The growing threat of Obama’s sequester “cuts” (Video) and Update

Crying wolf one too many times? A long, long time ago the United States Congress had to deal with what was referred to as a “Fiscal Cliff.” If we went over the cliff, it would be disastrous for the United States and the world. To solve the problem, Congress changed the rules. What makes you think the congress-critters won’t just change the rules again when it comes to the sequester cuts?

Scroll for an update.

I really can’t take any of this seriously anymore. President Obama said he would veto any effort to get around the automatic spending cuts. They changed the rules in early January and the president did not complain. My guess is they will change the rules again and the president won’t do a damn thing about it, because he does not want to lead, rather muster along blaming everything and anything, on anyone else he can see.

Before you watch this next video, remember, the goal was supposed to reduce the deficit, but Obama does not care about the deficit. They had to reduce the deficit or the automatic cuts would kick it.

Remember, this idea came directly from the Executive Office … this was Obama’s idea and the White House agreed it was his idea.

This is not a Democrat or Republican problem, we brought on this problem ourselves by allowing the federal government to grow and expand well-beyond its constitutional limits.

Update: Sometimes Ed Morrissey and I happen to be writing about the same topic with the same slant at the same time. I’ve had dinner with him and his wife once, so it’s not like we really know each other all that well … but we certainly think alike.

Steve Gilbert at Sweetness & Light also mentioning Obama’s now expired position from 2011.

Steve McGough

Steve's a part-time conservative blogger. Steve grew up in Connecticut and has lived in Washington, D.C. and the Bahamas. He resides in Connecticut, where he’s comfortable six months of the year.


  1. Dimsdale on February 20, 2013 at 11:15 am

    We should call ?bama “Hindmost”, he who leads from behind (If you read Larry Niven, you will already know about this).? For him, it is about “winning” by pointing fingers and assigning blame rather than assuming the responsibility for his job.
    The last budget that ?bama deigned to submit to the Congress shows both his seriousness and competence when it comes to the economy: it was shot down unanimously by both parties.? Face it, other than “organizing” and campaigning, what are his accomplishments?? He was a lousy lawyer, lousy lecturer, lousy senator, so why should a similarly lousy presidency be a surprise?
    For the “Great Community Organizer”, it is all about lip service rather than service to the country.

  2. stinkfoot on February 20, 2013 at 1:03 pm

    The so-called “sequester” doesn’t actually cut anything except 10% of the planned increases.? The fear mongering is ridiculous.

  3. JBS on February 20, 2013 at 6:14 pm

    Obama owns this one. He signed the bill. Now he is trying to weasel out of that responsibility?
    We’re screwed! He is the one sharpening the meat cleaver and relishing the prospect of having another issue to try and blame on Republicans. They might have thought of it, but, hey! who said we they were serious? But, it was both Republicans and Democrats who thought this was a good idea. Obama loved it and signed it. Now, he gets to have his wish.
    He could have vetoed it. But, then he wouldn’t have those “waskely wepublicans” just where he wants them. Maybe he should have a sign for his desk(s) that reads,”The Blaming Starts Here”.

    • JBS on February 20, 2013 at 7:26 pm

      As an aside, Fed officials announced on January 30th that they would continue to buy mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month and longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of $45 billion per month, a policy popularly known as quantitative easing.
      That’s $85 BILLION! per month!!!!! Holy . . . !!!! Err, where does that money really go? (Gag him!)
      Let’s see: In ten years . . . carry the . . . WOW! At some point that becomes real BIG money!!!!! Holy . . . (gasp . . . blump!)? (Hey, this guy needs oxygen here!!!)
      So, the sequester is really chump change in comparison!?
      And, that’s tonight’s presentation of: “Political Theater!”
      Stay tuned!

  4. JollyRoger on February 20, 2013 at 10:39 pm

    I can’t help but?think our Dear Leader’s growth of federal spending is?yet another?bubble which will soon burst- creating a really big flatulent sound which will drown out all of the noise he makes.? And I am a birther- son of an immigrant, husband of an immigrant, whole family came here by hook or by crook, and I think any wealthy American grandparents like Obama’s would go to any measures to ensure the citizenship of their grandchild.? Surely illegals and immigrants should be judged with the same jaundiced eye as our contemptible politicians?? I think so!

  5. Dimsdale on February 22, 2013 at 10:51 am

    Bottom line (from the Washington Post) in an article titled “?bama’s fanciful claim that Congress ‘proposed” the sequester” ( ):? ?bama gets FOUR PINOCCHIOS, which the WaPo defines as a “whopper” ( ).

    As Elizabeth Warren would say, “president speak with forked tongue”…..?? 😉


The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.