The inaugural address is history, the State of the Union speech is over, and all that is left is the incessant gridlock over what policies -- if any -- will be enacted to save this shining ship of states from careening over the so-called fiscal cliff and into the abyss.
Matters not how many times the red-eyed, Merlot-sodden, tobacco-stained John Boehner wipes the tears from his rheumy eyes and slurs out semi-comprehensible accusations at Obama, insisting this sequester is somehow the President's fault (forget the fact that all spending bills originate in his House of Representatives -- seems he's forgotten that. Maybe it was a during a blackout). All that matters is that Boehner and his minions continue to put our economy in serious peril, while blaming others for their risky schemes.
"In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Tuesday evening, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) blamed President Obama for the nearly $1.2 trillion in across-the-board spending cuts set to go into effect next month, labeling the looming cuts as 'the president's sequester.'"'Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester,' Boehner writes. 'What they might not realize from Mr. Obama's statements is that it is a product of the president's own failed leadership.'"
Okay, reality check. The sequester was created by the Budget Control Act of 2011, an act of Congress. Not the President. Congress. This Act mandated spending cuts if the congressional "super committee" was unable to formulate a compromise agreement on deficit reduction. This came to fruition in November 2011, when the super committee was unable to seal a deal, and that resulted in the defense and domestic spending cuts -- the sequester -- that were set to take place in January 2010, but are now delayed until March 1st.
But as Brett LoGiurato writing in "The Business Insider" explains, Boehner's plan to dump the blame from his failure into the President's lap may backfire -- badly:
"Boehner is arguing that the sequester will be incredibly damaging -- it 'threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more.' But at the same time, Republicans are prepared to let the sequester kick in if Democrats don't agree to an equal amount of cuts in entitlement spending. In essence, Boehner is prepared to support a policy that he says threatens national security and jobs."
And, Byron York writes in the Washington Examiner...
"Could the GOP message on the sequester be any more self-defeating? Boehner could argue that the sequester cuts are necessary as a first -- and somewhat modest -- step toward controlling the deficits that threaten the economy. Instead, he describes them as a threat to national security and jobs that he nevertheless supports. It's not an argument that is likely to persuade millions of Americans."
York's argument was seized immediately by White House press secretary Jay Carney in his press briefing earlier today. "The President believes it is essential that we avoid these cuts," Carney said after reading a passage from York's piece. "It is bad policy. The Speaker himself says it is bad policy. We -- the Congress, rather, must act to make sure it doesn't happen."
On the other end of the spectrum, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh also cited York's piece and wondered "what Speaker Boehner is thinking."
1
1
1
