ChrisWeigant.com

Sequester The Heck Out Of National Airport

[ Posted Monday, February 25th, 2013 – 18:03 PST ]

Every once in a while I get an idea that is so crazy it just might work. What with all the sequester talk in Washington, it occurred to me that the Obama administration has a better option for pressuring Congress than they may have thus considered. Instead of making life hard for Americans everywhere with the across-the-board cuts (in the hopes that enough citizens will complain to the elected representatives), why not get rid of the middleman, and just make life hard for those in Congress? Announce that the very first budget cuts to be implemented will be sequestering the living heck out of National Airport.

Announce that National will only have the benefit of one air traffic controller at any single time. Further announce that the T.S.A. will only have one security checker for each security gate at a time -- so be sure to get there early! Really twist the knife and announce that parking lot security will be drastically cut back -- starting with the "members only" Congressional parking lot.

Announce that such cuts will take place next week. Further announce that in two weeks, similar (but not quite as drastic) cuts will be made to Dulles airport in Virginia and Baltimore/Washington airport in Maryland. Any and all other federal budget furloughs or cutbacks will follow these as the flagship cuts which will be made after the sequester happens.

Those not familiar with the habits of Capitol Hill denizens might wonder what all of this is supposed to achieve. What it would achieve would be massive pain and rampant headaches for those who fly in and out of National Airport on a weekly basis. In a word: Congress.

Congresscritters used to mostly live in Washington, with their families. What with cheap and reliable air travel (and what with working a noon-Tuesday-to-noon-Thursday week many weeks), Congress now mostly lives in their home district and commutes to Washington. Much of this congressional commuting takes off and lands at National Airport (note: I refuse to use the new name of National, since it was named for a Union-buster who fired air traffic controllers en masse). It is convenient as all get out for congressmen, being pretty much right next to the halls of government, over the Potomac in Virginia. The airport actually bends over backwards to provide such convenience, with the aforementioned members-only congressional parking lot, situated with the shortest-possible walk to the terminals.

Since all of America (air travelers in particular) are about to get hit with a summer of delays and frustration in the airports across the land, why not start with Congress' favorite field? Imagine the delays. Imagine the lines at the security checkpoints. Imagine the grim atmosphere Congressfolk would have to face twice a week. One week of runway gridlock at National, and then "phase two" would kick in, and Dulles and BWI would get hit as well. No escape.

Of course, some in Congress represent districts that are close enough to take other forms of transportation. Most notably, those in Maryland and Virginia who are close enough to drive home from Washington. But they won't be spared the pain, either -- they'll be quite busy fielding outraged calls from their constituents who are used to the Washington region's airports actually functioning in a normal manner. This segment of the public will bear the punishment right along with those in Congress, so the car commuters in the House and Senate are definitely going to be impacted as well (if not quite so directly).

Is this unfair to the Maryland and Virginia residents who use these three airports? Well, yes. Yes it is. Sorry about that. But the rest of us will be paying the price a little further down the road as well, since you can't solve all the budget problems with just three airports. All I'm saying is make drastic cuts to the Washington airports a few weeks early, as a demonstration.

The problem with many in Congress (and I am not even discriminating by party, here) is that they get incredibly out of touch with how the decisions they make in the halls of Congress actually affect Americans' lives. For once, shouldn't they be the first ones to feel the impact of their actions (or, in this case, inaction)? It seems entirely fitting and reasonable to me to move cuts which make life tough for Congress to the front of the line in the budget wars. Bringing the Washington area airports (starting with National) to a crawl would indeed hit home. In fact, it would hit them on their way home.

The public (at least those outside of the Beltway region) would probably support such a move. Obama could pitch it as: "Want to slash federal spending? OK, you first!" I'm sure a lot of folks would see the justice in such an approach. In my opinion, it's certainly worth a try. Want the sequester to happen? Fine. Then we'll just sequester National Airport into the ground, until it (or you) screams for mercy.

I bet it would take less than three weeks for Congress to crack.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

44 Comments on “Sequester The Heck Out Of National Airport”

  1. [1] 
    SF Bear wrote:

    Three weeks! They are not man enough for three weeks. They will be whimpering and crying in three days. Can you imagine the lines? They will actually be forced to mingle with citizens, what an obscene idea.

  2. [2] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    why stop there? sequester the janitors, maintenance crews and security at the capitol building. sequester the kitchens. hell, sequester the gas, water and electricity so congresscritters must bear the full brunt of their sequester personally.

  3. [3] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    in all seriousness, i don't think the public has any illusions about the sequester being potentially harmful. what we're weary of is the all-too-familiar phenomenon of the manufactured "crisis" which is used as an excuse to quickly push through bad policy. from the iraq war to the patriot act to the fiscal cliff to the "nation's failing schools," crisis after crisis is conjured from thin air, like a flash from a magician's hand. after watching the same magic act from both parties for over a decade, folks tend to ignore the sound and fury and look to see what the magician's other hand is doing.

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    The problem with many in Congress (and I am not even discriminating by party, here)

    As you are wont to do.... :D

    Would that such fairness rub off on the denizens of Weigantia... :D

    Joshua,

    why stop there? sequester the janitors, maintenance crews and security at the capitol building. sequester the kitchens. hell, sequester the gas, water and electricity so congresscritters must bear the full brunt of their sequester personally.

    Actually a GOP CongressCritter suggested something along those same lines.

    Sequester White House domestic staff and White House travel..

    Maybe Mrs (does she prefer Ms?? Who cares..) Obama can drop some of her beauty staff and the other crap like putting in an appearance at the Oscars.. Word is there were loud groans of disappointment at the Oscars when she showed up.. :D

    I think the American public is getting sick and tired of seeing the Obama's everywhere they turn.

    in all seriousness, i don't think the public has any illusions about the sequester being potentially harmful.

    Actually, it's really not that bad..

    This country has a 3.8 trillion dollar budget.. The sequester will require to trim 85 billion off that budget...

    To put it in a more understandable context, it's like a family that has a $100 a week budget. If they were to have to "sequester" along the lines of what this country must sequester, it would mean they would have to cut $2.35 from their budget..

    Now, how RIDICULOUS is it that Obama and the Democrats can't find $2.35 to cut!!??

    Hell, get rid of all the White House servants and perks and THAT will likely meet ALL of the cuts required by the sequester...

    As usual, Obama and the Democrats are using fear-mongering to push their agenda...

    I say, call their bluff...

    Michale.....

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama could pitch it as: "Want to slash federal spending? OK, you first!"

    A *GOOD* leader would say "ME first!!!"

    Which is why the "good leader" and "Obama" are mutually exclusive terms and should never be part of the same sentence structure..

    Like "Military Intelligence" or "An Ethical Lawyer" :D

    Michale

  6. [6] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Actually a GOP CongressCritter suggested something along those same lines.

    Sequester White House domestic staff and White House travel...

    there are two problems with that. one, this is a problem that was directly caused by the legislative branch - both parties mind you, but still, that's like you spilling out the toybox and making it my responsibility to pick them all up. two, since congress are the only ones who are legally allowed to clean this mess up, obama sequestering himself won't accomplish anything. if he did, i seriously doubt anybody would care. i mean seriously, let's say obama sequesters himself, would you seriously start to suddenly think he was a *GOOD* leader?

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    et's say obama sequesters himself, would you seriously start to suddenly think he was a *GOOD* leader?

    I would say it's a DAMN GOOD start..

    A GOOD leader leads by example..

    Obama's leadership is more of a "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" type leadership..

    It will take more than that for Obama to be a good leader..

    But, as I said, it's a wonderful place to start...

    Wouldn't you agree??

    Michale...

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    but still, that's like you spilling out the toybox and making it my responsibility to pick them all up.

    That's what *adults* do... Pick up after their kids...

    The alternative is for the "adult" to leave the toys lying around so that someone comes in, trips over them and kills/injuries themselves..

    All I am saying is that, if Obama *IS* the leader he would like us to THINK he is, he should be the adult...

    Lead by example...

    Again.. Wouldn't you agree???

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-s-paycheck-exempted-sequester

    Well, at least Obama will still get paid..

    Whew!!!

    I was worried about that for a moment there...
    :^/

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    To put it in a more understandable context, it's like a family that has a $100 a week budget. If they were to have to "sequester" along the lines of what this country must sequester, it would mean they would have to cut $2.35 from their budget..

    Actually, an even BETTER context would be this:

    A family has a budget of $380 a week. The have an enforced "sequester" that requires them to cut $8.50 from their weekly budget.

    Are you telling me that our government can't find $8.50 to cut!!????

    Hell, do without cigarettes!! That right there would save a bunch!!

    Get rid of the "guests from hell" that stay and stay and stay and never contributes and never leaves...

    Maybe have the missus cut back on her wardrobe and her facials and her binge shopping and socializing...

    There are TONS of ways that our "family" can save some money..

    All it takes is the will to do the right thing..

    Yea, asking out politicians to do that!????

    What was I thinking!!???

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    michty6 wrote:

    I agree Michale. Let me take your analogy one step further: America is like a family with a budget of $380 a month but they spend $50 a month on video games where they go around blowing up countries and playing with their toy planes that blow stuff up. One side wants them to stop doing this, the other wants them to spend more on video games and stop eating food to pay for it...

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michty,

    Because of your innate inexperience with anything military or self-defense, you view the family's activities as "playing video games"...

    The reality, however, is that the family lives in a very dangerous neighborhood.

    So dangerous that constant training is required and every now and then the family must go out into their neighborhood and help OTHER neighbors who have problems..

    In essence, the family is the Neighborhood Watch for that area of the city and, as such, extra expense is required...

    So, all things considered, I think it's best to KEEP the training and the assistance and GET RID of the house guests from hell who are a drain on limited resources and contribute nothing to the welfare of the family..

    The family can get their own drinks and wash their own clothes.. They don't need servants like the White House family does...

    Wouldn't you agree?? :D

    Michale....

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, all things considered, I think it's best to KEEP the training and the assistance and GET RID of the house guests from hell who are a drain on limited resources and contribute nothing to the welfare of the family..

    How different would your life be today if our "family", back in 1941, decided to "quit playing video games"???

    You would likely be speaking German.. Assuming you survived what the Nazis do to conquered regimes...

    So, maybe a little more respect is in order for the "video game playing", eh??

    I'm just sayin'....

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    You would likely be speaking German.. Assuming you survived what the Nazis do to conquered regimes...

    michale, meet godwin. if we're going to go in that direction then the discussion is over.

    most of the "unwanted" houseguests are cooking and cleaning and weeding and shopping and doing all manner of things to keep our family in comfort, in spite of how poorly we tend to treat them. perhaps you're right and we don't need all that, but we sure are accustomed to it.

    as to your earlier question, i would not agree that obama sequestering himself would be good leadership. it would be read as attempted martyrdom, which plays even more to some of the stereotypes of him as self-appointed deity. if he were the "adult" in the room, he'd follow CW's advice and send the misbehaving children to "time-out."

  15. [15] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol amazing. I love how everything comes back to WW2. You do realise that WW2 was a war of defence not offence?

    Just now there is no-one on the offence against America. It would literally be impossible since America's military is 10 times bigger than everyone elses.

    But naaaaaaaaaa spend MORE on it.

  16. [16] 
    michty6 wrote:

    And let's continue your analogy. I'll pick up where you left off...

    The family does indeed live in a dangerous neighbourhood and need to spend some of their income on their protection - of that no-one is in denial.

    All down the street similar families realised this and their solution was to put a gate around their house and maintain this - a reasonable expense for a result that works well. Their families are fine.

    However 'Family USA' decides this isn't enough and constructs a massive lazer-beamed satellite controlled metal wall. It is patrolled 24/7 by armed, well trained guard. They have surveillance equipment everywhere.

    Then they decide to go and attack other families and houses because 'they gave them a funny look'. Also the people selling them the lazer beam controls constantly fill their minds with propaganda to make them spend more money and invade other families.

    It turns out that they spend almost half their income on this, unlike the other families who spend much smaller amounts of their and are doing fine.

    It turns out this spending has got them deep into dept. When someone suggests toning it down they scream 'how dare you!'. We'd be better off to not eat or let sick people in our family die and use the savings from this rather than cut back our crazy family defence expenditure...

  17. [17] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    SFBear -

    Yeah, maybe I was too generous. Heh.

    nypoet22 -

    I think Congress' budget is adminstered by them, so Obama wouldn't be able to do this. It would be fun to watch, though!

    Michale -

    I don't notice Boehner saying "Me first!" -- so is he a bad leader?

    The GOP are truly the children in this debate, because they refuse to say what they want to cut.

    "But..." I hear you say, "the House passed the Ryan budget twice!" Ah, but that doesn't count because Ryan refused to specify what he was going to cut. He said "the committees will figure that part out later," because he didn't want to come right out and say what he wanted to cut. His budget had big holes in it which said "we'll cut a bunch of money here" with no details at all.

    Mitt Romney ran an ENTIRE CAMPAIGN on the idea "just trust me, I'll cut a bunch of stuff later, but I'm not going to tell you what." He and his running mate Ryan REFUSED to say what they'd cut. For the whole campaign.

    Since the new Congress was seated, Boehner and the House have done exactly nothing on the budget. Nothing. Oh, they punted the debt ceiling down the road, but that doesn't really count. Obama has a budget cutting plan out -- the Senate is working on it right now. What do the House Republicans have? Nada. Where is their budget-cutting plan? Nowhere. The Ryan budget passed in the last Congress, so it is now legislatively dead. But they've done precisely nothing.

    Here is how the situation stands:

    GOP: "Cut! Cut! Cut!"
    Dems: "OK, what do you want to cut?"
    GOP: "I'm not going to tell you. You have to bring cuts to me, and I'll tell you whether I like them or not."
    Dems: "Seriously? Your biggest issue is cuts, but you refuse to say where we should cut?"
    GOP: "That's right. It's our issue, we're pushing it hard, and we want Obama to come up with the Republican budget-cutting plan, because we're too chicken to admit to the public what we really want to do."
    Dems: "?!?"

    Republicans have been screaming for cuts for years now. Also for years, they have refused to say what they want cut. That is, in a word, childish. An adult way to do it would be to come out with a plan and lay it on the table next to the Obama plan, and duke it out. Republicans are too scared to do this. Period. Until they do, I refuse to take them seriously.

    -CW

  18. [18] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    Almost forgot... looks like you blew it on the Hagel nomination call, eh? Whichever news outlet you heard "Hagel is toast" lied to you, pal. Maybe you should consider not listening to them in the future.

    Heh.

    -CW

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    michale, meet godwin. if we're going to go in that direction then the discussion is over.

    Not at all.. I was not making ANY comparison whatsoever..

    I was simply referring to the historical reference that, had the US not engaged in "video games" (as ignorant people would call them) then it's likely that Nazi Germany would have overrun Europe. And the UK would be the pride of the Nazi Empire..

    If there is a fault in my logic or reasoning, then.....

    "I am all ears."
    -Ross Perot, 1992 Presidential Debates

    :D

    most of the "unwanted" houseguests are cooking and cleaning and weeding and shopping and doing all manner of things to keep our family in comfort, in spite of how poorly we tend to treat them. perhaps you're right and we don't need all that, but we sure are accustomed to it.

    And we don't...

    if he were the "adult" in the room, he'd follow CW's advice and send the misbehaving children to "time-out."

    Agreed.. However, the problem is he would only send the children he DIDN'T like to TimeOut...

    The ones he DID like would be re-warded for their actions..

    There is empirical evidence to support such a conclusion...

    CW,

    I don't notice Boehner saying "Me first!" -- so is he a bad leader?

    DO I really have to sell THAT opinion??? :D

    I think I have agreed with that consensus on MANY occasions, along with the rest of the Republican bums...

    The GOP are truly the children in this debate, because they refuse to say what they want to cut.

    And the Democrats are truly the children in this debate because they stick their fingers in their ears, stick out their tongues and go, "Nyaaa Taxes Nyaaa Taxes Nyaaa Taxes Nyaaa Taxes"...

    Which is even made MORE ironic by the *fact* that Democrats GOT their Taxes a month or so ago..

    And it's ALL GONE!!

    So, now Democrats want MORE taxes, but the country is still waiting for the cuts that Democrats promised from the PREVIOUS round of taxes..

    And you are saying it's the REPUBLICANS that are acting like spoiled brats!!???

    An adult way to do it would be to come out with a plan and lay it on the table next to the Obama plan, and duke it out.

    WHAT "Obama" plan??

    The ONLY couple times that Obama released a plan, he couldn't get ANYONE to vote for it!! Not even from his OWN party!!!

    As long as Democrats are not willing to specify the CUTS they owe from the LAST round of taxes, they have absolutely NO MORAL AUTHORITY to lay the blame on Republicans..

    This entire sequester is Obama's idea...

    He can own it.. And ALL the fallout it entails...

    Let's see if he is man enough to stand up and be responsible...

    A million quatloos says he doesn't have the balls..

    Speaking of a million..

    What's your take on the Administration selling access to Obama for a half million dollars???

    :D

    OK, that was a cheap shot.. But it's just so damn easy!!!

    On another note, I have the 2002 vrsn of LATHE OF HEAVEN if yer interested.. :D

    Michale

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Almost forgot... looks like you blew it on the Hagel nomination call, eh? Whichever news outlet you heard "Hagel is toast" lied to you, pal. Maybe you should consider not listening to them in the future.

    Yea, that's what I get for relying of HuffPo!!

    Never again!!!! :D

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    looks like you blew it on the Hagel nomination call,

    Cite??

    I don't see it anywhere..

    If true, Iran will have nuclear weapons by years end..

    As David would say, "Yay!!" :^/

    A nuclear arms race in the Middle East..

    WHAT could possibly go wrong!??

    Michale

  22. [22] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    WHAT "Obama" plan??

    The ONLY couple times that Obama released a plan, he couldn't get ANYONE to vote for it!! Not even from his OWN party!!!

    you're probably thinking of the bill cb cited, but as michty pointed out back then, that bill was a political stunt by jeff sessions of alabama - not in any way shape or form an actual obama policy.

    the actual white house budget is here:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview

    to my knowledge, it's never come up for a vote one way or the other.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats complain about presence of debt clock on Capitol Hill
    dailycaller.com/2013/02/26/democrats-complain-about-presence-of-debt-clock-on-capitol-hill/#ixzz2M3fq0vz3

    The Democratic Party Seal

    http://joatmoaf.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/the_new_democratic_party_symbol.jpg

    :D

    Joshua,

    to my knowledge, it's never come up for a vote one way or the other.

    Apparently, there is a reason for that.. :D

    I don't think Obama wants to be embarrassed again by the lack of support...

    It's gotta be hard for our POTUS when his own Party recognizes the incompetence....

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Apparently, there is a reason for that.. :D

    I don't think Obama wants to be embarrassed again by the lack of support...

    It's gotta be hard for our POTUS when his own Party recognizes the incompetence....

    while that may well be true, a more likely reason is that boehner would never allow such a vote to take place, and all taxing and spending bills have to originate in the house. if by some twist of fate it actually happened, any real vote on a real budget from the white house would be supported by all but a few dems.

    i'm not judging whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing, but no one would suggest otherwise unless they were ill-informed or disingenuous. obama's 2011 jobs bill got a 51-48 procedural vote in the senate, not enough to overcome the everlasting filibuster, but still a majority, and that was right after the 2010 election where the dems were shellacked.

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don't know why ya'all are complaining about the Sequester...

    According to a very wise Weigantian, the sequester IS the compromise.. :D

    So, everyone is happy, right??

    Dems got their taxes and the GOP will get their cuts..

    "We dance, we kiss, we smooze, we go home happy. Whadoya say?"
    -James Woods, HERCULES

    :D

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    obama's 2011 jobs bill got a 51-48 procedural vote in the senate, not enough to overcome the everlasting filibuster, but still a majority, and that was right after the 2010 election where the dems were shellacked.

    An outlier.. And, since we're talking about budgets, not quite relevant..

    How has Obama's budgets faired in the light of day?

    Not so good..

    Michale....

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yep, it looks like Hagel is confirmed...

    Well, Obama should make it easier on everyone and just hand deliver some nukes to Iran..

    Because THAT is exactly what we're going to have with a Hagel SecDef..

    Unless Israel flips Obama a well-deserved bird and takes action themselves, Iran will be a nuclear power by years end.

    A nuclear armed Iran and a nuke race in the Middle East..

    "Yer doing a heckuva job, Obama".... :^/

    Whatta a run-up to the 2014 mid-terms.. I hope Israel still exists then. :^(

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    but still a majority, and that was right after the 2010 election where the dems were shellacked.

    It was also only a symbolic vote because the Dems who DID give the bill an AYE were on their way out and it didn't matter if they kissed Obama's ass or not..

    If it had been a vote BEFORE The Great Democrat Shellacking Of 2010, you can bet that it would have been ZERO votes in favor..

    One only has to see how other Obama ideas have fared to know this is true...

    Budgets, immigration the list goes on and on...

    Obama simply doesn't know how to lead.. Period..

    Michale

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lol amazing. I love how everything comes back to WW2. You do realise that WW2 was a war of defence not offence?

    The Obama Doctrine (as adopted from Bush) is that pre-emptive self-defense or pre-emptive defense of others is a legitimate reason for directed offensive action..

    Like I said, best if you left military matters to those that have the experience to speak intelligently of them..

    Just a suggestion. :D

    Michale

  30. [30] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Like I said, best if you left military matters to those that have the experience to speak intelligently of them..

    I would say the same in matters of finance/economics/commodities or anything to do with numbers to you but then we'd lose half the entertaining posts you make around here and it wouldn't be any fun...

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    I would say the same in matters of finance/economics/commodities or anything to do with numbers to you but then we'd lose half the entertaining posts you make around here and it wouldn't be any fun...

    As I wrote what I wrote, I was thinking the EXACT same thing, I shit you not!! :D

    Good point.... :D

    Michale

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/senate-gop-ponders-shifting-power-to-obama-88149.html?hp=l1

    Now THAT's what I am talking about!!!

    Let's see how Obama does when he has carte blanche...

    Give him enough rope to tie himself in knots...

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    BOB WOODWARD: Obama Is Showing 'A Kind Of Madness I Haven't Seen In A Long Time'
    http://www.businessinsider.com/bob-woodward-obama-sequester-republicans-2013-2

    I bet The Professional Left is re-thinking their love of Bob Woodward...

    Ideological loyalty trumps principles every day of the week and twice on Sunday... :D

    Michale

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, Democrat fear mongering at it's finest..

    CBO has just released figures that show all that is required for Obama's sequester is to cut ONE PERCENT of the federal budget..

    Are you fraking KIDDING me!!!

    Obama and the Democrats are all gloom and doom and Armageddon and "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!" over one fraking percent!!!???

    If Democrats can't find ONE FRAKING PERCENT of their spending to cut...

    They don't DESERVE to be in power!

    Michale

  35. [35] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    I'll let that well-known liberal hippie tree-hugging peacenik Pat Buchanan (yes, that was a heaping dose of satire) answer you on the Iran subject:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/02/26/infantile_conservatism__117165.html

    Heh.

    -CW

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll let that well-known liberal hippie tree-hugging peacenik Pat Buchanan (yes, that was a heaping dose of satire) answer you on the Iran subject:

    In what military capacity has Buchanan ever served??

    Near as I can tell, he was a draft dodger..

    I rest my case... :D

    Michale

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/teacher-pink-slips-claim-by-duncan-not-backed-by-evidence/2013/02/27/8a87aa2a-8113-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

    More baseless fear mongering from Team Obama...

    Didn't ya'all use to bitch and moan about Republican Fear Mongering??

    I guess, if it's from the Left, it's perfectly acceptable...

    :^D

    Michale

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    What do you think about the GOP giving Obama carte blanche with regards to the Obama Sequester???

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/senate-gop-ponders-shifting-power-to-obama-88149.html?hp=l1

    I think it's a grand idea..

    Obama and the Democrats think they can do it??

    Let them have at it...

    Michale.....

  39. [39] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    More baseless fear mongering from Team Obama...

    Didn't ya'all use to bitch and moan about Republican Fear Mongering??

    I guess, if it's from the Left, it's perfectly acceptable...

    no, it's not acceptable at all. but then, you know what i think of arne duncan. however, just because obama and duncan are fear-mongering about sequestration doesn't necessarily make it a good thing.

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    no, it's not acceptable at all. but then, you know what i think of arne duncan.

    I do indeed.. :D Yer the closest thing to me Wegantia has..

    And that's NOT an insult, no matter WHAT they say!! :D

    however, just because obama and duncan are fear-mongering about sequestration doesn't necessarily make it a good thing.

    True....

    But the CBO saying that only a little over 1% must be cut from the Budget makes it not NEARLY even CLOSE to as bad as Obama and the Democrats are making it sound..

    And the GOP has offered to give Obama and the Democrats carte blanch in handling the issue..

    They get a free ride..

    And they are quaking in their boots...

    Michale.

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Press turns -- on Woodward!
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/02/consensus-white-house-didnt-threaten-woodward-158172.html

    A respected and veteran journalist who is revered as a hero in the field..

    And he goes up against Obama and is tar'ed and feathered...

    And yet, there are STILL people who believe that the majority of the MSM is NOT in the bag for Obama..

    Amazing...

    Simply amazing...

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:


    Obama is the closest thing to Nixon we've seen in 40 years

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/28/obama-is-closest-thing-to-nixon-weve-seen-in-40-years/

    Amen to THAT!!!!

    Michale

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    It would be so hilarious if it wasn't so pathetically tragic..

    Our government forced a 2% tax hike on EVERY employed American last month.. Obama and the Democrats forced every employed American family to adjust their family budget to account for a 2% cut..

    And that SAME government CAN'T find a way to do it themselves!!???

    If Obama and the Democrats can't find a way to live with the EXACT same budget cuts that they themselves forced upon Americans.....

    Well, that tells me it's time to fire our government...

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    ""Replacing the sequester would require the President to save $85 billion out of a $3,500 billion federal budget. One would think that any President would leap at the opportunity to make government more effective and responsive. But what does the President do instead? He says Republicans are ‘cutting vital services for children’ in order to ‘benefit the well-off and well-connected.’ This has been the strategy now for years: block any attempt to reform the government and then relentlessly attack the reformers. Does any lawmaker, reporter, or citizen believe that the only way to save taxpayer dollars is to hurt children, that every government program is effective and helpful and not one penny is wasted?"

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senator-obamas-golf-weekend-tiger-cost-much-341-federal-workers-furloughed_704915.html#sthash.IqIqtHFH.dpuf

    The silence from the Left is deafening...

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.
[Powered by WordPress]