« | »

‘Cuts’ Will Kill Head Start, Hurt The Mentally Ill

From The Hill:

GOP lawmakers don’t fear political impact of sequester taking effect

By Molly K. Hooper | February 19, 2013

House GOP lawmakers say they do not fear political blowback if Congress fails to prevent $85 billion in automatic spending cuts from triggering in two weeks.

The heartless bastards.

The cuts known as the sequester are almost certain to hit the Pentagon and non-defense discretionary spending on March 1, and congressional Republicans and the White House are focused more now on avoiding blame for the cuts than preventing them.

That creates a challenging environment for House Republicans, given President Obama’s use of the bully pulpit, which he used to build pressure on them during last year’s fight over the “fiscal cliff.”

In other words, The Hill is saying Obama was able to convince the public that the Republicans were at fault in the ‘fiscal cliff’ (non) crisis. And he will be able to do it again.

Naturally, The Hill is going do their part to help Obama:

Already the White House warns that the cuts will reduce loan guarantees to small businesses, end Head Start funding for 70,000 children and leave 373,000 seriously mentally ill people without treatment.

It says there will be fewer food inspections, raising the potential for a food-borne illness outbreak, and that the Federal Emergency Management Agency will need to eliminate grants for firefighters and emergency personnel.

You see? Poor children, the mentally ill, food poisoning, firemen — they are all going to suffer because of these Republican cuts. But why did they leave out policemen and libraries and zoos?

Bear in mind that The Hill isn’t aimed at ‘low information voters.’ It’s aimed at Congressmen and their staffers. (Granted that might be a fine distinction.)

All of these dire warnings set up the potential to blame Republicans for economic ills or emergencies that occur in the sequester’s wake, regardless of whether they are directly caused by the $85 billion in cuts.

In fact, none of these cuts could possible be due to a measly 2.2% reduction in spending in a federal budget that is over $3.8 trillion dollars. But ‘what difference does it make now?’

Rank-and-file Republicans say they’re not worried their leverage could be cut once the spending cuts are triggered, though they acknowledge Obama is a tough political adversary.

Obama wouldn’t be a tough political adversary if we had an honest news media. But we might as well wish for the moon.

“It’s hard to compete with the bully pulpit that the president has,” acknowledged Rep. Bruce Lamborn (R-Colo.)…

The news media are both Obama’s pulpit and his bullies.

But he and other Republicans see the sequester as the best way possible to actually reduce government spending, which they see as the biggest threat to the nation…

Remember when Obama was pushing for higher taxes, he and Hillary and every other administration official were out on the talk shows saying that the deficit was the biggest threat facing our nation.

Now it doesn’t matter at all. In fact, the real danger to the nation is that we might not increase spending fast enough.

Senate Democrats unveiled a bill last week that would replace the sequester with $110 billion in deficit reduction, but also includes $55 billion in new tax revenues.

You see? The Democrats’ $55 billion dollars in spending cuts is a good thing. But the sequester’s $85 billion in spending cuts will destroy the country.

Clearly, the nation’s economy hinges on that $30 billion dollar difference. Which is what the federal government spends in three days.

Those tax provisions are unlikely to pass the GOP House, and Democrats are prepared to charge that Republicans rejected a sequester replacement to protect tax breaks for the wealthy…

And that is how this and every other battle between Obama and the Republicans always ends up. Obama fighting the evil, heartless Republicans who only care about the rich. — And that perception is more important than any deal they could ever strike.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, February 19th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

3 Responses to “‘Cuts’ Will Kill Head Start, Hurt The Mentally Ill”

  1. Enthalpy says:

    Head Start needs killing and the rest of this bs straight from the Masterful Liar has little meaning. The $85 billion is like a gnat on an elephant’s butt, but with Obama, it gets better with the tellin’.

  2. Mithrandir says:


    Advertisers demanding viewers not change channels, viewer’s low attention span, and neglect of other news, DEMANDS that any negative news only stays on the air a few days. BUT, Republicans can’t seem to just stick to their guns and lay low until it blows over. They are in UTTER FEAR of what appears on the t.v. screen, never mind most people are not watching, playing sports, or surfing the internet. Republicans are still living in the 60s or 70s when Walter Kronkite and the big 3 had everyone’s attention. This is the 2010s, and most people hate politics so much, they have tuned out anyway.

    And as usual, even 1 PENNY of spending cuts automatically cuts cops, throws open the prison gates, veterans lose their health care, old people lose their medicine. children starve to death, firefighters must let buildings burn to the ground, DOGS AND CATS, LIVING TOGETHER, –MASS HYSTERIA!

    You get the point, they do this all the time, you would think by now the public would catch on to this, and Republicans wouldn’t be bullied by it every time, but they are.

  3. untrainable says:

    Obviously Obama has spent a little time with his new secretary of state. His take on the sequester is that same as John Kerry’s on the Iraq war… “I was for it before I was against it.” I want to see someone in the media just run clips of Obama contradicting himself as many times as they ran Rubio’s water sipping “incident”. CNN… that’s 155 times in one day.

    Show Obama threatening a veto if the right tries to stop the sequester, then show him threatening jobs if it goes through. Because, who decides from where the 2% reduction in the growth of spending comes… Mr. Obama. So if firemen (who are usually paid by their localities and not the federal government anyway), and headstart (which is a serious waste of cash anyway), and the post office (which has been sucking cash into an endless abyss for decades), and food inspectors (who represent a regulatory nightmare anyway) get cut… it’s Obama who fired them, not the republicans.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »