Did Obama blow it on sequestration?

posted at 10:41 am on October 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

By even Fox News’ account, Barack Obama’s answer on sequestration last night was one of his best moments.  Summoning a commanding presence, Obama emphatically pledged to the American public that the planned sequestration of funds that would cut the Pentagon an additional $500 billion over the next ten years on top of a previous cut of the same magnitude “will not happen.” Many of Obama’s campaign pledges have expiration dates, but this one didn’t even make it to the end of the night before the campaign began reversing itself:

Megyn, you mentioned the sequester earlier, the massive cut to the Defense Department, the Pentagon, that’s coming up on January 2. The president said tonight that the sequester will not happen. That was a key moment. And it did make news. Well now, the White House, the campaign is back-pedaling. David Plouffe saying in the Spin Room just behind you, pressed on this, he said repeatedly to reporters, everyone in Washington agrees the sequester, quote, “should not happen.” And asked again, and he said it should not happen. So apparently ‘will not happen’ has become ‘should not happen.’ We’ll see what happens with that.

Politico’s Philip Ewing reports that Obama’s vow not only caught his campaign off guard, but Democrats in Congress too — and gave Republicans a big opening to attack Obama for his lack of interest in the issue so far:

President Barack Obama startled Washington during Monday night’s foreign policy debate when he said billions in automatic Pentagon cuts “will not happen” — a line that could weaken his bargaining power during an epic spending and tax fight expected when Congress returns. …

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) said the president is “not a dictator yet,” expressing surprise over the president’s prediction during the debate that sequestration ”will not happen.”

“I was astonished, I almost fell out of my chair when the president said, ‘Don’t worry, sequestration won’t happen.’ We’ve been begging the president to sit down with us to avoid what his own secretary of defense said would be a devastating blow to our national security. He just said, ‘Don’t worry, sequestration won’t happen.’ He’s not a dictator yet,” McCain told POLITICO Live.

Other Republicans piled on as well with attacks about what they called wasted months in which Obama hasn’t negotiated with lawmakers over a way to avert sequestration.

“It is a nice line, but for more than a year the president hasn’t lifted a finger to avert the crisis,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) “Instead, his policies and positions have increased uncertainty for our troops and the men and women who support them. The effects of sequestration can already be felt. Jobs have already been lost. The president and his party in the Senate have failed to offer even a single real solution that could resolve sequestration. If the president is determined that these cuts won’t happen, why has he drug it out this long?”

Obama tried to distance himself from the sequestration during the debate by claiming, “First of all, the sequester is not something I proposed.”  However, Bob Woodward wrote in his book about the debt-ceiling deal that the sequester proposal did originate with the White House, not with Congress:

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said during the debate in Boca Raton, Fla. “It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”

That directly contradicts a 2012 book from investigative journalist Bob Woodward — the Washington Post editor who, with Carl Bernstein, took down President Richard Nixon over the 1970s-era Watergate scandal.

“Then-OMB Director Jack Lew, now the White House chief of staff, and White House Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors pitched the idea to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Woodward writes,” according to a Sept. 7 story appearing on the Politico website.

“Under the deal, which Republicans accepted after several rounds of bargaining, the federal debt ceiling was raised — staving off a potential financial crisis.”

In other words, we wouldn’t need to worry about the sequester at all if the White House hadn’t demanded it as a condition of the debt deal.  Why did the Obama administration insist on those deep cuts to defense spending that even their own Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, calls “devastating” to our national security?  They wanted to make sure that Republicans didn’t cut too much from other budget areas, and so determined to hold Defense hostage to the budget process.

So why is both the White House and Team Obama backpedaling now?  First, they’d prefer not to have to take ownership of the sequester at all.  More to the point, Obama’s declaration now makes him the biggest stakeholder in sequestration negotiations.  If he can’t fix the problem and stop the sequestration cuts, Obama will come out as the biggest loser in the process now, not Republicans.  Of course, in two weeks that point may become moot anyway, but Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Well, he did say he was the nation last night. In that sense, he probably believes he can stop it all by himself.

Paradol Ex on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

That’s what I thought.

cozmo on October 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Must be out of context.

Must be “will not happen……until after the election”

Ben Hur on October 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

It probably won’t affect the election much(if at all). But this is really bad for his party after he loses in 2 weeks. He may be a lame duck at that point, but other Dems who have to worry about future elections won’t be pleased that he left them with so little wiggle room.

Doughboy on October 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

yes he did blow it.

cheetah2 on October 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

What a game! What a game! We’re still singing in the rain here in San Francisco.

Did I miss anything with the debate?

aunursa on October 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

This nation. Me. I lie.

SailorMark on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

Simply stated, Obama couldn’t care less about the positions of Reid and Pelosi, Obama only cares about Obama.

rplat on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Oh, “Blow” is a dog-whistle referring to Obama’s former drug use.

Ben Hur on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

First. Megyn is sexier as a brunette.

Second. Obama is so full of Baloney he can’t even keep his own lies straight.

Third. There are so many people sucked into the cult-of-Obama I don’t think they would care if he turned out to be Soviet Spy. They’d still vote for him.

Fourth. Thinking people are coming to realize just who Obama really is and they’re not liking him anymore.

Lawrence on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

If he can’t fix the problem and stop the sequestration cuts, Obama will come out as the biggest loser in the process now, not Republicans. Of course, in two weeks that point may become moot anyway, but Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

Oopsie.

Bitter Clinger on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

In terms of power he is the president.

In terms of responsibility it’s everyone else fault.

Oil Can on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Compared to healing the planet and making the oceans recede, this is easy. Piece of cake.

NeighborhoodCatLady on October 23, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Obama didn’t blow it, he did great. I just hate black people so I’m voting Romney.

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Foot, mouth and all that.
He OWNS it.

Funny that as he was at his “Most Presidential”, he made such a catastrophic error.

Jabberwock on October 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

This nation. Me. I lie.

SailorMark on October 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

When he said that it sent a chill up my spine, no joke.

VegasRick on October 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

We never get anything conservative from the Republican party any more. What was the last conservative direction item we have ever gotten? The most recent item I can think of was During Newt’s speaker of the House days. After that, it has been nothing but one progressive policy after another with no end in sight.

The sequestration was supposed to be the cuts the Republicans promised us in the 2010 election cycle. Sequestration was supposed to be the arm twisting required in order to get the bipartisan panel to come up with something better.

Sequestration has in fact been a bargaining tool the Democrats have against conservative policies. The Republicans basically handed a loaded gun to the democrats and ordered them to hold the Republicans hostage! Democrats! You need to stop us from doing anything Conservative, you are our only hope! Here, take this Sequestration Bill and beat us with it so the moron Republican voters will not notice we are moving left again!

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM

What’s the big deal about taking away $1 trillion from military spending? We found out last night we don’t need any more military equipment, just like we don’t need bayonettes and horses—or something.

dirtseller on October 23, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Just give Barack Obama an open mic, a topic and let the man go on it without a teleprompter!

The man just can’t help himself.

ajacksonian on October 23, 2012 at 10:53 AM

underwater ships, underwater polls…coincidence?

DanMan on October 23, 2012 at 10:53 AM

How about this, let’s just sequester the Blightbringer in Chicago in a couple of weeks.

hillsoftx on October 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

astonerii

I hope you’re not just now realizing Republican isn’t synonymous with Conservative

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

A$$hole. I simply can’t stand him.

Hang sequestration around his neck like a dead skunk. He owns it.

CantCureStupid on October 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said during the debate in Boca Raton, Fla. “It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”

“Then-OMB Director Jack Lew, now the White House chief of staff, and White House Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors pitched the idea to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Woodward writes…

See how his mind works? He didn’t propose it – some guys in his administration did. The buck stops with them, not the Preezy.

Hill60 on October 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Peace through superior firepower…………

crosshugger on October 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

astonerii

I hope you’re not just now realizing Republican isn’t synonymous with Conservative

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I have known for a long time they are not one and the same. But they are supposed to be the conservative party. Instead they have drifted to the progressive light party.

This is why if Obama was not as bad as he is, Romney would not be getting the check next to his name is going to.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

If the sequestration bit is the highlight from this debate – and it shows that Obama hasn’t been negotiating to prevent it from happening – it’s a big loser for Obama.

lorien1973 on October 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

The new definition of will.

I need to get one of those leftist dictionary’s. It’s getting hard to keep up.

plutorocks on October 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

but Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

Well that would be great!!!

I would love to see Reid & Pelosi torpedo Obama with the ships that go under the water……

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

We should just let sequestration happen and refund the money to the military when we have the chance.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

It’s a good thing when obama’s lies come back on him, and if they are doing so with increasing rapidity that’s a very good thing. At some point even the Democrat Mainstream Media won’t be able to cover for him.

paul1149 on October 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

underwater ships, underwater polls…coincidence?

DanMan on October 23, 2012 at 10:53 AM

+1

VegasRick on October 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

This is why if Obama was not as bad as he is, Romney would not be getting the check next to his name is going to.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

the lesser of two evils might be the best we can do for a long time – until the libertarian movement displaces the Retardicans

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Seems Obama screwed the pooch on the sequester.

Well, at least, he didn’t eat the pooch this time.

Bitter Clinger on October 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

That’s what I thought.

cozmo on October 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Just when did both Pelosi or Reid give any crap to who sits in the WH to drive their communist agenda? Yes, having another communist in the WH helps them, but not that much. They did well to run circles around Boehner and McConnell, prior to Hussein and during. Its just a “bump” in the road to them.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

We should just let sequestration happen and refund the money to the military when we have the chance.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Actually that is pretty close to what happens. Having gone through the not-funded, threatened RIF bit, I know that critical functions continue and the non-critical get their paperwork started… which can be weeks or months to get done. Once Congress comes to its senses and the President signs off, back-pay for those who worked gets put in place and everyone else goes back to their former status.

You can’t cut such a large beast like DoD quickly without destabilizing everything, and to do that requires months of getting a bad policy in place. By then the screams from back home usually gets a solid majority in Congress to realize they will be toasty if they don’t do something.

ajacksonian on October 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Chickens…

Roost…

Some flight time required.

Kraken on October 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Of course, in two weeks that point may become moot anyway, but Obama’s insistence that the cuts be stopped will seriously damage the negotiating positions of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as well.

Don’t we confuse ramming something down our collective throats (Obamacare–Dodd/Frank) in lieu of negotiating with these two scoundrels?

Don L on October 23, 2012 at 11:06 AM

What a game! What a game! We’re still singing in the rain here in San Francisco.

Did I miss anything with the debate?

aunursa on October 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Congrats and good luck against Deetroit. Glad (former Astro) Hunter Pence is with y’all now, and that amazing broken-bat hit he got last night, hitting the ball three times in a single swing, has now gone viral.

TXUS on October 23, 2012 at 11:06 AM

the lesser of two evils might be the best we can do for a long time – until the libertarian movement displaces the Retardicans

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM

I do not like libertarianism.

It is an argument that a society filled with bad morals can still be fiscally conservative. It just is not the case and never will be.

The reason anyone thinks the past was libertarian is because they discount the fact that 99.9% of people of the time were god fearing, or extremely fearful of those who were god fearing. Thus, a more moral society required fewer laws to function.

With the morals of our current society, there is not enough god fearing going on in the churches let alone the non church going population to keep the degenerates in check any more.

The requirements for the number of laws is inversely proportional to the morality of the people. When people are good because they are good, you need few laws to have a functioning society. When people are bad, they are bad and require laws and the penalties of those laws to keep the society functioning.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Stupid Michael Hirsh

But in making a vague and restrained case for a stronger America that would nonetheless steer clear of military involvement in hot spots such as Iran and Syria, Romney rendered almost moot any serious differences he might have with President Obama over foreign policy. All of which only raised a question not helpful to Romney’s case: Why replace the man in the Oval Office?

The moron thinks that Obama and Romney are equal on the economy/jobs? What an idiot!

Schadenfreude on October 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

That was clearly a rehearsed answer, and he STILL blew it.

rockmom on October 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Obama like every the majority of liberals hate the US military because it is one of very major aspect of making the US the world most powerful nation… Of course he wants to cut the military spending but because it the elections is two weeks away he lied through his teeth that he is not going to do it… The good news that a majority of voters do not believe any word he says anymore…

mnjg on October 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

We should just let sequestration happen and refund the money to the military when we have the chance.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Just pull an Obama if elected and spend it anyway by presidential fiat. When they react-stonewall saying: it’s the Obama way!

Don L on October 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Two weeks from today Obama will learn the true meaning of sequestration, and we will be the ones imposing it.

TXUS on October 23, 2012 at 11:11 AM

If Clinton can get away with what the meaning of is is, you bet your behind, Obama will get away with the will will.

Sir Napsalot on October 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM

It would be nice if you bigots would stop listening to Bark’s actual words and concentrate instead on what he meant to say.

Bishop on October 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Seems Obama screwed the pooch on the sequester.

Well, at least, he didn’t eat the pooch this time.

Bitter Clinger on October 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Give him time. When he’s done screwing it, then it’s…well, bon appetit, Barky.

Thomas More on October 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Not sure how Ed thinks Fox deemed this one of Obama’s best moments. I watched it live and MK seemed to imply that Obama overstepped his bounds there, and BB called it a “key moment”, not a god one.

BKeyser on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

When people are bad, they are bad and require laws and the penalties of those laws to keep the society functioning.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 11:06 AM

You never win this argument. Even the apostle Paul realized you cannot legislate morality. Grace comes from within.

John the Libertarian on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Slade@11:50
I knew it, I knew it I knew it ….You racist…………….;)

angrymike on October 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Hey, maybe he needs to hire a sequestration Czar.

jake49 on October 23, 2012 at 11:24 AM

No, Ed. He will simply pivot.

Come on!

Can I work for Hot Air?

Stepan on October 23, 2012 at 11:27 AM

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said during the debate in Boca Raton, Fla. “It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”

Later on in the debate (and also in previous debates) Obama accused Romney of wanting to increase military spending “that the military never asked for”, while Obama’s own Defense Secretary calls the proposed cuts “devastating”.

Which is it, Mr. President? Do you want to cut military spending or increase it or keep it the same? You can’t have it all three ways!!!

Steve Z on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Well, he did say he was the nation last night. In that sense, he probably believes he can stop it all by himself.

Paradol Ex on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

L’état c’est moi.

cheeflo on October 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM

This just proves that Obummer is at his best only when he’s lying right through his teeth.

Shepherd Lover on October 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM

My 2 year old stomped his foot this morning and said “NO” at the top of his voice! Reminded me of O last night saying “IT WILL NOT HAPPEN” – adults have more words than a 2 year old…

telmah on October 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Obama didn’t blow it, he did great. I just hate black people so I’m voting Romney.

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Good thing Obummer is half white, so you only have to half-hate him.

Nutstuyu on October 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

It would be nice if you bigots would stop listening to Bark’s actual words and concentrate instead on what he meant to say.

Bishop on October 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Hah. I’ve got my stash of bayonets, so go ahead and make me why don’t you? (I know, you’re being sarcastic).

Nutstuyu on October 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

You can’t have it all three ways!!!

Steve Z on October 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Mmmm, three ways. Yep, those Chicago bathhouse days were the bestest!

Nutstuyu on October 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM

The chain on his bicycle has fallen off from his backpedaling so furiously.

Oops .. I said “chain.”

Please don’t call me racist./

PatriotGal2257 on October 23, 2012 at 11:39 AM

At some point even the Democrat Mainstream Media won’t be able to cover for him.

paul1149 on October 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha *gasp* *wheeze* hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhaha.

Seriously, though.

Nutstuyu on October 23, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Pop Up Windows now? come on HotAir…

Kaptain Amerika on October 23, 2012 at 11:44 AM

“He’s not a dictator yet”–interesting choice of wording on McCain’s part.

bandarlog on October 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM

You never win this argument. Even the apostle Paul realized you cannot legislate morality. Grace comes from within.

John the Libertarian on October 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Not legislating morality. It is defending those who are moral from those who are not. If you allow the immoral to run the society, prosperity will never exist. So, it is not legislating morality, it is limiting the degree to which immorality is allowed to damage society as a whole.

If people did not steal, there would be no law against stealing, it would be a non issue and thus not require laws. But because people do steal, there is a law to defend people’s property from theft by discouraging theft first, and if people steal anyways, removing them from society by placing them behind locked bars.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 11:49 AM

So in the previous debate, he insisted that money was going to hire school teachers.

Romney mentioned it was borrowed money. So are we expecting student loans to fund grade schools?

seven on October 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM

That was clearly a rehearsed answer, and he STILL blew it.

rockmom on October 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Yes. Rehearsed for another situation, -he got desperate and decided to use it anyway, and he still muddled it up. In a fair and balanced news media that would have been his Dan Quayle moment.

slickwillie2001 on October 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Code to Lockheed Martin not to send out those pink slips. How can anyone trust anything coming from the liar in chief’s mouth? After the election he’ll have more flexibility remember.

Kissmygrits on October 23, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Y’know, we’re all pretty used to the flurries of ‘he lied ! No, HE lied’ garbage after debates. …BUT …
This is the SECOND TIME IN A ROW that Preezy arrogantly insisted someone check a transcript, to prove MITT wrong, and he was proven to have been in the wrong, instead !
Think of that !!! Makes me smile to watch him be blown outta the water like that !!
Bazinga !!

pambi on October 23, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Code to Lockheed Martin not to send out those pink slips.

Ya got that right. To follow on; and as far whether Obama ‘blew it’, time will tell, he and his campaign are sneaky.

darlus on October 23, 2012 at 12:22 PM

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said during the debate in Boca Raton, Fla. “It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”

Proposed and passed by Congress. Who signed it into law?:

1) Jay Carney
2) Eva Longoria
3) Barack Obama
4) Mahmoud Achmadinejahd

President Obama on Tuesday signed the Sequestration Transparency Act, which requires his administration to detail just how painful the sequester’s cut will be.

“Congress must act to avoid these devastating cuts & ask wealthiest to pay fair share,” White House deputy press secretary Amy Brundage wrote on Twitter, announcing the president’s signature.

Obama had until Wednesday to sign the bill, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent and cleared the House in a 414-2 vote. The Obama administration must lay out specifics about the $1.2 trillion in cuts to domestic and defense programs that will take place at the start of 2013 if Congress is unable to agree on another deficit-reduction plan before the end of the year.

BobMbx on October 23, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Obama had a number of meglomaniacal moments last night. This was one:

We need to be thinking about cyber security. We need to be talking about space. That’s exactly what our budget does, but it’s driven by strategy. It’s not driven by politics. It’s not driven by members of Congress, and what they would like to see. It’s driven by, what are we going to need to keep the American people safe?

Obama took Congress right out of the budget process with that quotation. Interesting. Then he followed up with sequestration “will not happen”.

I wonder what is on his mind these days.

Mr. Arkadin on October 23, 2012 at 12:36 PM

BobMbx on October 23, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Gotta love how happy the Republicans are to just kick the can down the road. Very patriotic of them.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Well, he did say he was the nation last night. In that sense, he probably believes he can stop it all by himself.

Paradol Ex on October 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Be very careful. Obama has increasingly used the office to act unilaterally-and he has faced no repurcussiotns from it, not yet, anyway. He may TRY to circumvent Congress either as a lame duck or as the president re-elect.

What scares me more than anything else about the prospects of a second Obama term is his complete and total lack of respect for the constitutional limitations on government in general, and more specifically, the presidency. He may just begin implementing his programs without Congress. Hell, why stop there? Why not just suspend the constitution and declare himself president for life?

It could happen. Have we seen any hint of constitutional restraint?

theosdad on October 23, 2012 at 1:00 PM

blink on October 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

The other idea was to give Obama clean pure $200B debt limit increases month after month after month to keep it in the public’s mind how much we are spending that they are not currently being taxed on.

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM

. It’s not driven by members of Congress, and what they would like to see.

Uh, Isn’t the House of Representatives called that for a reason? It is the voice of the people? And until that gigantic Federal power grab that gave voting for United States senators to the popular vote wasn’t the Senate the voice of the individual states?

Apparently the Constitutional Law professor missed that whole Federalism thing while he was chooming with is peeps.

Tenwheeler on October 23, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Obama didn’t blow it, he did great lied as usual. I just hate black people can’t stand lying, radical leftist Presidents who are out to destroy America so I’m voting Romney.

Slade73 on October 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Slade, I assume you forgot the sarc tag, but Fixed to reflect my own opinion.

Christian Conservative on October 23, 2012 at 1:06 PM

It could happen. Have we seen any hint of constitutional restraint?

What’s this “constitution” you are referring to? Same thing that Chief Justice himself declared null and void this past summer? That thing?

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Obama had a number of meglomaniacal moments last night. This was one:

We need to be thinking about cyber security. We need to be talking about space. That’s exactly what our budget does, but it’s driven by strategy. It’s not driven by politics. It’s not driven by members of Congress, and what they would like to see. It’s driven by, what are we going to need to keep the American people safe?

Obama took Congress right out of the budget process with that quotation. Interesting. Then he followed up with sequestration “will not happen”.

I wonder what is on his mind these days.

Mr. Arkadin on October 23, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I must have overslept for 3-4 years. What budget are you talking about?

BobMbx on October 23, 2012 at 1:15 PM

By even Fox News’ account, Barack Obama’s answer on sequestration last night was one of his best moments.

Funny that the only time he can look good is when he’s tossing out some lie.

kim roy on October 23, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Barry did not mis-speak, as always, we the American citizens mis-understood. The evil republicans have twisted what Barry said and they are always so dumb they believe it!/

IowaWoman on October 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Obama said, “Read my lips, sequester will not happen.”

blink on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 PM

[Obama]: “Don’t call my bluff.”

WisRich on October 23, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Part of the problem with Military budget increases has to do with Inflation as much as anything.

If inflation causes the dollar to be worth 20% less then it requires an increase of 20% in military funding to simply maintain current readiness.

We really need to thing all these things through before just blindly cutting any given budget.

>>>

Point is that an effective Investment driven Economy that is not inflating has more effect on balancing overall budgets than any given change in spending. All spending does is increase/decrease debt ratios.

Lawrence on October 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

We never get anything conservative from the Republican party any more. What was the last conservative direction item we have ever gotten? The most recent item I can think of was During Newt’s speaker of the House days. After that, it has been nothing but one progressive policy after another with no end in sight.

The sequestration was supposed to be the cuts the Republicans promised us in the 2010 election cycle. Sequestration was supposed to be the arm twisting required in order to get the bipartisan panel to come up with something better.

Sequestration has in fact been a bargaining tool the Democrats have against conservative policies. The Republicans basically handed a loaded gun to the democrats and ordered them to hold the Republicans hostage! Democrats! You need to stop us from doing anything Conservative, you are our only hope! Here, take this Sequestration Bill and beat us with it so the moron Republican voters will not notice we are moving left again!

astonerii on October 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM

The republicans figured out how the democrats get voters to “like”
them. The more free stuff you give out the more votes you get.

We will get the president we deserve. I hope we have turned ourselves around, woke up, set ourselves straight and now deserve
Romney. Our rino repub wienies better wake up to. We voters aren’t taking their leftie crapola any more.

BTW, where has John Boehner been? Has anyone noticed the number
of politicians who are missing or just plain silent? Boehner,
Canter, Palin (other than her gig on Fox), Perry, Bauchmann, etc.
etc. Romney must have a lot of “sway” with these people to get
them to shut up. Not picking on anyone in particular, however,
the repubs all start chattering and they end up muddying the waters. Good strategy by Romney.

Amjean on October 23, 2012 at 3:57 PM