In many previous comments, the defense budget was the first place you've mentioned that you wanted to cut. Including in the Obama era. So if you are now saying, no, you don't want cuts that big in the defense budget, are you upset that Obama said he would veto any attempt by Congress to fix those cuts?
uh yeah, is it that you don't want to tell the truth or are incapable of it? Obama didn't say he would veto any attempt by congress to fix the cuts.. Jesus, really? The veto threat was to Congress for trying to get around the sequester they imposes upon themselves..
wtf Mike? do you even vet your news slants anymore or just go with what Hannity and Rush tell you like it's gospel..
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Tuesday doubled down on President Obama's threat to veto any attempt to get around the automatic spending cuts triggered by Monday's failure of the debt supercommittee.
There is "no wiggle room" in the veto threat, Carney told reporters.
"Look, those cuts in the sequester are broad and onerous for a reason, because they’re supposed to force action by Congress to avoid them. They’re never supposed to take place," he said. "And they don’t need to take place, and they won’t take place if Congress simply acts."The deficit-reduction supercommittee announced its failure to reach a bargain on Monday, setting into motion the $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts, known as sequestration, scheduled to begin in 2013.
House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) has vowed to introduce legislation to prevent steep automatic spending cuts to the department.
However, Obama said the only way to avoid these cuts will be for Congress to come up with a deficit-reduction deal before the cuts take effect in 2013.http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/195141-white-house-no-wiggle-room-on-obama-veto-threat-The super committee’s failure to come up with $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction measures
has paved the way for an election-year battle by Republicans to rewrite the sequester rules and protect defense spending in the face of a White House veto threat.
...
President Obama, however, made clear on Monday night after the super committee’s official collapse that he would veto any effort to alter the sequester as currently written. “My message to them is simple: No,” he said, “There will be no easy off-ramps on this one.” Obama argued that Congress still has one year to find a path to $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction in order to head off sequestration. The road is rockier now that Congress does not have the fast-track protections afforded to the super committee to vote on a plan.
...
According to the Budget Control Act approved in August in a compromise to raise the debt ceiling, an automatic $1.2 trillion in across-the-board cuts split evenly between defense and nondefense discretionary spending would take effect on Jan. 1, 2013.
The split was done purposefully with the intention of forcing Congress to come up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction on its own, which lawmakers have proved incapable of doing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that defense spending would be reduced by between 8.5 percent to 10 percent from 2013 to 2021, saving about $454 billion.
...
Senate Democrats will take their cues from the White House, following Obama’s veto threat.
Like most Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., does not support altering the sequester ratio of cuts, and a Democratic leadership aide said that if the White House stands firm in opposition to undoing the current sequester rule, then Reid will hold the line. “The sequester was designed to be painful, and it is. But that is the commitment to fiscal responsibility that both parties made to the American people. In the absence of a balanced plan that would reduce the deficit by at least as much, I will oppose any efforts to change or roll back the sequester,” he said in a statement.Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., supports altering the sequester rule, but unless the White House is willing to negotiate, he will be hard-pressed to find the 60-votes he would need to rewrite current law.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/supercommittee/super-committee-failure-forecasts-sequester-fight-20111121where in the hell do you get "Obama said he would veto any attempt by Congress to fix those cuts?"
congress should get their shit together, don't you think? wouldn't it be nice to have an actual debt-reduction bill? huh, that's what this 'veto' threat was about.. it's time for Congress to put on their big-boy pants and come up with a bi-part plan and not eek their way around the sequester like they were trying to do.. IOW, the veto threat was something
you should be happy with since it was given to force them to work out something for this country instead of just running for the election..
For once, you should be on-board with this president since you're all about debt-reduction and all.. but the fact that you're making this stuff like this, kinda proves that no, you're not hell-bent on debt-reduction, you're just hell bent on saying "No" to anything Obama does, even when it's your own philosophy..
