HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Coburn, McCaskill Say Seq...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:08 AM

Coburn, McCaskill Say Sequester Likely To Kick In

Source: TPM

Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) both said Sunday the sequester will probably go into effect on March 1 since a deal between Democrats and Republicans to avoid the automatic spending cuts is unlikely.

"It will kick in," Coburn said on Fox News Sunday.

"Unless the Republicans are willing to compromise and do a balanced approach, I think it will kick in," McCaskill said.

-30-

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/coburn-mccaskill-say-sequester-likely-to-kick-in



Coburn: Hagel Will Be Limited At Pentagon Due To Lack Of GOP Support

PEMA LEVY 9:33 AM EST, SUNDAY FEBRUARY 24, 2013
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) argued Sunday that if confirmed as defense secretary, Chuck Hagel will be limited in his ability to do his job because of the dozens of Senate Republicans who will have voted against his nomination.

"He doesn't have the confidence of the vast majority of the Senate, which weakens him in that position," Coburn said on "Fox News Sunday," acknowledging that Hagel is likely to be confirmed this week. "In modern times, we haven't had one defense secretary that's had more than three votes against him, and you're gonna have 40 votes against him, or 35 votes. And that sends a signal to our allies as well as our foes that he does not have broad support in the U.S. Congress, which limits his ability to carry out his job."

-30-

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/coburn-hagel-will-be-limited-at-pentagon-due

-------------------------------------------

Coburn: No Gun Bill That Includes Record-Keeping Of Sales

PEMA LEVY 9:41 AM EST, SUNDAY FEBRUARY 24, 2013
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) said Sunday that a bipartisan group of Senators working on a deal to improve the nation's background check system are not very close to a deal and that Democrats will kill the legislation if they insist on including government records of gun sales.

"I don't think we're that close to a deal," Coburn said on "Fox News Sunday. "And there absolutely will not be record keeping on legitimate, law-abiding gun owners in this country."

-30-

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/coburn-no-gun-bill-that-includes-record-keeping

47 replies, 4619 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 47 replies Author Time Post
Reply Coburn, McCaskill Say Sequester Likely To Kick In (Original post)
DonViejo Feb 2013 OP
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #1
mac56 Feb 2013 #2
DCBob Feb 2013 #3
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #5
SIBIndi Feb 2013 #8
Herlong Feb 2013 #16
cstanleytech Feb 2013 #18
Herlong Feb 2013 #20
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #21
cstanleytech Feb 2013 #23
Cha Feb 2013 #25
Herlong Feb 2013 #29
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #30
Herlong Feb 2013 #31
Herlong Feb 2013 #32
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #39
Herlong Feb 2013 #40
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #44
DCBob Feb 2013 #26
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #28
Kablooie Feb 2013 #13
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #22
Herlong Feb 2013 #34
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #37
Herlong Feb 2013 #41
Herlong Feb 2013 #36
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #38
Herlong Feb 2013 #33
sendero Feb 2013 #14
forestpath Feb 2013 #15
LineLineReply 1
otherone Feb 2013 #17
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #4
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #6
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #7
On the Road Feb 2013 #9
xtraxritical Feb 2013 #11
cstanleytech Feb 2013 #19
DFW Feb 2013 #10
Inuca Feb 2013 #27
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #35
Inuca Feb 2013 #47
DFW Feb 2013 #46
Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #45
SemperEadem Feb 2013 #12
John2 Feb 2013 #24
PatrynXX Feb 2013 #42
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2013 #43

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:19 AM

1. The "boy who cried wolf" gets bitten by the wolf

This is about the 20th time in 4 years where politicians have tried to manufacture a crisis for the purpose of playing the Shock Doctrine card. The public is sick of that and there is no outrage that will save the day.

Make the damn cuts and then we'll see where we REALLY are. If we honestly can't keep the parks open, then we will take a look at that. If we truly can't get out Medicare checks, then we'll look at adjustments. I don't believe any of that crap. And if this is what it take to finally end some of our reckless defense spending, then so be it.

Grover Norquist is famous for saying he wants to "shrink government so small you can drown it in a bathtub." It is time for a movement to shrink military spending so small they will stop bullying the rest of the world, making Americans less safe as a result.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:31 AM

2. This.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:41 AM

3. Its going to get ugly because the cuts dont allow for wiggle room.

It will affect everyone. I suspect you will be back on this board crying even louder for someone to do something once you are personally affected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:50 AM

5. So what?

First of all, any bureaucrat worth his salt knows how to game the system to move money around. The Pentagon moves all sorts of its expenses under CIA budgets that are only seen by a handful of Senators, for example.

And let's get real. We're talking about very small cuts. $85 billion on a total budget of almost $4 trillion. THAT IS NOTHING -- a 3% cut. All this fear mongering in bullshit.

Yes, it is a blunt instrument, and maybe Congress will have to come in after a few weeks and authorize a few intra-agency budget transfers here and there to smooth things out. But really, this is just a bunch of noise about very little substance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 11:07 AM

8. Agreed

My payroll tax holiday just went away....2% increase.....ask the govt to decrease 2-3% and it becomes a "crisis of epic proportions".....ridiculous. And to top it they float out worst case scenarios of air traffic control cutting back and our defense being crippled....I'm sure the most critical items will never be considered if cuts are forced....all propoganda

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SIBIndi (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:23 PM

16. What's propaganda?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #16)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:43 PM

18. Fox News, in fact they fought for the right in court to lie to viewers and won. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 03:01 PM

20. Ahem.

 

SIBIndi (7 posts)
8. Agreed

My payroll tax holiday just went away....2% increase.....ask the govt to decrease 2-3% and it becomes a "crisis of epic proportions".....ridiculous. And to top it they float out worst case scenarios of air traffic control cutting back and our defense being crippled....I'm sure the most critical items will never be considered if cuts are forced....all propoganda

****If I loose my job March 1, what propaganda?****

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 03:02 PM

21. There is propaganda coming from the administration on this too.

Last edited Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:03 PM - Edit history (1)

It is all bullcrap. It is all posturing.

I'd say Obama is propagandizing this more than the Republicans, mainly because he can. He has the bully pulpit. And he can direct the various agencies to do their "Chicken Little" impressions. He is just trying to frame the debate that will come after the sequester kicks in. Typical Beltway stuff.

Search for "sequester impact" under Google News. You will see that the majority of hits are from DC-area sources, many of which are concerned with how this will impact the pirates that have their offices just outside the Beltway. So the Government gravy train may slow down a little for these (mostly) defense contractors? Cry me a river. Again, it is less than a 3% cut of the Federal budget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 03:08 PM

23. Chill out, I didnt say I disagreed with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:33 PM

25. You have no proof of anything.. you're just throwing

accusations around because you can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 06:51 PM

29. Truth will out, BlueStreak

 

Truth will out. I will loose my job on March 1. Truth will out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #29)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 06:55 PM

30. I don't deny that this is a big power struggle

And that a lot of people may be used as pawns and be hurt in the process. Again, I point out that the money in question is less than 3% of the total government expenditures. To hear the news reports and the propagandists, you would think we are talking about a 40% reduction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #30)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:19 PM

31. What's wrong with doing what's right for the American people

 

instead of gaining ground in some mythical power struggle.

After all, when we loose our jobs, who will they get to vote for them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #31)


Response to Herlong (Reply #31)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:27 PM

39. I believe Obama thinks he is doing what is good for the people

He is trying to negotiate a deal that will attack some of the biggest abuses of our system by the 0.1%. But he needs leverage to do this. The threats of massive layoffs, I believe, are more bluff than reality. But obviously even with a 3% cut, there will be some impact. I wish the impact could be targeted in areas that deserve to be cut the most, but the sequester doesn't permit that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #39)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:33 PM

40. I believe Obama thinks he is doing what is good for the people

 

BlueStreak

When was the last time you were re-elected president of the United States Of America

Please review the history of the debt crisis. Please. Please. Please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #40)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 09:47 PM

44. I don't get your point. Please explain.

If you are asserting that Obama or any Democrat always acts in the best interests of the average American, we'll have to differ on that one. There are just too many examples where that is not the case. But as corporate-owned and corporate-funded Presidents go, Obama is far better than most have been recently. It is a difficult balancing act -- serving the real masters while trying to make some moves that represent real progress for the nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:51 PM

26. Your arguments are almost word for word from what I heard on a conservative talk radio station..

on my way to work last week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #26)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 06:39 PM

28. And your point is ... ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 01:05 PM

13. If the sequester doesn't have much effect, the GOP will gain in influence.

And Obama will lose after warning so strongly how this will be so disastrous.

The result will probably be for the GOP simply double down on even more draconian cuts in the future.

So the Democreats will be focussing on all the horrible things happening and the Republicans will talk about how nothing has really changed at all.

The actual effect that we can feel in our daily lives will be the deciding factor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 03:03 PM

22. Which is to say that Obama has an incentive to make it hurt as much as possible

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #22)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:34 PM

34. How so?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #34)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:20 PM

37. He wants to push the GOP into doing the big deal that includes elimination of abusive loopholes

He was hoping that nobody would really be willing to go through with the sequester. That appears to have little leverage, so his fallback position is to make it painful enough to force some public outcry. He wants to drive the GOP to the bargaining table. It is not clear this will actually happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #37)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:35 PM

41. How can you know what is in his mind?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #22)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:38 PM

36. Can you tell me why this is happening?

 

Speculation is bullshit. Why is this happening?

Detail, links. No speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #36)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:21 PM

38. See #37

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:32 PM

33. Armed Forces Network

 

Last edited Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Rich Limbo. And his daily word on AFN. Has anyone dared to listen to the fat basterd? What the hell is wrong with Democrats? Sequester is not our baby!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:09 PM

14. If you think this is another non-event..

... you are seriously mistaken. Across the board cuts will results in mandatory furloughs and layoffs across all sectors of government. Our already crippled-by-low-demand economy will take a serious hit.

This is not fun and games and not "theater" in that there will be REAL results if this happens and they will not take a long time to manifest themselves.

I don't think a deal will be reached by the end of the month, but a month or so later would be soon enough to avoid the majority of the pain. Unfortunately what I more or less expect is that congress will pass a bill substantially eliminating the military's cuts, with DEMOCRATS being just as ready to do so as REPUKES, giving us the worst of both worlds.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #14)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:21 PM

15. Exactly. Thousands of middle/working class federal employees will be devastated.

 

Of course, they are nothing but pawns to congress and the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:36 PM

17. 1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:42 AM

4. How does the fact that Senate Repubs don't like Hagel "weaken" him at the Pentagon?

This is the new argument they've been trotting out--he'll win confirmation, but he's "damaged goods". Like they can't resist one final back stab. As long as Hagel can pick up a pen and sign his name to budget cuts (hopefully affecting OK and TX), he'll be doing his job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 11:08 AM

9. The Opposition to Hagel

really makes the GOP look deranged. They are just making it worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to On the Road (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 11:33 AM

11. "Look"? They are!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #11)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 02:45 PM

19. +infinity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 11:29 AM

10. Hagel will be "limited?" By whom?

Have Clarence Thomas or Sam Alito been limited in their voting a straight reactionary line on the Supreme Court because there was so much opposition to their nominations?

I thought not.

That's how much Chuck Hagel will be limited as Secretary of Defense. If he's confirmed as SecDef, then he's confirmed, whether he gets 51 votes or 91. Just because there are more reactionaries in the Senate than there usually are does not mean that Hagel will have to ask their permission every time he wants to enter the Pentagon. Coburn can yell and scream all he wants, just like we progressives did after the confirmations of Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito. Confirmed is confirmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 06:36 PM

27. I hope it's not going to happen, but

it's not the same thing as a justice. Once a jutice is confirmed, that's it, for life. A SoD still needs Congress and still has to come before Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #27)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:35 PM

35. What could they do to him, though--not give him the money he asks for?

I've never watched a presentation before the SASC, but I assume it's all about budget. I find it hard to believe they would deny him funding requests. They love giving the Pentagon our money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #35)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:36 PM

47. Not only about the money

Back in the days, Petreaus went both before SASC and the SFRC (foreign relations). I assume that as a SoD he will also have to defend policies and such. OTOH I agree, money issues are probably the only ones for which he will have to "play nice"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #27)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:26 AM

46. Right, but

If the same Republicans who voted against him conduct an obstruction campaign against him, they can be shown, with a little clever Luntz-style propaganda of our own, to be anti-military and anti-Defense--something they tend to shy away from big time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 10:59 PM

45. Even better, the minority republican caucus is "the vast majority".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 12:05 PM

12. I will totally blame the congressional rethugs for this

And all their talk about what "the American People" want... let's face it: "The American People" they're talking about are corporations and since their boy, mittiot, gave them permission to regard them as people, THAT is who they are talking about. They're not talking about all those people who are going to be impacted by this bullshit about to land on them. They are talking about billionares who do not wish to pay their fair share of taxes and who have the thug party in their back pockets to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SemperEadem (Reply #12)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:13 PM

24. I only see one solution

 

and it is somewhat similar to yours. I think we have no alternate but to suffer short term pain to cut out this cancer. I think the problem is mainly an extremist Republican Party ever since the attempted impeachment of President Clinton. The Electorate went right along with the Policies of the Republican Party over a decade since they gained control after the Clinton Administration. Our fiscal house was in good shape after Clinton repaired it and you do have to give some credit to Bush senior after he reluctantly raised taxes.

All of the Bush tax cuts have not been gotten rid of because the middle class was hurting and being squeezed. The top percent did not suffer at all over the last decade, but instead thrived. Everybody else's spending power froze or declined because the focus over the last decade was relieving tax burden, mostly at the top, for freeing up capital to create jobs.

Take Mitt Romney as an example. He didn't create jobs but took that investment to create more wealth for himself and his family. You can apply that to most of the top percent. What I've also notice are the number of mergers people at the top ,sold out for millions of dollars ,to enrich themselves and their immediate family. This to me reduces competition and allow the people that bought these companies set their own prices on goods and services because they are the only game in town. The NCAA is a good example of this. This strategy does not focus on jobs but more wealth. Supply and demand does not decline, but prices go up because of supply and demand.

I don't think spending or entitlements are the problem more so than the greed by a few people gobbling up all the resources. If they own the goods, they get to set market rates. This is where you can look at Health care costs or insurance. It even applies to the banking industry and all the financial markets. The people at the very top own all the goods and services. The only competitor left is the Government. You get rid of your nearest competitor, then market prices will increase. For exmple a union is when people with common interests form groups to increase their bargaining power. This applies to corporations and businesses also. It works both ways. This also decreases competition when everyone is on the same page also. What people need to do is realize what better serves their interests. The Republican party does not serve the interests of the middle class or poor. The House needs to be turned over in the next election cycle even if people suffer in the short term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:56 PM

42. Hagel will be just fine because the American people trust him

fuck the senate conservatives.. who are no longer conservatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 08:57 PM

43. Coburn's a twit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread