In the latest attempt to help soften the blow that the sequestration cuts will have, republicans voted to give the president's administration flexibility in how to make the required cuts instead of just being flat cuts across the board. The democrats, following the white house's lead, voted against this measure.

If that isn't playing political games, then what is? This bill gave the white house more power, but instead of taking this and working with it to make the cuts where they need to be made, they decided they'd rather have everything or nothing at all. More stupid political gamesmanship IMO

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00026

Why would you think either party wanted to get something actually done?

_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012

Dare to dream

I'm not a lover of either party. Both have their negative points which is why I won't join a political party. Have never been registered to vote under any particular party and won't ever be, but with this sequestration being the hottest political topic of the day, I thought this vote said a lot about what was really going on.

I'm not sure I like giving any presidential administration the powers that this bill does, but I think it does more good than letting sequestration hit and forcing cuts in areas across the board, instead of being able to focus them where they would do the least harm. Of course if it turns out that the cuts didn't do a lot of harm, then the democrats wouldn't be able to continually call for higher taxes, so the circle jerk continues...

Whatever. You gave a list of votes. Where's the bill?

Just saying the Pres can cut where he wants to doesn't solve the real problem of needing more revenue.

_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.

There is a link to the bill on that page.

Do you think that it's better the cuts just go across the board automatically or that the administration gets some leeway in how to implement them? If you think they would be better off with the ability to implement them the best way they see fit, then what's the point of them voting against it. If you feel that it's better they just let the cuts fall across the board, please explain how this is better...of course both "in your opinion"

And no it doesn't solve the needing more revenue thing, but there was already some revenue added back in January. What we really need is tax reform not tax hikes, but they'll never come to an agreement over actual meaningful reform

Seriously, you'd rather die than admit the Democrats are still just another political party.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

Nope, there's no pork to be cut. No waste to be eliminated. This is going to come out of paychecks, and it's gonna hurt. Why?

BECAUSE THEY WANT IT TO HURT.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

Just for you sutz, I went and pulled the link so you don't get too confused trying to find it

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.16:

OK, I looked through it. All I read is a bill to tell the President to submit a plan by Mar 15th concerning only spending cuts, with the amount fixed at $85B and stipulating the 50/50 split between Defense/domestic.

So, kick the can down the road another couple of weeks, and align to the Republican plan.

I see why the WH considers it a non-starter. They submitted a plan. Why don't the Repubs allow a vote on that?

_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.

It's obvious that both sides haven't been able to come to an agreement. That is clear. What this bill does is give the power to spread out how to make the cuts instead of just wildly wielding the ax all across the board, not taking enough from places that are too fat of a budget, and taking too much from places with razor thin margins for budgets.

of course I don't expect you to look at it objectively, because you need to be able to blame the republicans at every turn instead of sharing the blame between both parties as it should be

EDIT: just wanted to add that I looked up the numbers to be sure, but we have a budget of about $3.8 trillion and this sequester is looking to cut $108 billion from this. This is a total of less than 3% of the budget.

What have we added to our budget from last year that is so essential that remaining at slightly above last year's spending would send us spiraling into chaos and huge losses of jobs? Even with the most "vicious" cuts, our spending is still above last year's amount. And this is all with the (incorrect) stance that there is zero pork, fraud, waste, abuse, or redundancy to cut from the budget. Like I said earlier, an eighth grader could find cuts to implement that no one would even recognize are gone.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

So, if the sequester cuts are not that 'vicious,' why all the hyperbolic vitriol over the President using it as a barganing chip?

I blame the Republicans because they're the ones electing crazy Tea Party candidates and signing no new taxes pledges to Grover Norquist and in general acting in highly partisan, ideological ways. The great Will Rogers said, "I'm not a member of an organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

You don't see that. I do.

_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.

I must have must missed what Patty Murray, the Senate Budget Committee Chairman, put forth. What did the legislation propose?

The President and his party are the ones with all the hyperbole about how horrible the cuts are. The vitriol is present because of his refusal to even consider plans that would mitigate the harm of the cuts while still allowing for full cuts and revenues as he's demanding, and because he's forcing it to be a greater issue than it has to be. He set it up, castigated the Republicans for not wanting to go along with it, and then when they do compromise, he blames it on them. Wonder why they're mad at him?

I'd say let's grab this thing by the horns and ride it over the cliff together, screaming YIPPY KAY YEYYYYYYYYYYEEEAAAAAAAAAAYYY MOTHERFUCKERS at the top of our lungs, but there's a distinct possibility my family's meager income will be affected because they can't find any pork in the change behind the couches of the congressional lounges and foyers.

But yea, the presidential track record has been spotless since January 19, 2009. Who am I to question it. After all, I might regret doing that.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

Both parties suck, sequestration sucks. How about some REAL cuts where there's REAL waste? Getting sick of the games.

_________________

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.





and a big to conservative hyperbole and those who spew it.

_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.

Where are all these fucking horses I keep hearing you guys talk about?

_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-hail-armageddon/2013/02/28/ca8a32a6-81da-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

From that link:



But no. Across the board cuts right where it hurts the most. Air-traffic control. Meat inspection. Weather forecasting. And this after the president threatened to veto a GOP proposal to make cuts where it wouldn't affect areas it shouldn't. But it's their fault. Obama uber alles.

Sutz - you may not have said it here, but we haven't seen a single time Dear Leader has even been questioned, let alone criticized by those on the left. Ever. He can do no wrong. Hell, the Pope didn't have that kind of infallibility. Outreach programs had a lower opinion of Mother Theresa. Justin Beiber fans are less devout.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

I have a feeling that you've never seen any commentary/news truly from the "left." Given the current state of the media, that's a near certainty if you haven't looked for it.

_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.