Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
October 01, 2014, 08:20:45 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Obama melting down now that his Sequester Plan might actually happen. LOL!!!!!  (Read 873 times)
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8846


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2013, 11:29:31 AM »


Pentagon informs Congress of plans to furlough 800K civilians
 
By Jeremy Herb - 02/20/13 11:16 AM ET





The Pentagon notified Congress on Wednesday it will be furloughing its civilian workforce of 800,000 employees if sequestration goes into effect March 1.
 









< SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N8334.3630.WPPPLC-247REALMEDIAIN/B7350014.3;abr=!ie;sz=300x250;click0=http://oasc05134.247realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/HILLthehill/government/1{TIME_DATE_STAMP}/L22/1079282009/Middle1/BBN/BCN2013010114-001c_GMC/GM_ChevyCarat_BBN_300.html/596e536a774645644a587341444a4a7a?;ord=1079282009?"> < /SCRIPT>< NOSCRIPT>< A HREF="http://oasc05134.247realmedia.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/HILLthehill/government/1{TIME_DATE_STAMP}/L22/1079282009/Middle1/BBN/BCN2013010114-001c_GMC/GM_ChevyCarat_BBN_300.html/596e536a774645644a587341444a4a7a?http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N8334.3630.WPPPLC-247REALMEDIAIN/B7350014.3;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300x250;ord=1079282009?"> < IMG SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N8334.3630.WPPPLC-247REALMEDIAIN/B7350014.3;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300x250;ord=1079282009?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=250 ALT="Advertisement"></A> < /NOSCRIPT> Defense officials have warned lawmakers that sequestration will devastate the military and lead to a hollow force, but the civilian furloughs will be one of the first major impacts felt by the across-the-board cuts.
 
The Pentagon furloughs will affect civilians across the country. Pentagon officials have said that civilians could face up to 22 days of furloughs, one per week, through the end of the fiscal year in September. The employees would receive 30 days notice before being furloughed.
 
“We are doing everything possible to limit the worst effects on DOD personnel — but I regret that our flexibility within the law is extremely limited,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta wrote in a message to the department. “The president has used his legal authority to exempt military personnel funding from sequestration, but we have no legal authority to exempt civilian personnel funding from reductions.”
 
The Joint Chiefs also testified before both the House and Senate last week to lay out the dangers of sequestration, as the Pentagon has taken a much more proactive approach to the cuts than when they were set to hit in January.
 
The potential for furloughs was one of the few things DOD officials announced before the Jan. 2 deadline, which was delayed two months in the “fiscal-cliff” deal.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More from The Hill:
 • Obama under pressure to resume talks on arms treaty that is opposed by NRA
• NRA ads hit vulnerable Democratic senators
 • Obama renews call for $50B in new spending on roads, bridges
 • Kerry slams critics of foreign aid in first major speech as secretary
 • Unions hope US-EU trade talks can be lever to change labor laws
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




President Obama on Tuesday spoke to first responders who he also warned could be furloughed due to sequestration. He urged Republicans to compromise and stop the cuts.
 
Obama will be on the road again next week with campaign-style events arguing that Republicans are at fault for the cuts, while the GOP blames the White House for the sequester.
 







“Republicans in Congress face a simple choice,” the president said Tuesday. “Are they willing to compromise to protect vital investments in education and healthcare and national security and all the jobs that depend on them? Or would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations?”
 
But Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in response to the Pentagon furloughs that Obama has yet to put forward a plan to stop the across-the-board cuts, while the House has passed an alternative.
 
“I agree with the secretary of Defense that the impact of the president’s sequester would be devastating to our military,” Boehner said in a statement. “That’s why the House has acted twice to replace the president’s sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect our national security, and it’s why I’ve been calling on the president for more than a year to press his Democratic-controlled Senate to do the same.”
 
The back-and-forth is part of a blame game between the White House and congressional Republicans as the cuts are less than two weeks out, with no apparent movement to stop them before March 1.
 
Preparations for cuts from sequestration and the department's budget uncertainty are continuing in the defense industry.
 
BAE Systems notified 3,600 employees Tuesday that they could be laid off over a loss of work from the Navy, due primarily to the Pentagon facing a continuing resolution.
 
Bill Clifford, president of BAE Systems Ship Repair, told Ship Repair employees that the notifications under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act were going out to employees at four BAE locations in Norfolk, Va., Mayport, Fla., San Diego, Calif., and Hawaii.
 
“We do not take these decisions lightly, and we regret the anxiety it causes our employees and their families. I also recognize this news is unsettling, but rest assured we are working closely with our Navy customer and members of Congress to mitigate the impact of these proposed reductions,” Clifford wrote.
 
The WARN Act notices were a major political fight between Congress and the Obama administration during the 2012 campaign. After defense contractors threatened sending out mass notices before sequestration, the administration told contractors not to issue them 60 days before the cuts took effect — and also took the step of promising to cover layoff costs if contractors had to immediately fire workers.
 
In this case, BAE appears to be issuing the notices with enough time that it will follow the WARN law and not incur extra costs.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/operations/283981-pentagon-tells-congress-it-will-furlough-800k-civilian-workforce#ixzz2LSupeeTo
 Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16027


Getbig!


« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2013, 11:32:10 AM »

Emmortal is the one who wrote

I still haven't see him or Tony or You explain what Emmortal meant by this statement.  Does he think that in the past the office of the POTUS can "take" spending in or out out of the calculation of GDP at their discretion ?   That's what he seems to be saying though he has yet to explain why he believes this to be true

Tony also has yet to explain what he thinks Emmortal was saying

You on the other hand haven't even attempted to explain what Emmortal said about the calculation of GDP and instead are making a totally different (though equally ridiculous claim) that when a POTUS signs a law (in this case The Budget Control Act of 2011) that he becomes the sole owner of that legislation and anyone else who helped write it, support it or voted for it no longer has any responsibility for it's creation

I guess with that logic we can put sole blame for the Patriot Act on President Bush

It's called accountability, something neither Obama nor you seem to grasp. The Patriot Act is credited to/blamed on Bush, FIRST AND FOREMOST.



Now, back to the Budget Control Act of 2011.  Why would Obama simply choose to cave into Repubs who failed to reach an agreement on a way to reduce the deficit during the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction.   That's what created sequestration in the first place so why would he reward their recalcitrance by simply vetoing the part they don't like

BTW - this all goes back to your DELUSION that Obama OWNS the sequestration.   I know you believe that but the rest of the country does not share you delusion (refer back to the last election as a point of reference).   If massive spending cuts go into place due to the Repubs unwillingness to DO THEIR JOB OF GOVERNING it will be their party that is harmed (along with the country of course but we know Repubs don't give a rats ass about the country)

Obama signed int into law. It's his, period, especially when he THREATENED TO VET attempts to stop it.

The Republicans aren't governing? PLEASE!!! OBAMA is supposed to be governing; he's the president. But, he, like you, is a coward. He wants to have everyone else do the heavy lifting and to take credit for it, as long as it makes him look good.

When the policies end up being utter disasters, he runs, hides, then tries to blame everyone else for what HE approved and HE signed into law. And, numbskulls like you buy it: hook, line, and sinker.

The rest of the country thought they wouldn't be affected by Obama's tax hikes and only those EEEEVVVVIILL rich people would get soaked. Now, long after it's too late, THEY'RE THE ONES whining about their checks being smaller and their jobs going away.


Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25235



« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2013, 11:37:31 AM »

perfect example of why this board is a complete waste of my time

tell me what you think you are saying by this post

what are you implying

something about the sequester
govt spending
the gdp

be specific professor


Lol easy boss you're full of piss and vinegar these days.

You think that spending cuts will lead to economic down turn. In certain situations you may be correct but to think that the govt is run so efficiently and without waste to say that spending cuts will result in a downturn is just stupid.

The govt spending per capita has exploded over the past decades if a organization wastes 10% of their revenue/budget and their revenue/budget increases the amount of waste increases accordingly to the % if nothing is done to address it.

What have we done to address the waste?
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8846


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2013, 11:41:15 AM »

The reason austerity failed in Europe is because they did not lower taxes to compensate for cuts in spending. 

You have to lower govt spending and lower taxes on the private sector to pick up the slack. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25293


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2013, 11:42:03 AM »

It's called accountability, something neither Obama nor you seem to grasp. The Patriot Act is credited to/blamed on Bush, FIRST AND FOREMOST.

Obama signed int into law. It's his, period, especially when he THREATENED TO VET attempts to stop it.

The Republicans aren't governing? PLEASE!!! OBAMA is supposed to be governing; he's the president. But, he, like you, is a coward. He wants to have everyone else do the heavy lifting and to take credit for it, as long as it makes him look good.

When the policies end up being utter disasters, he runs, hides, then tries to blame everyone else for what HE approved and HE signed into law. And, numbskulls like you buy it: hook, line, and sinker.

The rest of the country thought they wouldn't be affected by Obama's tax hikes and only those EEEEVVVVIILL rich people would get soaked. Now, long after it's too late, THEY'RE THE ONES whining about their checks being smaller and their jobs going away.

good, we can put you on record as giving sole blame for the Patriot Act to Bush

I think everyone who voted for it is to blame but obviously you don't blame any Dems for it and you believe it solely the responsibility of Bush

that's insane of course but at least you're consistent

I've already explained why Obama would veto removing the sequester.
I understand that your childlike mind can't understand why he would do that but I've explained it in a simple enough way that most any adult can understand it.  I assume there is no point is trying to explain it any further

just curious, I assume we can blame Bush solely for all other legislation he signed.   I have never seen any Repub who is a brave as you in blaming Bush for EVERYTHING and absolving all Dems who helped him along the way

Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25293


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2013, 11:47:50 AM »

The reason austerity failed in Europe is because they did not lower taxes to compensate for cuts in spending. 

You have to lower govt spending and lower taxes on the private sector to pick up the slack. 

source

the IMF blames both spending cuts and tax increases for the failure of austerity measures in Europe

what is your source for the claim that it was caused by solely by tax increases

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-04/imf-officials-we-were-wrong-about-austerity.html
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16027


Getbig!


« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2013, 12:03:10 PM »

good, we can put you on record as giving sole blame for the Patriot Act to Bush

I don't "blame" Bush for the Patriot Act, because I don't necessarily see it as something evil and terrible.



I think everyone who voted for it is to blame but obviously you don't blame any Dems for it and you believe it solely the responsibility of Bush

that's insane of course but at least you're consistent

Voting for it doesn't matter, in the long run (in terms of ownership). At the end of the day, it's the PRESIDENT who signs it into law (unless his veto gets overruled, which is rare).



I've already explained why Obama would veto removing the sequester.
I understand that your childlike mind can't understand why he would do that but I've explained it in a simple enough way that most any adult can understand it.  I assume there is no point is trying to explain it any further

just curious, I assume we can blame Bush solely for all other legislation he signed.   I have never seen any Repub who is a brave as you in blaming Bush for EVERYTHING and absolving all Dems who helped him along the way



It appears your childlike mind can't grasp the difference between "FIRST AND FOREMOST" and SOLE. I never claimed Obama was solely responsible for the sequester.

YOU made that stupid claim, in you pea-brained attempt to absolve Obama from ANY responsibility for it, putting it all on the GOP.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8846


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2013, 12:06:28 PM »

Obama is never to blame for anything, EVER! 


* 404431_489822601054907_623003668_n.jpg (41.13 KB, 480x384 - viewed 58 times.)

* 14013_471291206258383_123426213_n.jpg (30.26 KB, 480x408 - viewed 59 times.)

* 558076_489540721081979_591952247_n.jpg (29.36 KB, 421x480 - viewed 62 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25293


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2013, 02:57:26 PM »

I don't "blame" Bush for the Patriot Act, because I don't necessarily see it as something evil and terrible.

Voting for it doesn't matter, in the long run (in terms of ownership). At the end of the day, it's the PRESIDENT who signs it into law (unless his veto gets overruled, which is rare).

It appears your childlike mind can't grasp the difference between "FIRST AND FOREMOST" and SOLE. I never claimed Obama was solely responsible for the sequester.

YOU made that stupid claim, in you pea-brained attempt to absolve Obama from ANY responsibility for it, putting it all on the GOP.

jumpin jeebus you're dumb

the sequester is OWNED by the parties who made the deal.... period

Obama has no reason to acquiescence

If Repubs don't want spending cuts (and you can bet your ass they don't) then they will negotiate

if they don't then they and the Dems (and us) will live with the consequences and we'll all get to see which party suffers the political fallout

I know you believe all the blame will fall on the Dems but we also know your perception of how these things will go down with the public is pretty f'd up (no need to deny this as we all have seen the proof leading up to the last election)
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8846


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2013, 03:19:00 PM »

3 hour airport security waits under sequester

February 20, 2013 | 3:32 pm | Modified: February 20, 2013 at 3:35 pm
190Comments





Paul Bedard

Washington Secrets
The Washington Examiner
✉ Email Author✉ Newsletter SignupE@SecretsBedardDPaul on FB
 

Popular in Politics

13 hour airport security waits under sequester
2The GOP’s astonishingly bad message on sequester cuts
3In first speech as Secretary of State, Kerry complains about lack of funding for Department
4Flashback: Pentagon press feared Ron Paul victory would lead to layoffs
5*Video* Remember when President Obama supported the sequester cuts?
 

The travel industry is warning that airport security line wait times could stretch to three hours after mandatory funding cuts kick in March 1.
 
Top congressional aides and the U.S. Travel Association tell Secrets that under the looming budget sequester, an hour will be added to security waits at the nation's largest and busiest airports due to necessary Transportation Security Administration and U.S. Custom and Border Protection furloughs required to meet the funding cuts.
 
And once travelers pop out of those security lines they will likely face even longer waits since cuts in Federal Aviation Administration staff will result in reduced air traffic control and longer delays.
 
Customs furloughs will hit especially hard in international passenger areas where check-ins for those returning to or visiting the United States can experience two hour waits already. "Wait times getting back into the country projected at three or more hours," said a travel industry source. A Democratic review of sequester cuts added, "At the busiest airports, the increase in peak airport wait times would regularly reach three or more hours. These delays would dramatically impact air travel, potentially causing thousands of missed passenger connections daily, and negatively impact our economy."
 

Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

















 
"The indiscriminate sequester cuts threaten to derail the travel-led recovery," warned Roger Dow, president of the U.S. Travel Association. "There is absolutely no excuse for travelers in one of the world's most advanced nations to suffer through a travel process that wastes their precious time and resources," he said.
 
To press Congress to restore funding, the travel association said it is creating a mobile messaging campaign to let delayed travelers text complaints to their House and Senate representatives.
 
"It is time for Washington to solve problems rather than create potentially devastating new crises. The 14.4 million Americans whose jobs depend on travel, the two million Americans who fly each day and the millions more who take to the roads and rails to drive the American economy are counting on our elected officials to deliver results that keep our nation competitive and attractive to travelers around the globe," said Dow.
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25293


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #35 on: February 20, 2013, 03:53:32 PM »

3 hour airport security waits under sequester

February 20, 2013 | 3:32 pm | Modified: February 20, 2013 at 3:35 pm
190Comments





Paul Bedard

Washington Secrets
The Washington Examiner
✉ Email Author✉ Newsletter SignupE@SecretsBedardDPaul on FB
 

Popular in Politics

13 hour airport security waits under sequester
2The GOP’s astonishingly bad message on sequester cuts
3In first speech as Secretary of State, Kerry complains about lack of funding for Department
4Flashback: Pentagon press feared Ron Paul victory would lead to layoffs
5*Video* Remember when President Obama supported the sequester cuts?
 

The travel industry is warning that airport security line wait times could stretch to three hours after mandatory funding cuts kick in March 1.
 
Top congressional aides and the U.S. Travel Association tell Secrets that under the looming budget sequester, an hour will be added to security waits at the nation's largest and busiest airports due to necessary Transportation Security Administration and U.S. Custom and Border Protection furloughs required to meet the funding cuts.
 
And once travelers pop out of those security lines they will likely face even longer waits since cuts in Federal Aviation Administration staff will result in reduced air traffic control and longer delays.
 
Customs furloughs will hit especially hard in international passenger areas where check-ins for those returning to or visiting the United States can experience two hour waits already. "Wait times getting back into the country projected at three or more hours," said a travel industry source. A Democratic review of sequester cuts added, "At the busiest airports, the increase in peak airport wait times would regularly reach three or more hours. These delays would dramatically impact air travel, potentially causing thousands of missed passenger connections daily, and negatively impact our economy."
 

Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

















 
"The indiscriminate sequester cuts threaten to derail the travel-led recovery," warned Roger Dow, president of the U.S. Travel Association. "There is absolutely no excuse for travelers in one of the world's most advanced nations to suffer through a travel process that wastes their precious time and resources," he said.
 
To press Congress to restore funding, the travel association said it is creating a mobile messaging campaign to let delayed travelers text complaints to their House and Senate representatives.
 
"It is time for Washington to solve problems rather than create potentially devastating new crises. The 14.4 million Americans whose jobs depend on travel, the two million Americans who fly each day and the millions more who take to the roads and rails to drive the American economy are counting on our elected officials to deliver results that keep our nation competitive and attractive to travelers around the globe," said D
ow.


Hey Dipshit, you're in favor of massive spending cuts....remember

so stop with the phony complaining about the potential result of those cuts and also why not spend and extra 3 seconds on your cut and paste jobs next time and leave out all the superfluous crap
Report to moderator   Logged
MCWAY
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16027


Getbig!


« Reply #36 on: February 20, 2013, 04:58:02 PM »

jumpin jeebus you're dumb

the sequester is OWNED by the parties who made the deal.... period

Obama has no reason to acquiescence

WRONG AGAIN!!

If the president doesn't sign it into law, it doesn't matter who makes the deal, unless they can override a presidential veto (You should have learned that from Schoolhouse Rock, as a kid). OBAMA SIGNED IT INTO LAW, Einstein!! It's his; he owns it. Your obsession with trying to absolve him of any responsibility is beyond laughable. Then again, considering how cowardly you are, that's not a surprise.

Obama signed it; he agreed to the deal; HE OWNS IT, genius!!



If Repubs don't want spending cuts (and you can bet your ass they don't) then they will negotiate

if they don't then they and the Dems (and us) will live with the consequences and we'll all get to see which party suffers the political fallout

I know you believe all the blame will fall on the Dems but we also know your perception of how these things will go down with the public is pretty f'd up (no need to deny this as we all have seen the proof leading up to the last election)
 

Who said anything about all the blame falling on the Dems? OH, NOBODY, except you, yet again in your boneheaded attempt to exempt Obama from responsibility.

He's the president; he signed it into law. He happens to be a Democrat. He has the forture of a felatting media, who (like you) will break their necks to make excuses for him.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8846


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #37 on: February 21, 2013, 01:34:12 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNBhue9OMTY" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNBhue9OMTY</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!