[SkyPilot]

So much for the erstwhile GOP concern about gutting national security. And who cares if the sequester’s cuts leave entitlements and other Democratic pet causes, such as Pell grants, unscathed?

Way to go GOP!

[rbg81]

So much for the erstwhile GOP concern about gutting national security. And who cares if the sequester’s cuts leave entitlements and other Democratic pet causes, such as Pell grants, unscathed?

---

Yet another reason the current GOP leadership has me scratching my head. When they cut defense, they are mauling their own base. But, of course, they leave Pell grants and other entitlements intact because to do otherwise would be “mean”. Who is the moron who comes up with these self-destructive strategies? Its either a clueless Republican or a Democrat in deep cover.

[Venturer]

The faces above should be considered a Poster for the GOP.

It is certainly what we have seen from the GOP for the last 4 years or more.

Whatever Obama wants in the sequestration is what Obama will get. We do not have two parties any more, we have the hard left as democrats and the easy left as Republicans.

None of our politicians in Washington seems to care about the country any more.The Only care is to get re-elected by passing out the goodies.

[babygene]

"The sequester would force the Pentagon to reduce its planned spending by 16.3  percent between now and Sept. 30, and to do so in an undifferentiated, across-the-board manner." I believe this cut is appropriate, along with similar cuts in ALL other government spending. It would be nice if such cuts could be targeted on a macro level, but that would take some intelligence on the part of our "leaders", which they lack... IMHO, the only way to do it is across the board cuts.

[bert]

I think sequestration is good.

Sequestration is the only way to get spending cuts. Spending cuts are not going to happen otherwise.

There will be necessary sequestered projects added back minus the marginally necessary or completely unnecessary pork. Keep soldiers and sailors, eliminate the rail gun.

[jpsb]

Adm. Mike Mullen, has famously said that the single biggest threat to U.S. national security is not Al Qaeda, China, Iran or North Korea. It’s the national debt.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Meanwhile bring back US jobs.

We cannot fund a huge defense establishment with a shrinking export machine.

BRING BACK US JOBS.

Now.

[asinclair]

The authors of sequestration, which was supposed to scare Congress into agreement on an alternative, did not anticipate the GOP’s postelection maneuvering. The party is abandoning its unpopular threat to block a debt-ceiling increase — and using the threat of the sequester instead. The goal, apparently, is still more spending cuts without any tax increases, a deal Obama properly refuses and which is less sensible for the country than is a combination of entitlement cuts and higher revenue through closing tax loopholes, which Obama might accept.

GOP's post-election maneuvering? How about the Democrats' multiple instances of post-agreement maneuvering when they got their "tax increases now" and tomorrow never comes on the promised spending cuts? Not even spending increase cuts.

So, now, for the first time in too many years, we have a situation where the Executive actually has to cut down on the spending increases. And it's cuts across the board, all discretionary spending, not just "targeted" against specific programs. Obama's people will actually have to do their job and figure out what's meat and what's gristle. Now, not later. Everywhere, not just in selected "safe" programs that the Democratic base doesn't care about.

About military spending: Part of the problem is that the practice of military force has morphed from throwing men at the problem to one of relying on technology to wage war. The various States are (supposedly) not equipped to do the R&D necessary to improve war technology. This is one thing our Founders could not have forseen. Think the Manhattan Project, and it's effect on World War II. (Then think Dr. Strangelove as a potential consequence for these technological "advances".)

And we've thrown a ton of money at blue-sky (and black-sky) ideas for waging war. Some of them have proved to be somewhat effective; others have remained black holes for money and brainpower. Trying to identify the latter is an interesting exercise in crystal-ball gazing...and then one realizes that some of the most inane military ideas go on to be civilian-sector successes. (cf http://xkcd.com)

Is sequestration a bad thing? Anything that stops the unbridled flow of money we don't have to people who don't contribute a single thing (other than babies and fat backsides) to the society as a whole is a good thing. The idea is that we are supposed to work together, all of us, to the common good. That's the whole point of the Union. People tend to forget that.

I lay claim to no label: Conservative, Progressing, Democrat, Republican. So my ideas and beliefs don't flow in any particular ideological channel:

• I'm not against charity, I'm against charity at the point of a gun.
• I'm not against gun regulation, I'm against central gun regulation.
• (Do you want to make firearms safety classes a requirement for children? I do -- how many children will not die by doing something they don't understand, if they are exposed to it before they pull the trigger? If it works for sex education...)
• If you want to limit firearms available to citizens, then limit the firearms available to all citizens, equally, regardless of occupation or association with government. That includes military personnel not in a battlefield situation. Ditto ammo.
• If, DHS, you really think that scissors are an effective weapon against the armed lawless, then turn back all that ammo you stockpiled and get millions of "the weapon of your choice" instead. Put your stockpiles where your mouth is, Big Sis.
• If no schools can have firearms in them, then let's apply that to all schools equally. Including schools that have First Children in them. Or children of US Representatives and Senators. Laws should apply to all citizens, not just those that don't have power.

We, all of us, are supposed to be equal under the law. Let's practice what our civics teachers have been preaching all these years.

[ex-snook]

Wars should have a surtax to pay for them.