but he's been seen wearing a sequined tutu and marching in their annual parade.
Besoeker, as Maxwell Smart would say Ah! the old tutu trick.
But if his name is "Rodger" and he is married to a Muslim and a convert (mandatory if you want to marry a Muslim woman in a Muslim ceremony) and uses a prayer beads, then he should have a lot of cognitive dissonance when he puts on his tutu.
Certainly no shortage of "cognitive dissonance" within this administration. More sordid intrigues and backstabbing buggery than Downton Abbey with a flashing NO VACANCY sign. The faster we drive away from Albion, the closer we get!
The Obama definition of balance: he increases spending while Congress raises taxes to partially cover it.
[An Nahar] U.S. President Barack Obama I inhaled. That was the point... urged Congress Saturday to find a balanced approach to deficit reduction, warning that steep budget cuts known as "the sequester" would hurt the economy and threaten thousands of American jobs.
"If the sequester is allowed to go forward, thousands of Americans who work in fields like national security, education or clean energy are likely to be laid off," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address.
"All our economic progress could be put at risk," he added.
The cuts, which are due to take effect on March 1, would also affect U.S. military readiness, said the president.
"As our military leaders have made clear, changes like this affect our ability to respond to threats in an unstable part of the world," Obama pointed out.
The sequester was agreed by the president and Congress in 2011 to be so punishing that it would force Washington's warring political factions to forge an agreement on a way to cut the U.S. budget deficit.
But amid partisan gridlock, no agreement on cutting the deficit has been reached and cuts due in March will slash defense spending by $55 billion and non-defense discretionary spending by $27 billion this year.
On Friday, the White House issued a doom-laden survey of the impact of sequestration.
It said 10,000 teacher jobs were at risk, food inspections could stop, 373,000 mental health patients would lose treatment and prosecutors could be furloughed.
The FBI would have 1,000 fewer officers, small business loans would be cut by $540 million, and around 600,000 women and kiddies could lose government-funded emergency nutrition, according to the White House.
"The good news is, there's another option," Obama said.
He reminded his audience that two months ago, the White House and Congress faced a similar prospect of deep cuts and tax hikes, known as the "fiscal cliff".
On that occasion, said the president, Democrats and Republicans managed to come together and make "responsible cuts and manageable changes to our tax code" to pull back from the brink.
"This time, Congress should pass a similar set of balanced cuts and close more tax loopholes until they can find a way to replace the sequester with a smarter, longer-term solution," Obama said.
[MEDIAITE] On Fox News Sunday, House Minority Leader Nancy San Fran Nan Pelosi Congresswoman-for-Life from the the Socialist paradise of San Francisco Bay Area, born into a family of politicians. Formerly Speaker of the House, but it's not her fault they lost. Really. Noted for her heavily botoxed grimace... (D-CA) told Fox News Channel anchor Chris Wallace that the ongoing debate about a balanced approach to deficit reduction should not place undue emphasis on spending cuts. She said that it is "almost a false argument" to say that Washington has a "spending problem." Pelosi noted that there have been "plenty of spending cuts," and budgetary priorities like education and food safety must be protected.
"Sequestration is a bad idea all around," Pelosi began.
"The fact is we've had plenty of spending cuts, $1.6 trillion in the Budget Control Act. What we need is growth," Pelosi said. "Slashing spending indiscriminately, she said, would hurt growth prospects for the U.S. economy."
"What we do need is more revenue and more cuts," she added. "What I would like to see that is a big, balanced, bold [budget] proposal. Short of that, we must do something to avoid the sequester."
Wallace asked Pelosi for her thoughts on House Speaker John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner's ... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans... (R-OH) insistence this week that Washington must "deal with its spending problem."
A friend of mine was pulled before his bosses due to his fondness for "long lunches"
The first question they asked him was if he had a drinking problem?
No,he said; "only when I'm broke"
So no, it's not a false argument to say that Washington has a "spending problem." especially when it's broke
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
I got a nose bleed reading this article.
For all of those who point at Bush's last four as the real reason for the recession, just remember WHO was SOH and WHAT party controlled both the HOR and the Senate...geez, the abbreviation for House of Representatives is so appropriate for them these days
Posted by: Bill Clinton ||
It's A 'False Argument To Say We Have A Spending Problem'
It's a LIE to say (As you do) That we DON'T.
Gotcha, or do lies NOT count, well if you're in power, I guess they don't (Until election time)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
#6 The sad|scary part is that people _believe_ her.....
It's sad to think of who put her in office--particularly if they think she makes any sense. One would think she has been hittin the California mind bender medical marijuana or Thai Stick before the interview.
Sooner or later the global banking system is gonna crash. With this kind of denial in positions of leadership, and outrageous trading practices by banks and hedge funds, the outcome is pretty much guaranteed. Everybody still thinks they've got their own place at the betting table ... but no-one wants to admit that their checkbook is empty.
A crash may not happen this year ... but it's gonna happen. I hope that people like Bernanke and Pelosi get pelted with eggs when it does go down.
I agree Raider, & this woman is a pathological liar; as are many in her profession. She can be comforted by the fact that 20% of the electorate will be so stupid as to believe it. Another 20% will be too apathetic to care, and the last 20% will be the die-hard statists that don't care because they're good w/having future generations be tax serfs. The sad fact is this - neither side really wants to cut, and it might be too late anyhow. Bring on the cliff, the sooner, the better. Or just shut down congress to essential DOD functions to protect the country from outside attack. Although I think our internal stupidity has already runined us.
..the riots will be in the dark blue disarmed urban areas. Those beyond the outer belt won't have much of a problem other than keeping the refugees confined to the interstate on their way to the next deep blue urban area. Just tell them the 'free' stuff is over there ->
[THEHILL] The president of the American Federation of Government Employees says a one-percent increase is "absolutely unconscionable." He saw what the Chicago Teachers Union got...
The head of the largest federal employee union said Saturday that President B.O.'s proposal to increase pay for federal employees by 1 percent was "absolutely unconscionable" and "simply not enough."
"It is not enough to allow federal employees to make up lost ground from two-plus years of frozen pay. It is not enough to allow workers, most of whom earn very modest salaries ranging from $24,000 to $70,000, to maintain living standards. And it is not enough to send a message with any kind of clarity that the administration values the federal workforce and doesn't believe it should continue to bear an enormously disproportionate share of deficit reduction," David Cox Sr., the president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), said in a statement.
The White House told labor leaders of the proposed increase in the 2014 fiscal year budget in a phone call late Friday night. That raise would come on top of the half-point pay hike, scheduled to take effect in late March, which has been delayed as part of the "fiscal cliff" deal struck last month. Federal salaries have been frozen since 2011.
"Unconscionable" indeed. Only a federal employee's union representative would label a wage increase a reduction, then bitch about it. Perhaps they should all simply walk out? A work slowdown would certainly go unnoticed. Hopefully the IRS will lead the way.
With 14 percent real unemployment, maybe its time to suspend the Civil Service Act*, and open jobs to competition. *Why should everyone else but government have uncontrolled open borders [re: regulations] that can provide employers with an unlimited labor pool? What's good for everyone else should be good for the government as well.
A dissolution of the Civil Service Act would unhinge 60+ years of civil rights, advances in social justice and women's rights. Paternoster lakes will appear in hell prior to the end of the Civil Service.
One of the big problems is that we always talk about pay raised for EVERY federal employee, regardless of series, grade or performance.
Why would all feds get a raise? I'm all for breaking it down to high performing, valuable employees getting a raise and the ticks going without. I'm pretty confident I'd do fine and many others wouldn't.
But putting a blanket pay freeze on the federal service for 3 years is driving hard to retain professionals out. I have a job interview at 0900 in the morning with a regional utility company and, if the job and compensation look right, I'm gonna take it.
Who will do my job that I currently do at my agency?
I don't really care...I've been kicked around alot the last few years. You can't treat experienced engineers like janitors for very long before they start jumping ship.
But I digress, pay raises for strong performers and valuable people, but not for everybody would be my recommendation. That way you keep the people you want and need the most.
That's not how democracies work, bigjim-CA. The categories with the biggest numbers (mediocre-poor performers) get the best deals & the minorities (strong performers) get screwed. That's why we were set up as a republic.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.