[sunmars]

So who were the 3 republicans who voted against spending cuts?

and its actually %100 billion according to Cantor not 60 as the WApo puts it.

[dalereed]

Those aren’t cuts, they are tiny reductions in budget increases!

A real cut would be elimination of programs and firing of at least half of the federal employees.

[Thermalseeker]

Sorry, but “slashing” $60 billion out of a $3.5 trillion budget at a time when we are accumulating debt at a rate of $6 million a minute is hardly “dramatic”.......

[Soul Seeker]

Whatever.

They promise 100b which is small as it is. They couldn’t keep that promise because the establishment betrayed everyone so they can go to hell if they tink I give a damn about these cuts.

[catfish1957]

5%????? 5%???????

That is a travesty. Kind of like telling a family to give up a hobby to reduce their budget. Our own GOP did not do what we ask them to do.

[Gipper08]

This is a case where the POST is more accurate than Cantor. The GOP is using smoke and mirrors to appear to be cutting more than they are.

[Le Chien Rouge]

$60 billion in deficit savings is like throwing a couple of deck chairs off the Titanic.

It’s still sinking.

[K-Stater]

In a 235-189 vote, House approves dramatic cuts in federal spending.

A less than 2% reduction in spending qualifies as 'dramatic'? We really are in sad shape then. And let's not forget this is barely half of the cuts that the GOP had been talking about a few short months ago.

[BobL]

“So who were the 3 republicans who voted against spending cuts? “

---

From the article: “The three Republicans voting against the measure were Reps. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Walter Jones (N.C.) and John Campbell (Calif.)”

This is where it gets fun. We still kicked butt in that vote, and the RINOs didn’t have a prayer in stopping it. It’s certainly nice to have a large majority in the House.

[tiredoflaundry]

In a rare early morning weekend vote, the House approved an aggressive plan Saturday to eliminate dozens of federal programs and offices while slashing agency budgets by as much as 40 percent, drawing out more than $60 billion in deficit savings.

Anyone with half a brain knows this is a very small cut to the budget. But, I think that is what the Reps. wanted. *O* is already said the "V" word, and the left is getting all twisted in the panties over it. If the Reps play their cards right, this could work well for them at election time. Even the smallest of cuts is unacceptable for the Dems, meanwhile the country is demanding cuts.

[tobyhill]

“The revised bill added more reductions, and cut $100 billion from Obama’s request for the current year.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/19/gop-controlled-house-passes-spending-cut/

I'm so confused! Did they cut $60 billion or $100 billion?

[org.whodat]

No way in he’ll would I accept Mr Tarp Cantors word on anything, he even lies about his support of TARP.

[screaminsunshine]

What a joke. They “SLASHED” 60 Billion. That does it. WTF! We are wasting our time with Republicans. I am not going to be like the Black base of the Democrat Party. Ferget it!

[EternalVigilance]

$60 billion in deficit savings

The debt is now increasing at a rate of almost $5 billion per hour.

We went further in the hole while they were talking about it.

[org.whodat]

This crap is not attached to a continuing resolution, so it is total one hundred percent, spin for the fools in fly over land.

[Hoodat]

Dramatic? Hardly. These cuts represent only 4% of the deficit. What about the remaining 96%? That needs to be cut as well.

[paulycy]

[wastedyears]

They call that small a number dramatic? I consider a trillion to be dramatic.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

they need to cut hundreds of billions not tens of billions

[mewykwistmas]

What’s dramatic is the headline and their lack of giving a rat’s @ss:

Budget financed with borrowed money /cuts:

3,700,000,000,000.00
60,000,000,000.00

[newzjunkey]

Cantor is a liar. It’s probably not even the $60 billion WAPo claims.