Woodward: Obama White House Initiated Idea of Sequester

[JTA]

The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”

The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.

“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”

The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

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

The Kenyan and his underlings once again shown to be liars. No wonder liars like Vrede worship this Chicago thug.

Here's hoping Obama's foolish sequester survives and the American public realizes that budget responsibility does not mean the end of the world.

Spending cuts at last!

[rstrong]

Nonsense. Budget sequestration goes back to the Gramm–Rudman–Hollings Balanced Budget Act of 1985. It was always there during the Obama-Boehner talks, always an option.

Both sides want cuts, but they disagree on WHAT to cut. Neither side could be seen cutting what they promised to protect. The Republican especially were pandering to the far right with a policy of no cooperation and no compromise under any circumstances - but the Democrats aren't blameless either.

The impression I get it that they agreed to a compromise - cuts on both sides - and they're using the sequestration maneuver to claim "we never voted for it!"

> The Kenyan and his underlings

We get it, you stormfront reject. You can't stand the idea of a black President. But your racial panic has nothing to do with the budget.

[O Really]

You never do get it, do you? I don't call him Kenyan because he is black; I call him that because he is a petty despot like those of the African continent who plunder their nation's treasury, are little more than gawdy showmen, rule with an iron fist and who care little for liberty. I speak of him as a foreigner, an outsider...not by birth...but a foreigner as he ignores the principles of constitutional government or individual freedom that was the bassis of this republic....

"Despot"?? Seriously?
Seems Obama hardly merits the title considering how the Republicans holding Congress hostage seem to have no problem doing whatever they want to. Try taunting and creating ridiculous obstacles in Zimbabwe. The very fact that you and the insurgent wannabes can say the things you do belies your claim of "despotism."

[Stinger]

I call him that because he is a petty despot like those of the African continent who plunder their nation's treasury, are little more than gawdy showmen, rule with an iron fist and who care little for liberty. I speak of him as a foreigner, an outsider...not by birth...but a foreigner as he ignores the principles of constitutional government or individual freedom that was the bassis of this republic.

You get more stupid in a little paragraph like that than anyone I've ever read.

Cluebus for the terminally ignorant: Just because you babble sound bites doesn't mean they're true or even tangentially related to reality.

Thanks for playing. Please try again.

[Stinger]

The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”

The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.

“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”
.

Lew was right. There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be an automatic trigger.

Here's your veep candidate, Paul Ryan, through the years, advocating for sequestration.

"What conservatives like me have been fighting for for years are statutory caps on spending ... and if they breach that amount, an across-the-board sequester comes in ...." LINK

Thanks for playing. Please try again.

[Wneglia]

The sky is falling.

[Wneglia]

Thanks, Wneglia, here's the article that your graph comes from:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfrezza/ ... lame-game/

Bill Frezza

...Competitive Enterprise Institute...

Competitive Enterprise Institute

The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is an advocacy group based in Washington DC with long ties to tobacco disinformation campaigns...

It postures as an advocate of "sound science" in the development of public policy. However, CEI projects dispute the overwhelming scientific evidence that human induced greenhouse gas emissions are driving climate change. They have a program for "challenging government regulations", push property rights as a solution to environment problems, opposed US vehicle fuel efficiency standards, and spin for the drug industry.

Many of its claims have been debunked. Here are a few examples related to climate change:

Annenberg Political Fact Check, "Scientist to CEI: You Used My Research To "Confuse and Mislead," May 26, 2006.
"Thank you for emitting", Real Climate, May 18, 2006...

See also:

The Competitive Enterprise Institute And Global Warming; and
CEI Programs & Projects for more details...

CEI's Foundation Funders

...Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation (Koch Family Foundations)
Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation (Koch Family Foundations)
David H. Koch Charitable Foundation (Koch Family Foundations)...

Amoco Foundation, Inc.
Coca-Cola Company...
Ford Motor Company Fund...
Philip Morris Companies, Inc.
Pfizer Inc...
Texaco, Inc.
Texaco Foundation...

In a 2006 profile of CEI and other global warming skeptics, Washington Post reporter Joel Achenbach noted that "the most generous sponsors" of CEI's 2005 annual dinner were "the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Exxon Mobil, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, and Pfizer. Other contributors included General Motors, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Plastics Council, the Chlorine Chemistry Council and Arch Coal."

...Brown & Williamson...

Mountaintop removal

In January 2011, William Yeatman, an energy policy analyst with the the Competitive Enterprise Institute, charged that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) revocation of a permit for a West Virginia mountaintop removal mining operation - Spruce 1 Mine - "would trade jobs for protection of an insect that lives for a day and isn't even an endangered species." The EPA, however, did not veto the permit because of a bug, but because the operation would have "buried more than six miles of high-quality streams" and "polluted downstream waters as a result," with inadequate mitigations offered by petitioner Arch Coal...

Smoking as a civic duty...

You, an oncologist, do that fairly regularly - cite tobacco shills and other sources working contrary to human health.

But, that's not to say that Bill Frezza is entirely wrong. Americans will indeed blame the GOP, he's just trying to spin the GOP's political calamity because he claims to be so much smarter than most of us.

Plus, the Dems will seek to restore funding for popular programs and the GOP will either go along or suffer for it at the polls. Works for me.

I heard on Fox News that the sequester amount was 1/2 of 1% of the national debt, but again, being Fox News, that was probably innaccurate and biased data, right Vrede?

[O Really]

I heard on Fox News that the sequester amount was 1/2 of 1% of the national debt, but again, being Fox News, that was probably innaccurate and biased data, right Vrede?

The number may be accurate, but in a meaningless context. The brouhaha isn't about the effect of sequester on debt, but on government services. It is commonly expressed by those who claim to know, that it's a "(mostly) everybody hack 5% or so" cut. I guess it would make sense to Fox to say "we're really cutting your income by 5%, but it won't hurt because it's only 1/2 of 1% of your mortgage and car debts."

[Wneglia]

I heard on Fox News that the sequester amount was 1/2 of 1% of the national debt, but again, being Fox News, that was probably innaccurate and biased data, right Vrede?

The number may be accurate, but in a meaningless context. The brouhaha isn't about the effect of sequester on debt, but on government services. It is commonly expressed by those who claim to know, that it's a "(mostly) everybody hack 5% or so" cut. I guess it would make sense to Fox to say "we're really cutting your income by 5%, but it won't hurt because it's only 1/2 of 1% of your mortgage and car debts."

If the world as we know it is coming to an end because of such a miniscule cut in the growth of spending, then we are all doomed.

[O Really]

If the world as we know it is coming to an end because of such a miniscule cut in the growth of spending, then we are all doomed.

Politicians posture, thus the "sky falling" parade of horribles. But real stuff affecting real people will be cut - and the people affected won't generally be the people doing the cutting. I know it's not federal, but in NC it's real unemployed people who are getting benefits reduced and time of eligibility reduced. Tell them it's inconsequential and "miniscule."

[Boatrocker]

Unemployed folk, eh? Well, we all know they're really just a bunch of whiny, self-entitled, 47% parasites who ought to get jobs and not lay around on their lazy asses. Screw 'em, eh?

[O Really]

Unemployed folk, eh? Well, we all know they're really just a bunch of whiny, self-entitled, 47% parasites who ought to get jobs and not lay around on their lazy asses. Screw 'em, eh?

Yep, that would be them. And especially those that got laid off because of other cuts. Heck, statewide unemployment rate is only 9% or so, and since it's generally lower than that in the cities, somebody must be hogging more than their share of benefits since there are plenty of jobs available for everyone who "really wants to work."

[Boatrocker]

Unemployed folk, eh? Well, we all know they're really just a bunch of whiny, self-entitled, 47% parasites who ought to get jobs and not lay around on their lazy asses. Screw 'em, eh?

Yep, that would be them. And especially those that got laid off because of other cuts. Heck, statewide unemployment rate is only 9% or so, and since it's generally lower than that in the cities, somebody must be hogging more than their share of benefits since there are plenty of jobs available for everyone who "really wants to work."

If they're over 40, they are severely disadvantaged. If they are over 50, they are phuqued. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Only luck and some invaluable connections have kept us (mostly) working for the last 2 years, in an office where there are only 5 guys, all over 50. I'm the youngest at 56. Without this job, the best I could hope for would be sweeping at Burger King or (gag!) maybe a PT flunky at Walmart, since our local store doesn't have "greeters" anymore. I have to work and try not to dip into my 401ks for another 11 years before I'm even eligible for full SS. But then, that will make me a 47% taker, won't it?

[O Really]

I think you misunderstood me, I did not question the graph's percentages. Rather, I find your choice of sources to be odd for a doctor, and think Frezza's whining about the GOP being blamed is pretty lame.

.

I'd guess the Doc is more selective in his oncology sources than in his political sources. If he weren't, he'd be finding his medicine here... http://www.naturalnews.com/033847_chemo ... ments.html

[rstrong]

> The Kenyan and his underlings

We get it, you stormfront reject. You can't stand the idea of a black President. But your racial panic has nothing to do with the budget.

You never do get it, do you? I don't call him Kenyan because he is black; I call him that because he is a petty despot like those of the African continent who plunder their nation's treasury, are little more than gawdy showmen, rule with an iron fist and who care little for liberty. I speak of him as a foreigner, an outsider...not by birth...but a foreigner as he ignores the principles of constitutional government or individual freedom that was the bassis of this republic.

And yet you don't call a hundred other politicians far more responsible exactly what you describe, "Kenyans." Show us any way that Obama "plundered the treasury", and I'll show you how he was stuck continuing with Republican policy. Show us any way that Obama "rules with an iron fist", and you won't find a Republican President any different. Show us any way that he "cares little for liberty", and you won't find anything that isn't also Republican policy. Heck, it's the Republicans who turned the country into a stinking torture state and did away with habeas corpus.

And don't try to deflect with "you don't vote Republican either", because you haven't been calling Bush II, McCain, Romney, Rove, Cheney or all the others "Kenyans." You only call the black guy that, you half-wit racist bigoted, stormfront reject loser.

[Wneglia]

The sequester will cost more jobs than there are people employed

[rstrong]

Wow. The sequester could negatively affect water and sewage services. In other words, all of America is about to embark on a Carnival cruise.

[Stinger]

.

[O Really]

Take off your blinders and see the truth that his efforts toward depotism is enough to earn him the title.

Real life examples, please? Be specific.

BTW, you do realize that Republicans control only one of the three main branches of the government, right? (Executive, House, Senate) And of course don't control the Judiciary. So "governing" by always saying "no" by filibuster fits the (maybe a little exaggerated) description of "holding Congress hostage.)

[O Really]

...

As far as Obama the despot, you can look it up yourself without my having to teach you the truth. Here's a very small sampling (not from the leftist MSM, so you will have to try to be open minded):

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/obama-like-a ... ic-despot/

http://www.redstate.com/robints/2012/06 ... tic-obama/

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/ ... onial.html

I see. So some people who never liked Obama from the start call him a "despot" for finding ways to get things done despite the obstacles intentionally thrown in the way, and does it legally. Got it. So I'll go look at the undoubtedly long list of successful legal challenges to his "despotic" actions. Might take a while - if you've got some cites it would be a big help.