Sequestration Devastation? Not By a Long Shot!

Sequestration Devastation?

Not By a Long Shot!

If you've been exposed to any form of news media this month, you've been told that a looming disaster is approaching as March 1 approaches, and federal budget/spending "sequestration" takes effect.

From ajc.com News:

"The White House today released examples of what the Obama Administration says will happen if $85 billion in automatic budget cuts are allowed to go into effect on March 1, arguing the domestic spending cuts in the "sequester" would "threaten thousands of jobs and the economic security of the middle class."

In a fact sheet given to reporters, the Obama White House argues there would be damaging across the board cuts to education, small business, food safety and more ... ."

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/jamie-dupree-white-house-lays-out-sequest-impact/nWKPZ/

To emphasize the grave danger about to destroy America's economy and the lives of registered (and un-registered) voters, the Obama administration released a "Fact Sheet:" with a litany of the extent of the destruction about to sweep the Nation.

A summary of the horrific impact includes:

•           Cuts to education
•           Cuts to small business
•           Cuts to food safety
•           Cuts to research and innovation
•           Cuts to mental health
•           Security and Safety
•           Research and Innovation
•           Economic Growth
•           Government Services
•           Education
•           Economic Security
•           Public Health.

Unfortunately, what the White House and Congress fail to tell you, is that the "devastation" is NOT the result of draconian slashes to our lives, welfare and futures, but a 2% decrease in the rise of total government spending; which will inevitably exceed  the unprecedented  total $1,358,000,000,000.00 for FY 2012.

Of this total, "discretionary" spending ( the stuff that might be "cut") has exploded by 60% since 2008!

In case you're not sure just who's telling the truth, you could always look at the "letter of the law."

Since 99% of people will not take that step, and would rather listen to their favored "truth-teller" on the tube, here's the real deal:

Budget Control Act of 2011

 "CBO ESTIMATES.—As soon as practicable after Congress completes action on any discretionary appropriation, CBO, after consultation with the Committees on the Budget of the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall provide OMB with an estimate of the amount of discretionary new budget authority and outlays for the current year, if any, and the budget year provided by that legislation.

OMB ESTIMATES AND EXPLANATION OF DIFFERENCES.—Not later than 7 calendar days … after the date of enactment of any discretionary appropriation, OMB shall transmit a report to the House of Representatives and to the Senate containing the CBO estimate of that legislation, an OMB estimate of the amount of discretionary new budget authority and outlays for the current year, if any, and the budget year provided by that legislation, and an explanation of any difference between the estimates.

(A) The term ‘nonsecurity category’ means all discretionary appropriations not included in the security category defined in subparagraph (B).

(B) The term ‘security category’ includes discretionary appropriations associated with agency budgets for the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the intelligence community management account (95–0401–0–1–054), and all budget accounts in budget function 150 (international affairs).

‘‘with respect to fiscal year 2013— ‘‘(A) for the security category, $686,000,000,000 in new budget authority; and ‘‘(B) for the nonsecurity category, $361,000,000,000 in new budget authority"

The "report" that the CBO is required to publish, has been. It shows, clearly, there is no devastation on the horizon.

It reveals that the scare tactics of the right and the left are little more than flailing attempts to protect their favorite programs and take further advantage of the taxpayers who are being stuck with these ridiculous bills:

 

So, how does "total discretionary spending under "sequestration" compare to the planned spending increases for 2013?

From the Wall Street Journal:

"the sequester cuts the agencies' "budget authority" by about $85 billion between March 1 and Sept. 30,

The government spent $3.538 trillion in the fiscal year that ended in September 2012. So [i][b]$85 billion is 2.4% of the federal budget[/i][/b]. … Depending on the agency, cuts are going to be in the ballpark of 5% and 13%, according to various estimates from government officials."

What's really happening?

The government will have to cut 2% of projected total spending in the coming years!

Now, I'm not rich, but I am certain that I can find two cents to save from each dollar I have to spend without feeling too much pain.

If I have to cut increasing my "discretionary spending" (Shiner Bock, Jack Daniels, movies, Pecan Sandies, Marlboros, et c.) by "between 5% and 13%, I'm pretty sure I can handle that , too.

 Why can't the idiots in Washington find 15% of waste in their departments, instead of whining and terrorizing the uninformed and credulous?

Are you terrified, too?  Or should we just expect "business as usual?"

2/24/13 ETA:
How about we cut fundung across the board to 2008 levels, when schools were full of teachers, no firefighters or other first-responders had been laid off, there were still construction jobs and job-training programs, and no banks or automakers had yet needed to be bailed out?

Things were working well as far as government-run programs/jobs were concerned until the housing bubble and financial bailouts; so, why not "reset" policy and funding to those levels and let the taxpayers spend the rest as they see fit?

We no longer have an Iraq war to pay for and Afghanistan is all but over. According to the Obama administration, Government Motors and Chrysler are flying high and do not need our help anymore. All the "bailouts" were paid back. Where's all that extra money now?

There should be tons of extra money to spend on social programs without the need for any other tax increases or spending increases!

Jw

Obama using Flight 253 to gain control, not prevent or protect

You would expect that the immediate response to the failed bombing of Flight 253 would have been to mobilize intelligence and Homeland Security resources to address failures and assess strengths, right?

Not in this administration!

Instead of facing up to its failure to act against a potential threat from a religious extremist, the Obama administration immediately poured all its resources into trying to divert attention to ... GWB, of course!
On December 26, two days after Nigerian Omar Abdulmutallab allegedly attempted to use underwear packed with plastic explosives to blow up the Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight he was on, and as it became clear internally that the Administration had suffered perhaps its most embarrassing failure in the area of national security, senior Obama White House aides, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and new White House counsel Robert Bauer, ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns -- if any -- from the Bush Administration.
...
"This White House doesn't view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it's a political issue," says the White House source. "That's why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue."

The Politics of Incompetence

It seems that vital resources at DHS, FBI, NSA and CIA took a backseat to political operatives, who are still hard at work defending our citizenry from George Bush.

"The idea was that we'd show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could," says a staffer in the counsel's office. "We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we'd declassify it if necessary."

The White House, according to the source, is in full defensive spin mode. Other administration sources also say a flurry of memos were generated on December 26th, 27th, and 28th, which developed talking points about how Obama's decision to effectively shut down the Homeland Security Council (it was merged earlier this year into the National Security Council, run by National Security Adviser James Jones) had nothing to do with what Obama called a "catastrophic" failure on Christmas Day.

Just as many suspect, Obama's greatest concern in response to the failed terrorist attack was not for identification and prevention of foreign attacks, but was for the preservation of his administration's power and ability to continue with his domestic agenda.

What was the first "big step" the administration took in the aftermath? Buy a controlling interest in GMAC and Allied Bank.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread530709/pg1

I do not believe Barack Obama has the necessary motivation to take ANY substantive actions. He wants the US to have more internal police power. The more threatened and victimized we become, the greater his ability to impose more domestic control.

What better way to impose the ultimate "nanny state" than to assert, "This is for your own good," and back it up with proof of the threats and danger that only Washington can address?

"Swine flu," "global warming." "housing crisis," and "economic collapse," haven't worked so far.

Take it one step farther. Our health, environment, finances and homes weren't enough.

Now, people must die.

Recall that he, Clinton, Emmanuel and others in the administration chant the same mantra:

Rahm Emmanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
Hillary Clinton: “Never waste a good crisis.”
Obama: “Time of crisis can be 'great opportunity'”

(Saw this coming back in March)

I really believe that Obama has absolutely NO motivation to take any concrete FOREIGN action in these regards. The worse things get, the better for his agenda.

His administration needs help. He needs this.

Nov. 18, 2008
Rahm Emmanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Mar. 6, 2009
Hillary Clinton: “Never waste a good crisis.”

Mar. 8, 2009
Obama: “Time of crisis can be 'great opportunity'”

Ever since Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel paraphrased economist Alan Friedman last November, saying, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” the Obama administration has followed this path to push its agenda into the forefront of the public consciousness.

By turning every issue (climate, health care, banks, housing, the economy, et c.) into a “crisis,” Obama and his administration have preyed upon fear and desperation to push aside reasoned debate.

Using Congress as the scriveners, Obama has crafted blueprints for his socialist plans and turned them over to the Democrats in the House and Senate to solve, or fail.

When, you have to ask, will we become desensitized and deaf to the cries of “crisis” every time Obama wants to move his socialist agenda another step forward?

The majority of Americans are now realizing the results of Obama's agenda.

Isn't it funny how time has borne this out?

Obama will say ANYTHING that gains him support, regardless of his intentions.

I've said the same thing since he and Hillary were facing-off in 2008.

Read his books if you want to see what he really intends to accomplish.
(Been saying that, too. Is it too late?)

So, here we are nearly 6 months later and what do we see?

Economic "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Swine flu "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Energy "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Banking "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Automobile "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Housing "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Credit "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Health care "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.
Media "crisis" necessitating unprecedented government intervention.

Wanna know what's next?

"Civil unrest," "inflammatory speech," "right-wing terror," and anything else that threatens an expanding liberal/progressive/Obama constituency.

I won't say "I told you so."

Deny ignorance!

jw

"Friends of Barack" Ruin His Campaign( if not his reputation) in Ignomy

F.O.B. Will Spoil the Campaign

Remember the F. O. B.? “Friends of Bill.” The members of the group didn’t matter as much as the message membership carried. If you were an FOB, you had the man’s ear; you were his ‘bud.’ The term was powerful, often to the point of intimidation.

Today, the F.O.B. label can have even more impact, although not for the same man and certainly not for the same reasons. Today’s FOB can derail an otherwise well-thought-out campaign for the highest office in the land and the most powerful elected position in the developed world.

Picture this:

“William Ayers; terrorist. Courthouse bomber. Defiantly anti-establishment and arguably defiantly anti-American:”. Friend of Barack.

“Tony Rezko, financial opportunist. Shady deal-maker. Financier to his supporters. Convicted felon:” Friend (and Neighbor (NOB?))of Barack.

“Father Michael Pfleger, renegade priest. Evangelist for separation and destruction:” Friend of Barack.

“Jeremiah Wright, preacher of hate and dissension. 'God Damn America.’ Shepherd to his flock:” Friend of Barack.

Consider a 15- or 30-second spot focused on each of the foregoing FOBs, individually, 4 spots, and closing with a notation that he is a “Friend of Barack.” Follow up with a fifth (or more, depending on how many FOBs you ultimately desire to use) tying them all together as the Friends Of Barack!.

The campaign reels. The candidate squeals.