY passenger airline service in Western Kansas were it not for Federal spending (airlines get a subsidy to operate rural routes that are not economically feasible).

Quote : At Kan. airport, fliers back sequester cuts . . . but, wait, they’re closing the control tower? The cuts came into clearer focus Thursday. Garden City Regional Airport would lose its air traffic controllers, saving the federal government $318,756 and leaving pilots to handle landings, takeoffs and weather conditions mostly by themselves. “Oh,” said Dave Unruh, a retired farmer who heard the news as he waited for a flight to Dallas. “Is that part of the deal?”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nat...story.html

Quote from gunnerusa : Lol! And that's not the funniest part. The funniest part is...there wouldn't be ANY passenger airline service in Western Kansas were it not for Federal spending (airlines get a subsidy to operate rural routes that are not economically feasible).

The money saved by the feds spending less state money means the state can pay for those air traffic controllers if they choose.

Quote from Deusxmachina : The money saved by the feds spending less state money means the state can pay for those air traffic controllers if they choose.

Feel free to hold your breath!

Quote from jonsmith74 : Wow, once again, demonstrating that you have absolutely no clue. How many different inspections reports do you need to open your eyes? I've taken you to school several times in just 24 hours on this and yet you're still insisting on will disbelief.

telling someone they have no clue is not kosher here, my friend

Quote from Deusxmachina : The money saved by the feds spending less state money means the state can pay for those air traffic controllers if they choose.

I read another similar article this week.

Having no in-person ATCs at small airports isnt all that unusual, since many times the planes radio in and are guided by regional air traffic controllers or ones located in major nearby cities.

Having live people there is nice, of course, but its nowhere near a mandatory thing for tiny airports.

And besides, there have been ATC screwups which caused crashes before, so maybe letting the pilots do their own thing might be safer!