Steve Breen by Steve Breen

Steve Breen

Comments (21) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 1 year ago

    It ain’t the donkey that cut the money out of the budget. Look for the elephant.

  2. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    I thought the Tea Publican herd said to cut back on government.

  3. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    @ARodney

    @Radish

    The House voted 269-161 for the sequester. The Senate voted 74-26 for the sequester. The President signed off on the sequester. It seems to me that everybody except those that voted against sequester is responsible.

  4. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, over 1 year ago

    What a bunch of hypocrites. The RWNJs wanted austerity and now they blame us.

  5. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, over 1 year ago

    Why would Republicans complain anyway? This is what they wanted. Now they have to explain it to their constituents and guess what … the constituents only want to cut OTHER peoples’ spending.


    And they blame the other party when people see the useful things that government provides (however imperfectly).


    Who saw THAT coming?!

  6. Nos Nevets

    Nos Nevets said, over 1 year ago

    @ARodney

    Obama proposed the Sequestration.
    Republicans called his bluff.

  7. Nos Nevets

    Nos Nevets said, over 1 year ago

    I’ll take the pain now, please.
    Spare my grandchildren later.
    Seems the honorable thing to do.
    Where I part with the Tea Party:

    I’ll agree to tax increases IF & ONLY IF spending has ALREADY (current spending, not future) been cut by the same amount. Double the pain to double the gain. Let’s get it over with.

  8. Jase99

    Jase99 said, over 1 year ago

    @Ms. Ima

    No more than you care anything that remotely resembles a fact.

  9. Ajax 4Hire

    Ajax 4Hire said, over 1 year ago

    And remember,
    The Sequester did not cut money from the government, it only reduced it raise.

    You fail to see the 2% raise the government got at the beginning of the year to cover which more than covers “The Sequester”.

    I would reminder President Obama:
    “The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.” Princess Leia.

  10. TheTrustedMechanic

    TheTrustedMechanic GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Nos Nevets

    This has been disputed and refuted ad nauseum. Learn the facts before you spew the partisan propaganda would you please? President Obama did NOT propose the sequester, it was a White House staffer, so O is responsible but he is not the great mind behind it. The White House suggested the sequester, the republicans embraced it heartily and the Democrats went along with it too. Mikefive is correct, both houses passed it handily, both parties are responsible, but Rock is also correct, it was the republicans who salivated over the idea, now they are trying to defer blame for getting what they wanted. If you want facts, here are a few indisputable facts, based in reality not the partisan propaganda alternate reality bizarro world of the RWNJs:
    After negotiations that led to the sequester Speaker Bohner is quoted as saying he got “98% of what I wanted.” I guess that means he wanted the sequester
    A majority, 174 of the republicans in the HoR voted for the sequester, only 66 voted no. Democrats were evenly split, 95 aye, 95 no.
    A majority, 28 of the republicans in the Senate voted for the sequester, only 19 voted nay. A majority, 45 of the Democrats in the Senate voted for the sequester, only 6 voted no.
    You can verify the figures at http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00123
    And
    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll690.xml#Y

  11. TheTrustedMechanic

    TheTrustedMechanic GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Nos Nevets

    And before you try to spew the lie that President Obama wanted the sequester so bad he swore to veto any legislation to repeal it, that is not what he said. What he said was “Now, the question right now is whether we can reduce the deficit in a way that helps the economy grow, that operates with a scalpel, not with a hatchet, and if not, whether Congress is willing to stick to the painful deal that we made in August for the automatic cuts. Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts.
    My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.
    We need to keep the pressure up to compromise — not turn off the pressure. The only way these spending cuts will not take place is if CONGRESS GETS BACK TO WORK and agrees on a balanced plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion. That’s exactly what they need to do. That’s the job they promised to do. And they’ve still got a year to figure it out. [The White House, 11/21/11]

    It was hard for me to find the full text of his quote, not the right-wing cherry picked excerpt that makes it look like he is flat out refusing to stop the sequester. What he said, if you read the quote in its entirety is that Congress has to work to achieve what they were supposed to achieve to start with, not repeal portions of the sequester they don’t like and leave what they do like for partisan purposes. And the republicans tried to shift the responsibility for choosing what got cut to the President, but he wasn’t stupid enough to bite their bait. It all boils down to the republicans got exactly what they wanted (the Democrats did too) with the sequester, but now the republicans don’t like the repercussions so they are trying to repackage and resell their rotten meat as something that it isn’t. I believe that is called fraud.

  12. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    Although the President had no discretion on the amounts that government agencies would have cut from their budgets, The agencies did have discretion on who had their hours cut. Michael Huerta, the current administrator of the FAA, decided to do an across the board cut.

    Excerpt from:
    EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
    April 4, 2013

    “The head of each agency has the final responsibility for implementing the reductions required by sequestration.”

    32,000 of the FAA’s 47,000 employees are bureaucrats. It would be impossible to make the furloughs composed of all administrative personnel, but instead of an across the board cut, I think the FAA could live without having its bureaucrats for the short term involved much easier than the public could do without aircraft controllers. As an example (using round numbers), if the budget cut was 10% why couldn’t the FAA have cut administrative personnel by 13% and flight controllers by 7% (and yes, I’m aware that this does not make for an overall 10% cut). The goal being to keep as many air traffic controllers as possible.

  13. Tax Man

    Tax Man said, over 1 year ago

    @TheTrustedMechanic

    There are no spending cuts.

  14. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    @TheTrustedMechanic

    It warms the cockles of my heart (whatever those are) to see someone go to a credible source for data, not distort it, and then make a credible argument. Kudos to you, TTM!

  15. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Yet all you right wings point to Reagan’s firing the air traffic controllers as a good thing and the chaos that created as just a part of doing Republican business as usual.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (6).