Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   masterskrain said, 4 months ago

   Well, if we start with real,and significant cuts to the Defense, and “Homeland Security”, we might actually start to get somewhere!
2. 

   dtroutma said, 4 months ago

   “Across the board, same cuts” isn’t intelligent, as many programs, valuable ones, can’t continue if reduced any further, even another 5%. Others, bloated programs like farm subsidies (to tobacco!! for example), and yes, “defense” and even “homeland security”, could easily survive a 30% reduction without affecting real functionality. The real problem is the public, and especially that “TEA Party” right wing small segment demanding cuts, has NO CONCEPT of what most government agencies and programs actually do.

   
   For example, cuts to NOAA are touted and that public says , oh, yeah!, but when storms ravage their area, because predictions and warnings weren’t available (like for tsunamis as well) it’s all “government’s fault”. Right.
3. 

   4my10851cs said, 4 months ago

   NO PROBLEM the dems have not had a budget in years, even tho required to this is just another left wing cartoon
4. 

   Rockngolfer said, 4 months ago

   @dtroutma

   I agree with everything you said above.
   I think the government needs to spend more money on fixing infrastructure. Around here roads and waterlines need the most attention.
   That would create jobs and get some cash flowing.
5. 

   Night-Gaunt49 said, 4 months ago

   @4my10851cs

   And the Republicans have had terrible budgets that are just cut-cut-cut the parts of govt that help people while they continue their tax cuts that wreck the economy.
6. 

   M Ster said, 4 months ago

   @4my10851cs

   Many conservative Republicans faithfully recite the talking point, “the dems have not had a budget in years”.
   *
   Question: What good were the Republican budgets of 2001 – 2006 when the costs of the wars weren’t in them?
   *
   Having a bogus budget for the sake of being able to say you have one is JUST as irresponsible as not having one.
7. 

   masterskrain said, 4 months ago

   @dtroutma

   I do have to wonder who thinks spending Millions of $$ for farm subsidies to tobacco farmers, while at the SAME TIME spending Millions of $$ on programs to stop tobacco use is a really good idea!
   Or is this just another example of Corporations, specifically the ones with huge investments in Tobacco Products like R.J.R., and the others, dictating policy with open cash drawers??
   There are a LOT of Tobacco farmers that could easily switch to other crops, Wheat, Corn, Soybeans, Barley, and the like and not suffer financial hardship. If the Government would raise the restrictions on hemp farming, there would be another huge crop with MANY practical uses, like fabrics for clothing, hemp oil, rope, and many more products.
8. 

   Michael wme said, 4 months ago

   @dtroutma

   It’s been pointed out by another commenter before (a couple of weeks before): If you let them choose, defence and tobacco subsidies are vital to the national interest, but the parks and meat inspections and air traffic controllers are luxuries people must learn to live without until we can afford to end all the cuts.

   
   The across the board sequestration will be terrible, but the alternative of letting them pick what they want to cut has always proven even worse.
9. 

   mickey1339 said, 4 months ago

   Let it happen. Sooner or later we need to take the hard drop and force congress and Obama to deal with the process. All this delaying and supposed negotiating is so absurd it’s an insult to the American people.
10. 

    ruff said, 4 months ago

    @masterskrain

    You mentioned defense. We have not had a defense since WW2. We have a War Department that is totally overblown to feed the military-industrial complex, and sell arms all over the world.
11. 

    Wabbit said, 4 months ago

    Is it the GOP that wants the sequester? Are they willing to take the blame for the damage it will do?
    I rather doubt it about being responsible and taking the blame for it.
12. 

    ARodney said, 4 months ago

    @HOWGOZIT

    Obama has submitted a budget EVERY YEAR, as required by law. Romney said he hadn’t “passed” a budget, but of course presidents don’t pass anything, congress does. Congress may have ignored his budgets, but he has submitted them every year. (You can check Politifact if you care to, it’s there.)
13. 

    pirate227 said, 4 months ago

    @ARodney

    Facts? Zit? Does not compute…
14. 

    masterskrain said, 4 months ago

    @ruff

    They still call it the Department of Defense, but I know what you mean…Maybe it should really be the “Department of Offense”, since we are STILL stuck in two wars WE started!
15. 

    Night-Gaunt49 said, 4 months ago

    @HOWGOZIT

    Not a rebuttal.
16. Load the rest of the comments (4).