• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sequestration

Zorkorist

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Where we at, 27th February 2013?

Obama, appears not to give a shit. He didn't give a shit the first time, he didn't give a shit the second time, and he doesn't give a shit now.

Doubtful we'll have any midnight deals now... the hate is too great.

So, bitches... Sequestration.

-John
 
Anybody have any idea what sequestration means?

It's obviously a made up word, kind of like go bathing, in a German Concentration Camp.

-John
 
Inflation "isn't a problem" but the Federal Government needs all of its spending increases or "all hell breaks loose". :colbert:

Zorkorist said:
Anybody have any idea what sequestration means?

It's obviously a made up word, kind of like go bathing, in a German Concentration Camp.

-John
Click to expand...

... :colbert: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dictionary.com+sequestration

Sequester
verb (used with object)

  1. to remove or withdraw into solitude or retirement; seclude.
  2. to remove or separate.
  3. Law. to remove (property) temporarily from the possession of the owner; seize and hold, as the property and income of a debtor, until legal claims are satisfied.
  4. International Law. to requisition, hold, and control (enemy property)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#3 sounds like what Sequestration means in this context, no?

Thanks for the definition. I was wondering why they were throwing that word around.

The word is equally as bad as reality.

-John
 
Zorkorist said:
Where we at, 27th February 2013?

Obama, appears not to give a shit. He didn't give a shit the first time, he didn't give a shit the second time, and he doesn't give a shit now.

Doubtful we'll have any midnight deals now... the hate is too great.

So, bitches... Sequestration.

-John
Click to expand...

Exactly why do you think Obama doesn't give a shit? Exactly, what do you think the president should be doing?
 
He's had multiple attempts to reach an agreement with the Republicans, but no.

He is a failed leader. He hasn't any idea of how to lead the country forward. Worse, the country is foundering underneath his regime.

His legacy will be worse than Jimmy Carter. The country is perhaps laid bare.

-John
 
Zorkorist said:
He's had multiple attempts to reach an agreement with the Republicans, but no.

He is a failed leader. He hasn't any idea of how to lead the country forward. Worse, the country is foundering underneath his regime.

His legacy will be worse than Jimmy Carter. The country is perhaps laid bare.

-John
Click to expand...

How do you reach an agreement with someone if they aren't willing to compromise?
 
You do what is right, and compromise yourself.

You LEAD. You find the compromise that is somewhere in negotiation.

But we shouldn't be talking about compromise. Because President Obama doesn't give a SHIT about compromise.

His agenda, and his legacy, are exactly what you and I see today.

Sequestration, chaos, evil, death.

And he is OK with that.

-John
 
Has to go through the senate before the president has anything to do with it. He's already called for compromise from both sides. Can't really expect more from him.
 
Brainonska511 said:
Compromise is not "I get all I want and you get nothing (or barely anything)"
Click to expand...
In the world of politics, it certainly is.

Keep in mind that President Obama already passed his universal healthcare plan.

At some point there is no longer compromise, and just bullying.

-John
 
It's obvious you have no fucking clue what you are talking about nor do you seem to understand how government works.

Good day.
 
Zorkorist said:
Where we at, 27th February 2013?

Obama, appears not to give a shit. He didn't give a shit the first time, he didn't give a shit the second time, and he doesn't give a shit now.

Doubtful we'll have any midnight deals now... the hate is too great.

So, bitches... Sequestration.

-John
Click to expand...

Yes, it is awesome. Obama is the Great Messiah :thumbsup:
 
Embarrasing, that America is driven to cowering before the Federal Government, but maybe a wakeup call, for the 74% that are not Federal Employees, or 52% that are not on the Government dole.

-John
 
I'm glad the republicans are holding their ground on this one and not "bending" like they did when the fiscal cliff was here. I'd love to see NOTHING HAPPEN after the sequester takes place and then the dems will need to scramble to explain why...
 
Zorkorist said:
Where we at, 27th February 2013?

Obama, appears not to give a shit. He didn't give a shit the first time, he didn't give a shit the second time, and he doesn't give a shit now.

Doubtful we'll have any midnight deals now... the hate is too great.

So, bitches... Sequestration.

-John
Click to expand...

Spending has to be cut, we have no other choice.

We spend more on military then most of the other world powers combined.

The government can not tax and spend our way to recovery. Sooner or later robbing paul to pay peter will have to come to an end.


Itchrelief said:
Aren't Republicans saying that sequestration is a good thing? I see lack of leadership all around.
Click to expand...

Reducing federal spending is a good thing. So what is your point?
 
Obama doesn't give a shit about the cuts because the liberal mind is so easy to manipulate... he spins it to make the other side look bad.

Same thing with any liberal cause... guns... take away high capacity mags and watch violent crimes drop to zero.
 
I am wondering what exactly you expect Obama to do? Unilaterally force the Republicans and Democrats to come to an agreement and pass something? What kind of power do you think the president has? Perhaps you are thinking this is a dictatorship. Do you realize it is congress' job to actually pass bills because they constitutionally hold the purse strings of the government. The ignorance here is almost deafening. Also compromise isn't do it all my way. This partisan blindness makes you look ignorant and simple minded. I am not a fan of more than a few of the things Obama has done but open your eyes. Loopholes in our tax system that were perfectly fine to close before are now off the table apparently. And why is that? Are the loopholes no longer bad? If serious about the debt why not do both reduce spending and remove the loopholes?
 
ivwshane said:
How do you reach an agreement with someone if they aren't willing to compromise?
Click to expand...
I think it's time for the Democrats to lead by example. They recently got substantial tax increases and, in turn, they hardly had to concede much in the way of spending cuts which were well below what they've placed on the negotiation table in the past. It's pretty clear that the Republicans are through with the Dems idea of "compromise" and are going to dig their heals on this one.

Dems and Reps both agree that the current sequester spending cuts are not structured in a rational manner. I don't see why Dems are demanding tax increases as a condition to agreeing to talk about restructuring the previously agreed to spending cuts in a way that makes more sense for this country.

Democrats, Republicans and Obama all agreed in 2011 to this sequester deal. Tax increases were not part of that deal. It seems that Dems now want to move the goal posts beyond the scope of what was originally agreed to and seem to be quite happy to blame Reps for their lack of "compromise" for refusing to play that game.

By taking this position, they've effectively placed their tax increase agenda ahead of what's best for our country.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top