Understanding Obama’s Sequester Hoax

Understanding Obama’s Sequester Hoax

obama pinocchioTo understand the sequester hoax and scam we have to actually go back 2 years. The bill was the final chance in a series of proposals to resolve the 2011 United States debt-ceiling crisis, which featured bitter divisions between the parties and also pronounced splits within them. Earlier ideas included the Obama-Boehner $4 trillion “Grand Bargain”, the House Republican Cut, Cap and Balance Act, and the McConnell-Reid “Plan B” fallback. All eventually failed to gain enough general political or specific Congressional support to move into law, as the midnight August 2, 2011, deadline for an unprecedented U.S. sovereign default drew nearer and nearer.

The solution came from White House National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling, who, on July 12, 2011, proposed a compulsory trigger that would go into effect if another agreement was not made on tax increases and/or budget cuts equal to or greater than the the debt ceiling increase by a future date.

Ultimately, the intent of the sequester was to secure the commitment of both sides to future negotiation by means of an enforcement mechanism that would be unpalatable to Republicans and Democrats alike. President Obama agreed to the plan. House Speaker John Boehner expressed reservations, but also agreed.

On July 26, 2011, White House Budget Director Jack Lew and White House Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors met with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to discuss the plan. Reid, like Boehner several days before, was initially opposed to the idea, but was eventually convinced to go along with it, with the understanding that the sequester was intended as an enforcement tool rather than a true budget proposal.

On the evening of July 31, 2011, Obama announced that the leaders of both parties in both chambers had reached an agreement that would reduce the deficit and avoid default.[6] The same day, Speaker of the House John Boehner’s office outlined the agreement for House Republicans. One key element in the deal being reached and the logjam being broken earlier that afternoon was U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s ability to negotiate with his 25-year Senate colleague, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.[18][19][20] Biden had spent the most time bargaining with Congress on the debt question of anyone in the administration, and McConnell had viewed him as the one most trustworthy. – wikipedia

In essence, because the president refused to budget cuts and wanted the debt ceiling raised, he and his staff came up with the sequester as a mechanism to automatically kick in, if they still hadn’t agreed to cuts and spending a year later. This sequester is that mechanism.

Obama Blames House Republicans

Obama is constantly blaming house republicans for things he does. It is no surprise then that he turns around and blames house republicans for a proposal he and his staff came up with.

Bob Woodward’s “The Price of Politics”

page 215 July 12, 2011

They turned to [White House national economic council director Gene] Sperling for details about a compulsory trigger if they didn’t cut spending or raise taxes in an amount at least equivalent to the debt ceiling increase.

“A trigger would lock in our commitment,” Sperling explained. “Even though we disagree on the composition of how to get to the cuts, it would lock us in. The form of the automatic sequester would punish both sides. We’d have to September to avert any sequester” — a legal obligation to make spending cuts.

“Then we could use a medium or big deal to force tax reform,” Obama said optimistically.

“If this is a trigger for tax reform,” [House speaker John] Boehner said, “this could be worth discussing. But as a budget tool, it’s too complicated. I’m very nervous about this.”

“This would be an enforcement mechanism,” Obama said.

page 326 July 26th

At 2:30 p.m., [White House Budget director Jack] Lew and [White House legislative affairs director Rob] Nabors went to the Senate to meet with [Senator Majority Leader Harry] Reid and his chief of staff, David Krone.

“We have an idea for a trigger,” Lew said.

“What’s the idea,” Reid asked skeptically.


Reid bent down and put his head between his knees, almost as if he was going to throw up or was having a heart attack. He sat back up and looked at the ceiling. “A couple of weeks ago,” he said, “my staff said to me that there is one more possible” enforcement mechanism: sequestration. He said he told them, “Get the hell out of here. That’s insane. The White House surely will come up with a plan that will save the day. And you come to me with sequestration?”

Well, it could work, Lew and Nabors explained.

What would the impact be?

They would design it so that half the threatened cuts would be from the Defense Department…. The idea was to make all of the threatened cuts so unthinkable and onerous that the supercommittee [tasked with making additional cuts] would do its work and come up with its own deficit reduction plan.

Lew and Nabors went through a laundry list of programs that would face cuts.

“This is ridiculous,” Reid said.

That’s the beauty of a sequester, they said, it’s so ridiculous that no one ever wants it to happen. It was the bomb that no one wanted to drop. It actually would be an action-forcing event.

“I get it,” Reid said finally.

page 344 July 30th

The president and [White House chief of staff William] Daley were on the patio outside Daley’s office with [adviser David] Plouffe, [Treasury Secretary Timothy] Geithner, Lew and Sperling when they got word that Biden was making progress with [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell. It looked as if Republicans were ready to agree to a Defense/non-Defense sequester in the trigger.

Plouffe couldn’t believe it. These guys were so afraid of increasing revenues that they’re willing to put Defense on the chopping block? Republicans’ revenue phobia was so intense that they would sell out the Pentagon.

“This is a deal we can probably live with,” Obama said, willing to do almost anything to salvage something and prevent catastrophe.

Jack Lew delivered a speech, however, in Tampa publicly denouncing the house republicans for the sequester.

“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger…. [It] was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure at the end.”

Bob Woodward couldn’t believe it.

“After reviewing all the interviews and the extensive material I have on this issue, it looks like President Obama told a whopper,” Woodward said.  “Based on what Jack Lew said in Florida today, I have asked the White House to correct the record.”

So is the sequester a massive budget cut? If you pay attention to the president, the sky is falling, the sky is falling. But, after carefully look at it, you see not just cracks in the theory that the sky is falling, you see massive gaping holes, vast canyons you could drive an army through.

The sequester is not a budget cut. The sequester is a stop to AUTOMATIC INCREASES. Most Americans are unaware how out of hand congressional spending is. Americans don’t realize that there are automatic increases written right into the budget. What is illogical about it is, it is not tied to anything, like say population increase. It is haphazardly written into the budget plan.

This sequester was proposed by the president to call the house republican’s bluff. They had proposed over 50 different cut options to the president, which he rejected. He wanted the debt ceiling increased and spending upped. This was proposed as a test to force house republicans to come up with spending and cuts. Unfortunately, the president has denied and refused every single proposal by the house republicans. And, now, he turns around and plays dirty politics by saying it was their idea to have a sequester.

He wants his cake and to eat it too.

Department of Defense Prepares for Half a Billion in Spending Cuts

dod civilian workerWASHINGTON, Feb. 21, 2013 – Deep, across-the-board spending cuts scheduled to take effect March 1 would cause chaos for the Defense Department, Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said in a televised interview yesterday.

Carter told Judy Woodruff on “PBS Newshour” that the department will do what it can to minimize disruptions should the cuts kick in, but it can do only so much.

“We don’t have a lot of flexibility, and we don’t have a lot of time in that regard,” Carter said.

A “sequestration” mechanism in budget law requires DOD to cut $46 billion in spending from March 1 until the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year unless Congress comes up with an alternative that would stop sequestration from triggering. This comes on top of $487 billion in defense spending reductions already programmed over 10 years, and Pentagon officials have noted that operating under continuing resolutions in the absence of a fiscal year budget complicates matters.

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta notified Congress yesterday that the department is preparing to place almost all of its 800,000 civilian employees on unpaid furlough for one day a week through the rest of the fiscal year. These are not faceless bureaucrats who simply shuffle paper, Carter said.

“They repair our ships. They maintain our aircraft,” Carter said. “That’s who these people are, and 44 percent of them are veterans. It’s a terrible thing to have to deprive them of some of their income.”

If sequestration triggers, operations and maintenance — the primary funding that ensures readiness — will be particularly affected. The department will ensure units deploying to Afghanistan will receive the training needed to succeed. But this will rob other units readying for other missions, Carter said.

“That’s just a mathematical fact of doing sequester,” he added. “This is very damaging to national security.”

In planning for sequestration, the Navy already has postponed sending an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf to join one already there, to ensure there will be enough ready carriers to dispatch to other critical areas if required.

“In everything we do, we’re really trying to keep on protecting the country and delivering the defense under these circumstances,” Carter said.

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

Charities Left Out in the cold in Cash for Clunkers Deal

Cash for Clunkers What is it?

I’ve mentioned before that the stock market it is a zero sum gain, I win at your expense, not a win win situation. In the cash for clunkers program the government is footing the bill for $2 billion. Now when I say the government is footing the bill, I mean US. But the cars that qualify for the trade in program are perfectly running cars; can’t be too old; can’t have bad emissions; can’t have great emissions; have to be paid off.

Now I thought on its face that those criteria were just awful. Why would a rational thinking American turn in a car and burden themselves with more debt? This is why were are in this mess to begin with. This is insanity. This makes me mad.

Not only does the cash for clunkers program make me mad, but now I’ve found out that these idiots fell for it hook line and sinker and the program is an “overwhelming success”. Idiocy is running rampant in America. They should have an intelligence quotient for people to call themselves American.

Now I am totally ballistic. I am so fuming mad I could spit.



Enter the Charities

In the stimulus package, that Barrack Obama signed into being, you’ll see how in that bill, charitable donation tax write offs were lowered. I don’t know how a peace loving, hippie acting, granola eating, president could completely shaft charities like that.

Regardless of what some idiots who stick their heads in the sand say, charities do benefit heavily due to people wanting a tax write off.

As if that weren’t enough, let’s take a look at the Cash for Clunker stimulus package, i.e. car industry bailout.

The cars being turned in for vouchers are the cars that previously would have been the exact cars donated for a tax deduction. Car donations were left completely out of the entire cash for clunkers program, even though both the Congress and Senate were told of the problem months and months before.

Apparently, charities are not a big enough lobbying group. [ I guess they didn’t “donate” $1 million like Goldman Sachs did… ooops did i say that ]

And, Obama is gloating over the plan, and hoping it will get renewed. So once again, this president is shafting them.

I just don’t get it.

I say donate your car. If you really need a new car so badly, you can get dealer incentives to buy upwards of $4,500 anyway. Give your old car over because I’m not liking to foot your stupid bill in this $2 billion car bailout, because that’s all it is anyway.

Don’t misunderstand me, I am not a desocialistacrat nor a repukeblican. Both are the same thing.

People Who Say Protectionism is Bad Are Idiots and Here’s Why

People Who Say Protectionism is Bad Are Idiots

chinese protectionismI find it interesting that people who call themselves Libertarian, Democrat, and Republican all jump on the “protectionism is bad” bandwagon. They wail and moan how it harms the american “consumer” with rising prices, if they are not allowed free trade.

BUT HOLD ON A SECOND, you can’t start a company in China without 51% ownership by a Chinese firm. You can’t sell goods in china without huge 40%-60% tariffs on all imported goods.

This notion of protectionism is a complete and utter lie. China has been doing this for 60 years. In fact, they are so bad, they even subsidize exports. That means, the cheap Chinese crap you buy, isn’t actually cheap, they use Chinese tax payer money to lower the prices. Then, when you see it on the shelf, it is twice as cheap as a US made piece of plastic trash, because the US doesn’t put tariffs on it. So instead of an American made plastic cup, you now can only find a Chinese made plastic cup. And, some idiot on the news says, OH ITS A MIRACLE, CHINESE PLASTIC CUPS ARE CHEAPER THAN AMERICAN PLASTIC CUPS, THE AMERICAN CONSUMER WINS.

No no no no no! Stop! Their government is lowering the prices of all Chinese exports to make sure the local plastic crap is more expensive.

The Chinese economy is not THAT far off of the American economy. They are not a 3rd world nation.

You’ve been had, bamboozled, hoodwinked, RUN AMUCK. These idiots crying about protectionism have no clue what they are talking about. We don’t need “free trade”, we need equal trade. Any country that has economic policies in place for American goods, the US should have an exact mirror of those policies. PROBLEM SOLVED.

Don’t Be Scammed by Obama’s Health Care Plan

The Obama Health Care Plan

faith healer obamacareThe core of Obama’s Health Care “Reform” Act is based on whether or not you’re covered by insurance for health care. In fact today, people consider it a forgone conclusion that health care = insurance. You ever get into a dick waving contest with a bunch of your yuppie friends over health care, as a sign of how well your company treats your or negotiates? “What kinda health care does your company offer?” “What deductions do you have to pay out of your paycheck?” “Does your company insurance cover everything?” “My company’s health care insurance is so good, my daughter got a boob job from it.”

In fact the media, using it’s normal scare tactic, has completely couched all of its coverage of the bill in terms of health care = insurance. There’s not even a logical argument that goes before it. They completely make us assume that, that’s the only way to get health care in America.

What does that mean? It means, they assume you’re too stupid to realize insurance isn’t necessary for good health care. In fact they assume it so much, that they make it a forgone conclusion. They print stories like:

“For the staggering 46 million Americans lacking health care coverage, the uninsured will have the opportunity to select a plan from a menu of private and public options –similar to the way members of Congress choose their coverage.”

Wait, you mean to tell me that 46 million people don’t have health INSURANCE, not, health care. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Obviously the person winning in this entire debate is: INSURANCE COMPANIES. They bought “the Clintons”. Obviously, since they repeatedly tried to push it through congress. Now they have Obama in their back pocket.

You don’t need insurance to have health care. The only thing you need for health care is money. I’m sure many of you are shaking your head right about now.

“millions of Americans go bankrupt due to health care costs”

More media scare tactics. Let’s go over the history of insurance briefly so everyone isn’t rattling in the dark.

The History of Insurance in America

The first insurance to arrive in America was for housing. It was fire insurance, seeing as houses were built entirely of wood. Let me point out a little point of business and government commingling, at this early stage, 1752 to be exact. The insurance company, in order to maximize profits, wouldn’t insure houses that were too close to each other. Building contractors built houses as close to each other as possible, so they could put as many houses as they could on their properties. So really this is a head to head battle between the insurer and the builders. Who won? The insurers. They got Ben Franklin to back them. So much so, that the states adopted “building codes”, to avoid “fire hazards.

During the industrial revolution, you saw an explosion in insurance products: life and business insurance. Many ponzi schemes popped up. Companies, couldn’t even cover premiums were taking from new policy holders to pay off old ones.

risky business obamacareThe scandals were so GREAT that finally the government put its foot down, in 1935. It created social security. Awww you thought social security was to help the poor starving citizens didn’t you, all this time. You fool. They saw an easy way to grow government almost times 20 with one piece of legislation and everyone rushed at the idea. And, by grow government, I mean taxes skyrocketing 20 times worth.

“oh but they didn’t raise taxes during the great depression.” Idiot, they went off the gold standard and inflated the dollar beyond belief. Inflation is a tax. Repeat after me: INFLATION IS A TAX. You have no say so in inflation do you? No you don’t.

By creating social security, the government essentially robbed a major portion of insurance products right out from under insurance companies.

What is Insurance?

Insurance comes in 2 forms: catastrophic unforeseeable event or a foreseeable event that must occur. The first type is like your fire insurance. It is unlikely to happen, but in the event that it does, you’re covered. The second type is like your life insurance, because you will definitely die.

Do you see health insurance fitting either of those two? I mean the modern version of health insurance. Let me take you back one year to the “financial crisis.” What did everyone say the cause was? Cheap money, readily available, that everyone spent like a drunken sailor.

Ok if you have an air of cheap money, that’s readily available, that everyone spends like a drunken sailor, that must = bubble. Right? Of course. That by definition is a bubble.

Take a look at health care insurance right now. Your company gives you the “opportunity” to buy into the policy, and what’s the first thing you and your doctor do? You and your entire family go get check ups, dental cleanings, glasses refitted. Any little thing you rush to the doctor and put it on your insurance bill. The insurance company is happy to serve you.

“What could be wrong with that?”

By creating health insurance that is geared towards every day use, the insurance companies and the medical industry got together in a room and agreed upon how much to charge YOU, or “on your behalf”. Fog clearing yet? So instead of a check up being $5, the check up is now $100.00. OMG WHY? Because now the insurance company can charge you, or your company, through the nose. The medical community doesn’t raise the price one cent without first consulting the insurance companies. So now the people without insurance have to pay $100 for a check up, because that’s how much the rate is.

What does that have to do with Obama? Social Security… guess what, sat in a room with the medical community and agreed upon how much to charge YOU, or “on your behalf.” By so doing, the politician gets kudos from voters thinking he’s so great. When in fact he just jacked up the price 20 times. And, now he doesn’t raise taxes he… say it with me… raises inflation, which is… a tax.

Fog clearing yet?

Now instead of just social security, Obama wants an state sponsored program to bring insurance to everyone. Awww, that Obama is such a nice guy. But, wait, if there are 46 million Americans who don’t have insurance, could it be that 46 million Americans die every year? BINGO! No, they don’t. They do their own thing and negotiate prices with their doctor / dentists. And, their dentist / doctor negotiates prices with them. HOW DARE THEY?

Ve haf to put a shtop to zis, zis instant.

Welcome to the Obama health care plan. Under the Obama plan, these rogue doctors and dentists would be forced to stop this negotiating. All the lost sheep would be brought into the fold.

Oh did a light bulb go off just now?

“You mean to tell me doctors / dentists can negotiate prices?” Yes, if the government were not involved in any form of health care, the market would dictate prices for every procedure. If you only purchased health care for catastrophic events, your insurance premiums would be drastically reduced and heal care would be affordable for everyone. The so called expensive procedures wouldn’t be out of reach for everyone.

This bill is an insurance scam. It is the greatest ponzi scheme ever invented by mankind. Please go ask your doctor if there was a time, long ago, that patients could come into the office and negotiate medical prices. If he’s honest with you, he’ll tell you it is true.

Liberty: What You Consider Property the Government Doesn’t Consider Property

What You Consider Property the Government Doesn’t Consider Property

the watering holeIt’s a cold night, the wind is hushed, and not a creature is stirring. The redneck repeats his words, “get off my property,” as his shotgun is held chest high. The deputy casually shifts in the snow, “now Jed, you know we’re the law, and we can come onto your property at any time for an inspection.” The redneck cocks both barrels, “is that a fact? Seems to me, that ain’t so.  So kindly get back in your paddy wagon and git.”

The government feels that they can completely ignore the constitution. It cannot be made more apparent than in this blatant and obvious scenario. In this case, everyone understands that the property in question is the guy’s land. But, more subtle than that, we have unconsciously given away our property rights over other areas over the years.

Is Gay Marriage a Property Rights Question

The entire debate surrounding marriage, in general, is a red herring. The right to get married isn’t even abridged by the state. Yes there are marriage licenses but the right to get married is an inherent right that people have exercised long before a united states was even conceived of. What is worse is that people willingly go and pay for a marriage license, as if to say, we do not have a right to marry each other, without state permission. Nowhere in history did the state forbid marriage, before the US.

Continue reading Liberty: What You Consider Property the Government Doesn’t Consider Property