Obama using sequester ‘to inflict maximum pain’ on Americans for political gain

Wehrwolfen

Senior Member
May 22, 2012
2,750
340
48
By: Patricia Campion
March 5, 2013


“For perhaps the first time in the history of the United States,” The Washington Examiner reported Monday, “it is in the political interest of a president to inflict maximum pain on the American people.”

“Now facing the consequences” of the automatic spending cuts his administration's sequester cuts will inflict upon Americans – and frustrated by Republican successes in blocking his effort to raise taxes and pass gun-control measures – The Washington Post reported Sunday that Obama is now “focused” on winning back control of the House to “forward” his agenda, “which he and his advisers believe will be crucial to the outcome of his second term and to his legacy as president.”

“The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens,” The Washington Post quoted Washington health care lobbyist Emily Holubowich saying Feb. 23.

In the meantime, John Kass of The Chicago Tribune wrote last month that “the whoppers” coming from the Obama administration regarding the effects of the sequester cuts – designed by his administration -- are intended to convince Americans that “the sky is falling” and that Republicans are to blame.

"We're already seeing the effects at some of the ports of entry, the big airports, for example. Some of them had very long lines this weekend," Obama’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Nepalitano told a breakfast event organized by Politico, adding that major airports were already seeing lines "150 to 200 per cent as long as we would normally expect."

"I don't mean to scare, I mean to inform."

But The Daily Telegraph, reported that “spokespeople for both O'Hare and LAX, as well as

“There's only so much we can do with personnel,” Nepalitano added, “and please don't yell at the customs officers, the TSA officers. They aren't responsible for sequester."

A Feb. 27 press release from the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure said Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Michael Huerta "could not provide information to support claims that the nation may expect 90-minute flight delays due to the sequester cuts or provide data to support the Administration’s predictions of furloughs for nearly all of the agency’s 47,000 employees.”

“TSA employees will see their uniform allowances nearly double to $446 per year,” the House Transportation Committee noted in a Nov. 9 press release regarding the TSA’s new bargaining agreement struck ahead of the sequester deadline. “By comparison, a combat Marine Lieutenant receives a one-time uniform allowance of $400. The cost of the increase in TSA uniform allowance is an estimated $9.63 million annually.”

On Feb. 21, The Fiscal Times reported that Obama’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that the Pentagon would furlough 800,000 civilian workers.

“For the defense department,” The Fiscal Times reported Feb. 25 that -- while the “furlough” could amount to as little as two weeks without pay -- no one will lose their job and none of the jobs for essential security forces will be affected.

The same exaggeration applies to the Pentagon’s warning of furloughs for about 15,000 military school teachers and staff around the world.

“Because the length of the school day can’t legally be shortened,” CBS reported Monday, “the “furloughs” will amount to teachers and staff taking “one unpaid day a week.”

As The Washington Post reported March 1, Obama’s claim that janitors on Capital Hill would get a pay cut was also “incorrect.”

“So my general view is that if the American people looked at this,” Obama said during a July 15, 2011 press conference -- addressing the debt ceiling hike negotiations that led to the Budget Control Act, which contained his sequester trigger -- “they’d say, boy, some of these decisions are tough, but they don’t require us to gut Medicare or Social Security.”

As reported Sunday by The Huffington Post, Obama’s Director of The National Economic Committee Gene Sperling told CNN that Obama has resurrected “the issue of cutting entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security as a way out of damaging budget cuts.”

“They don’t require us to stop helping young people go to college,” Obama assured at the July press conference.

“If the sequester goes into effect,” Obama told workers at the Newport News Shipyard in Virginia Feb. 26, “more than 2,000 college students would lose their financial aid.”

“They don’t require us to stop helping families who've got a disabled child,” Obama assured at the press conference.

Four days before the sequester deadline, the White House warned residents of Oregon that they “will lose approximately $6.4 million in funds for about 80 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities.”

“Arkansas will lose approximately $5.6 million in funds for about 70 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities.”

“As part of its strategy to pressure Republicans into accepting new revenues as part of a deal to prevent the sequester from taking effect,” The Huffington Post reported Sunday that the White House released 51 reports” that detailed “the ugly effects those cuts would have in individual states.”

“And they don’t require “job-killing tax cuts,” Obama assured at the press conference. “They require us to make some modest adjustments to get our house in order, and we should do it now.”

“All told,” Obama warned workers at the Newport News Shipyard in Virginia Feb. 26, “the sequester could cost tens of thousands of jobs right here in Virginia.”

“Across the country, these cuts will force federal prosecutors to close cases and potentially let criminals go,” Obama warned further.

On March 1, The Associated Press reported that the Department of Homeland Security released over 2,000 illegal immigrants from its jails ahead of the sequester deadline and plans to release 3,000 more during March.


[Excerpt]

Read more:
Obama using sequester ?to inflict maximum pain? on Americans for political gain - National Government | Examiner.com
 
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
March 4, 2013



WASHINGTON — As the nation’s top Democrat, President Obama has a clear imperative: to ratchet up pressure on Republicans for across-the-board spending cuts by using the power of his office to dramatize the impact on families, businesses and the military.

But as president, Mr. Obama is charged with minimizing the damage from the spending reductions and must steer clear of talking down the economy. A sustained campaign against the cuts by the president could become what one former aide called “a self-fulfilling kind of mess.”

As a result, Mr. Obama is carefully navigating between maximizing heat on Republicans to undo the cuts while mobilizing efforts to make sure that the steep spending cuts do not hurt Americans. His advisers acknowledge the potential political perils ahead as the president struggles to find the right kind of balance.

At his first cabinet meeting of his second term on Monday, Mr. Obama called the cuts an “area of deep concern” that would slow the country’s growth, but promised to “manage through it” while pursuing a robust agenda. It was an echo of his formulations from the White House podium on Friday, when he began to dial back the dire warnings about long lines at airports and furloughs of F.B.I. agents, to name a couple, that he had made over the past several weeks.

“I’ve instructed not just my White House but every agency to make sure that regardless of some of the challenges that they may face because of sequestration, we’re not going to stop working on behalf of the American people,” Mr. Obama said, using the formal name for the spending cuts.

The president’s approach is unlikely to satisfy Mr. Obama’s most partisan backers, who view blaming Republicans for the deep spending cuts — especially in the military — as a tantalizing opportunity for political gain. And stepping back from a battle over the cuts could allow the significantly lower spending to become the “new normal” for the federal budget.

But a high-profile focus on the cuts in the months ahead is risky, too.

If severe economic pain ultimately fails to materialize, Mr. Obama could be blamed for hyping the situation, much like his cabinet secretaries were in recent weeks. (Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, for example, was criticized for declaring the nation would be “less safe” because of furloughs of border patrol agents.)

Seeking short-term political gain with the spending cuts could also make more difficult the president’s hopes for a longer-term budget deal with Republicans on taxes and entitlement spending.

Mr. Obama’s team is keenly aware that the more he focuses on the cuts, the more he threatens to divert attention from his second-term priorities on guns, immigration and preschool.

“You can’t simply put them on hold and simply deal with this,” David Axelrod, a former top adviser to Mr. Obama, said in an interview. The danger of sounding the alarm on the sequester, he said, is that “you can so magnify the impact of it so that it becomes an even bigger self-fulfilling kind of mess.”

Mr. Obama was careful during his first term to seize on any bit of good economic news so that no one could accuse him of hurting the economy by his statements. That desire to be upbeat — as in 2010, when administration officials declared a “recovery summer” just before the economy dipped again — sometimes got him into trouble.

The question now for the president is how much to keep up the drumbeat of concern about the spending cuts in the weeks ahead.

In talking points distributed by the White House to Democratic pundits on Friday, advisers suggested focusing on how Republican refusal to accept tax increases will “threaten our national security and hundreds of thousands of middle-class jobs and our entire economy while too many Americans are still looking for work.”

But the document also urges them to make the point that it is time to turn to other issues. Former Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader during the Clinton years and the first term of George W. Bush, said he expects the president will not spend much time talking about the cuts.

“What he has to do is say, ‘I warned you about this, it’s going to happen, it’s gradual, but at the same time, we’ve got a country to run,’ ” Mr. Daschle said. “You’re not going to hear him with much more hyperbolic rhetoric.”

Senior White House aides said as much on Friday before Mr. Obama formally signed the order putting the cuts into effect. They told reporters that sequestration cuts would not be the only thing the president talks about — or even the majority of what he talks about — in the weeks ahead.

[Excerpt]

Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/u...ion-poses-political-risks-for-obama.html?_r=0
 
Well is anyone surprised by this? I'm not

He is going to make us pay now..they already shut down tours of the whitehouse...Swell guy Obama is
 
Total and unmitigated Bullshit.

The Republicans and Conservatives in general have expressed their abject hatred of the American people by calling them "takers". They slashed spending that allows states to hire cops, teachers, firemen, sanitation workers, postal workers and a plethora of other government employment. And although expeditures to Medicare and Social Security have been cut..they want to cut further. What they ultimately want is the destruction of the Social Safety Net. Katrina was a wonderful example of how conservatives view government. And if that weren't enough..they yelled "Let him die" during a debate on health care.

They is no way to compromise with folks like that.
 
There is not going to be any pain.

For Christ sake will you fucking sheep stop your panicked bleating already?
 
Well is anyone surprised by this? I'm not

He is going to make us pay now..they already shut down tours of the whitehouse...Swell guy Obama is

Yep, shutting down WH Tours only harms our children.
Never mind that the tours are given by unpaid volunteers. :cuckoo:
Talk about being childish and immature.
A Repub Rep. Louis Gohmert proposed in the Gov. budget that no money is to be used to pay for Pres. Obama to be transported to and from a golf course until WH Tours are resumed.
I think that Obama has forgotten that the Repubs control the purse strings. :)
It's a very dangerous game your playing Mr. President.
 
Spending cuts, especially boneheadedly stupid cuts like the Sequestor demands are ill advised.

What class of Americans are most likely to be effected?

the working class.

PRECISELY the class of people who are most needed to be in a position to revitalize this economy.

This event is exactly the opposite of what is needed.
 
Last edited:
Can someone, anyone, give me one single issue the Republicans are standing for besides protecting the wealthiest Americans?
 
Spending cuts, especially boneheadedly stupid cuts like the Sequestor demands are ill advised.

What class of Americans are most likely to be effected?

the working class.

PRECISELY the class of people who are most needed to be in a position to revitalize this economy.

This event is exactly the opposite of what is needed.

It's like saying we're going to make the car go faster by stopping by the drive-thru and get the guy in the back seat another cheese burger. :(
 
Spending cuts, especially boneheadedly stupid cuts like the Sequestor demands are ill advised.

What class of Americans are most likely to be effected?

the working class.

PRECISELY the class of people who are most needed to be in a position to revitalize this economy.

This event is exactly the opposite of what is needed.

There are no spending cuts. There are decreases in the planned spending increases.

Only an idiot like Bam Bam calls a smaller increase a cut.
 
Spending cuts, especially boneheadedly stupid cuts like the Sequestor demands are ill advised.

What class of Americans are most likely to be effected?

the working class.

PRECISELY the class of people who are most needed to be in a position to revitalize this economy.

This event is exactly the opposite of what is needed.

There are no spending cuts. There are decreases in the planned spending increases.

Only an idiot like Bam Bam calls a smaller increase a cut.

Says the guy who says there is not going to be any pain.
 
Here's the sad part - his entire administration is full of waste, fraud, and abuse. From the trillions to the "green energy" sector, to the hundreds of billions to the auto industry, to the hundreds of billions in waste, fraud, and abuse in his stimulus package, to this little gem:

In all, the White House appears to employ 3 calligraphers for a yearly total of $277,050.

Chief White House Calligrapher Gets Paid $96,725 Per Year | The Weekly Standard

The truth is - Obama doesn't want to cut anything. He wants the federal government to have FULL control over the ENTIRE economy (ie migrate from capitalism to marxism). But, if something has to be cut, he wants it to be the U.S. military - since he hates them anyway.

If he were serious about cutting, he'd start with the worthless White House callipraphers and get a $200 printer which could do 1,000,000,000x's the volume of work for 1/1,000,000,000th the cost.
 
There is not going to be any pain.

For Christ sake will you fucking sheep stop your panicked bleating already?
Prooving that much larger cuts to the military can be painlessly made!!!
Thank you

And you base this on.....? What again? Oh, that's right, as usual you have zero data to back up your false claims. But it's always nice to have you drop by Ed and ruin a thread with pure stupidity! I'm sure I'll see you again soon....
 

Forum List

Back
Top