Wednesday Open Thread [2.20.13]

Filed in Open Thread by on February 20, 2013

Speaker John Boehner is doing everything he can to portray the Sequester as Obama’s idea and sole responsibility, I suppose because he knows that the affects of the massive draconian spending cuts will be felt immediately and everywhere, but that they will cost a million jobs and send the country into a recession, and thus the cuts will ultimately be politically unpopular to the point that if a candidate voted for the Budget Control Act of 2011, that candidate will be defeated in 2014, which will mean that the Democrats will retake the House (since contrary to Boehner’s revisionist history, it was mostly Republicans who voted for the BCA, including Boehner himself). Tomasky agrees:

[I]t sure isn’t going to be looking very responsible to people, as the March 1 sequestration deadline approaches, for Republicans to be going before the cameras and saying that the cuts are unfortunate but necessary medicine, or whatever formulation they come up with. They’ve wanted these spending reductions for two years. It hardly matters much who invented the mechanism for the cuts. What matters, as the Republicans will find out, is that the people don’t want them.

So Boehner is panicking, since he knows he can do nothing to prevent the Sequester because his crazy ass party won’t let him do anything. In fact his crazy ass party loves, and I mean LOVES, the cuts that are coming. Don’t believe me, listen to the crazy ass Republicans themselves:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “It’s pretty clear to me that the sequester is going to go into effect…Read my lips: I’m not interested in an 11th-hour negotiation.” [Washington Post, 2/12/13]

Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS): “It’s going to be a homerun…I am very optimistic that on March 2nd, we’ll all wake up and America will have tremendous respect for what its House of Representatives led and what it’s federal government was able to accomplish.” [Politico, 2/13/13]

Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY): “Sequestration will take place…I am excited. It will be the first time since I’ve been in Congress that we really have significant cuts.” [Billings Gazette, 2/11/13]

Republican Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA): “I want to see it go into place.” [Cherokee Tribune, 2/9/13]

Republican Congressman John Shimkus (R-IL): “He [President Obama] can announce all he wants. Sequestration is coming.” [Politico, 2/5/13]

Republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais (R-TN): “Sequestration needs to happen…Bottom line, it needs to happen and that’s the deal we struck to raise the debt limit.” [Cleveland Daily Banner, 2/1/13]

Republican Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA): “The consensus is we want the sequester numbers to come in and to finally see spending reduced in Washington.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8/13]

Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney (R-SC): “We want to keep the sequester in place and take the cuts we can get.” [Dow Jones Business News, 2/8/13]

Republican Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R-KS): “The majority of the caucus agrees that at the minimum, the spending cuts we have already agreed on, must happen.” [U.S. News, 2/6/13]

Republican Congressman Tom Cole (R-OK): “We would rather see those cuts happen…I can assure you that there will not be a political blink on this. These cuts will occur.” [U.S. News, 2/6/13]

Republican Congressman Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA): “We’re willing to let it go through till they (Democrats) respond to us.” [McClatchy, 2/6/13]

Republican Congressman Jim Lankford (R-OK): “We’d rather do it another way. But if the only way it can be done is sequestration, then it has to be done.” [Politico, 2/5/13]

Republican Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH): “The only thing that’s worse than cutting national defense is not having any scheduled cuts at all.” [Roll Call, 10/12/12]

Republican Senator John Barrasso (R-WY): “Let me be very clear – and I’d say this to the president as I say it to you – these spending cuts are going to go through on March 1.” [CNN, 2/17/13]

Republican Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK): “I think sequester’s going to happen…I think people want it to happen.” [NYT, 1/31/13]

And they should love them, because the Sequester is what the Republican Party believes today. They are for massive spending cuts to everything everywhere but defense spending. That is what the Sequester is.

And they should love it because Speaker Boehner sold his party on the greatness of the Sequester back in 2011, as revealed today by John Avalon.

“It’s a PowerPoint presentation that Boehner’s office developed with the Republican Policy Committee and sent out to the Capitol Hill GOP on July 31, 2011… It’s essentially an internal sales document from the old dealmaker Boehner to his unruly and often unreasonable Tea Party cohort. But it’s clear as day in the presentation that ‘sequestration’ was considered a cudgel to guarantee a reduction in federal spending–the conservatives’ necessary condition for not having America default on its obligations.”

Avalon reveals Boehner to be a pathological liar, but we already knew that.

About the Author ()

Comments (33)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. cassandra_m says:

    Hillary News of the Day! — She’s Running!

  2. Delaware Dem says:

    LOL. That’s good enough for me. HILLARY 2016!!!

  3. cassandra_m says:

    Senate Minority Leader Fooled by Report in Military Version of The Onion

    On November 14, 2012, Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wrote to Elizabeth King, the Pentagon’s congressional liaison, with a an unusually credulous query. “I am writing on behalf of a constituent who has contacted me regarding Guantanamo Bay prisoners receiving Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits,” McConnell wrote in a letter acquired by Danger Room. “I would appreciate your review and response to my constituent’s concerns.”

  4. pandora says:

    Oh my. That’s really embarrassing. Talk about wasting tax dollars. 😉

  5. Dave says:

    “That’s good enough for me. HILLARY 2016!!!’

    And if she did something really off the wall and pulled in Jon Hunstman, there would be little point in campaigning and the election would be fait accompli.

    Oh yeah, and the nation would be better off as well.

  6. puck says:

    Stop with the Huntsman bromance. Aren’t there enough qualified Democrats? If there are, Hillary will definitely know them. I would hope that by 2016 this bipartisanship fetish will have run its course. By choosing Huntsman, Hillary will be validating the GOP narrative that Democrats are too extreme on the left. I don’t see any reason why Hillary or any Dem candidate for President should be validating the Republican brand during a national election. Let them sink across the board.

  7. socialistic ben says:

    unless Huntsman is no longer a republican when he is chosen

  8. puck says:

    whatever. I don’t think there is any such thing as “former Republican.” Look at Chris Coons – started out as a Reaganite, ran as a Democrat, then twice voted for tax cuts on the rich. Who could have foreseen?

  9. cassandra_m says:

    Huntsman won’t make a difference with a very dysfunctional Congress, so it boggles the mind to think of how the nation would be better with him as a Hillary VP pick.

  10. pandora says:

    I’m with Puck. Huntsman is not a moderate. He’s a diplomatic speaker, but his views are extreme – at times, more extreme than the Tea Party/conservatives. Dig deeper.

    Huntsman may be the pro-life cause’s most accomplished executive. He signed bills banning second-trimester abortions, reclassifying third-trimester abortions as a third-degree felony, and requiring abortion providers to explain the pain unborn children can experience during abortion. He signed a trigger law that would ban abortion outright if Roe is overturned. He opposes embryonic stem-cell research. And by establishing a state legal fund to defend these laws, he showed willingness to uphold state prerogatives.

    So yeah, please drop the bromance. Hillary is too smart to tie this albatross around her neck.

  11. puck says:

    The latest good guy with a gun unfortunately stands a good chance of getting off with a Florida SYG defense, based on the article:

    Neighbor James Arbogast, 31, said he saw Harbachuk run up to the pickup before the shooting incident. The truck was driving away but reached a stop sign, where Harbachuk started yelling and banging on the passenger side window.

    He said he saw the man get out. Seconds later, the shot fired.

    Basically, all Floridagun owners have apparently also been given a human hunting permit. This is what happens to the moral restrictions on shooting a person once you remove the legal restrictions.

  12. Jason330 says:

    The Republicans quoted above remind me of John Wilkes Booth, a man who was so deluded that he thought the country would regarded him as hero for killing President Lincoln.

  13. bamboozer says:

    I was going to write a well reasoned explanation of how Boehner was for sequestration before he was against it and that it never originated with Obama. But due to recent good news I will instead proclaim HILARY IN 2016!!!! That and Republicans stock up on crying towels and depends as you will need both in quantity.

  14. V says:

    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/02/wwe-tea-party-real-american/62344/
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/20/have-you-heard-the-wwes-wildly-racist-tea-party-wrestling-character-named-jack-swagger/

    This is sort of amazing. The WWE has debuted a new tea-party themed wrestler/hype man combo and the right establishment is pretty pissed about it.

    the best part? they are bad guys.

  15. Jason330 says:

    V – the fact that they are “heels” and not “faces” (to use wrestling lingo) is interesting.

    The cartoon characters that populate the WWE, reveal our national psyche, and even though the WWE is a wingnut run business, they know where the money is.

  16. Paula says:

    Did you guys hear about this yet?

    Delaware Law Weekly

    Stolen-Gun Bill Proposed in Delaware
    Jeff Mordock
    Delaware Law Weekly
    2013-02-20
    “Under new legislation proposed in Delaware’s General Assembly and supported by Delaware Governor Jack Markell, individuals who fail to notify police of a stolen or missing gun would face a fine of up to $500 for a first offense and could lose their right to own a gun as a second offense.”

    More here:
    http://www.delawarelawweekly.com/news.php?news_id=4255

  17. V says:

    Jason,

    I mean, it’s no Iron Sheik/Hulk Hogan showdown, but amusing nonetheles.

  18. Jason330 says:

    Irresponsible a-holes should lose their right to own a gun on the first offense.

  19. mike says:

    And the first time that actually happens Alan Gura will end up taking DE to court on it, they will lose, and you and I will have to foot the bill for the fact that folks like Markell violate people’s rights.

    And yes, I’m quite certain that making someone a prohibited person for life because they had guns stolen and didn’t adequately report the theft would be considered unconstitutional by the courts.

  20. V says:

    7 other states have such laws, and all federally licensed gun owners have similar reporting rules when they are robbed.

    plus, this is just the proposal so there could be changes before the bill is finalized.

    but yeah, not sure sure they will lose right off the bat.

  21. V says:

    I was wrong. 7 states and DC.

    looks like Conneticut and Ohio make it a felony (like the proposed Delaware law), Massacusetts and DC don’t use the word felony but discuss permanent revocation of licensure or registration, and NJ, NY, Michigan and RI all have civil penalties.
    http://smartgunlaws.org/reporting-lost-or-stolen-firearms-policy-summary/#identifier_10_5772

    so there’s that.

  22. pandora says:

    First, thanks for the link, V.

    And here’s a candidate for “never allowed to ever own a gun again” club. Seriously, if we threw the book at all (and there are soooo many) of these “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” fools it might make gun owners think twice about irresponsible behavior.

    Incidents like this happen far too often.

  23. V says:

    (also, i meant to type federally licensed gun DEALERS upthread, not owners. whoops).

  24. The Straight Scoop says:

    I’m SHOCKED that El Som hasn’t weighed in on the WWE tea party wrestler and manager. They cite the Constitution, decry immigrants and people who went free stuff, declare themselves to be “true Americans,” hate the Mexican-born world champion (and currently have a title match against him at Wrestlemania)… And they are the heels. This is screaming for a masked sleeping beast’s thoughts.

  25. SussexWatcher says:

    Excerpts from today’s NJ. Good luck with Mayor Micromanager.

    Williams is the city’s top political official now, but he can’t shake his previous career as a police officer. 

    Describing himself as as “combat cop” …

    Williams’ out-and-about style contrasts with that of his predecessor, James M. Baker, who preferred to let police handle crime scenes and surveillance details. 

    When complaints roll in, Williams wants to check them out himself, while trying avoid micromanaging his police chief, he said. 

  26. Truth Teller says:

    Huntsman proved himself to be a coward when he stood on stage along with the other Repuks and remained silent while a GOP mob booed an active duty serviceman serving in Iraq. Let us not forget or forgive these acts of UN Americiaism on the part of GOP and their ilk.

  27. Happy to oblige, Straight Scoop.

    Yes, the WWE has started a xenophobic angle featuring Jack Swagger, ‘the All-American American’; Zeb Coulter, his Mexican-hating mouthpiece, played by former rassler and booker Dutch Mantel; and Alberto Del Rio, who holds the secondary WWE championship belt.

    The reason for the angle is that WWE has failed miserably in the past three-plus years to create a new Latino superstar. Rey Misterio, Jr. is at the end of the line, WWE totally botched the push for Mexican superstar Mistico, who is Sin Cara in WWE. So, they panicked, and did a horrible heel-to-face turn with Alberto Del Rio. Del Rio is a pretty good heel as sort of an elitist upper-class rich guy, but he’s terrible as a face. Cuts bad promos, and is only OK in the ring.

    With Del Rio’s face turn bombing, and no other Latino superstar in the offing, it looks like the bookers went with this xenophobia angle in order to prop up Del Rio. Not only do I think that Del Rio is beyond propping up, but there are, as you might expect, unintended consequences. There was a Smackdown taping in, wait for it, Biloxi, Mississippi on Tuesday. The yahoos cheered Coulter’s rants, which will have to be edited out.

    But here is the delicious irony. After the Smackdown taping, Jack Swagger, who has screwed up before, was arrested for DUI, speeding and possession of marijuana. Oh, did I mention that Dutch Mantel’s daughter was killed by a drunk driver? Yet another PR disaster for WWE, which deserves it. Not sure if this will kill the angle, but Swagger probably shouldn’t buy any green bananas.

  28. Dave says:

    @pandora,

    “Huntsman is not a moderate. He’s a diplomatic speaker, but his views are extreme – at times, more extreme than the Tea Party/conservatives.”

    Sorry I forgot there are litmus tests on both sides. Remember I tend examine the whole person so I never home in on a single issue. I forgot my place.

  29. puck says:

    It’s more than one issue, Dave; Huntsman also has extremist tax positions. I’m not going to spend any time looking it up though until IF Hillary gets nominated and IF she picks Huntsman.

  30. pandora says:

    Look at his tax policy, Dave. How about his idea to completely eliminate home mortgage interest deduction? How about his positions on guns? Hardly homing in on a single issue.

    Look, I understand you’re upset with the state of your party, but that’s not my fault – it’s actually former GOPers/small c conservatives, like you, who are to blame. Oh yeah, those crazy conservatives were all the rage when they were going after Dems – and none of the now called RINOs said a word.

    Please stop trying to make Huntsman appear moderate. He’s not. I get why you like him – and it has nothing to do with you being above the fray. You’re not. Get your own parties house in order and stop expecting the Dems to move to your positions and candidates.

    Why would Hillary even consider him? She doesn’t have to since your choice next election may be between Hillary and a Dem VP or Rick Santorum?

  31. pandora says:

    And here’s more of Huntsman’s policies…

    “I would vote to increase the debt limit if there was a corresponding level of cuts.” Jon Huntsman.

    On Ryan’s budget: “I would’ve voted for it. Including the Medicare provisions.” Jon Huntsman.

    He’s on record saying he’d repeal the ACA.

    Dave, do you even know Huntsman’s positions? If you do, and you agree with them, then you’re a Republican. That’s fine, but it’s no reason for a Democrat to consider him.