Email tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised

tererun said:

Oh come on now, don't get mad at me because you fell for it yet again. I told you, I have no doubt obama does the wrong things and lies. i just don't believe he is alone. hell, US politicians are not alone in that. Your anger is coming because you are believing in a dishonest side. You are believing that they are going to fix the world of obama's evil, but yet you see that they never get it right. This is like believing in a professional wrestler. It is all scripted, and it is all an act. While you are having blind faith in the republicans to save the world they are pretty much taking your money just like the rest. That is why you will always be let down, because you expect something from these people. It is like watching the three stooges and thinking they are not going to screw up this time.

So ask all the absurd questions you want, but it is not Obama that is your problem. Your problem is your faith in your side.

Click to expand...

My anger? My side?

Lady, my "side" is that of the American people and my anger is that our bloated, self serving government is flexing its muscles trying to prove that it is entirely indispensable....and that's dangerous.

Lutherf said:

Keep making light of it all.

Have you ever heard the word "Holdomor"?

Click to expand...

The only reason I make light of it is there's a new "Obama is a tryant/socialist/evil" story that comes out of the rightwing every week. Always seems to be some sensational headline that hits the ground with a dud once someone takes the time to actually google the source material. Hell 90% of the time (I'm looking at you Daily Caller) it's just a link circle back to other Daily Caller articles that supposedly supports the story you're currently reading. So yeah...I make light of it. I'm also tired of checking into it because for some reason it seems like I put in more work verfying sources and checking the intergrity of their stories than right wing editors do. I don't get paid for that!

Edit: They have things like this on the left generally from Alternet or some other left wing website and I never read the stories! Why do I want to read the rightwing version?!

Lutherf said:

OK....just because I've always wanted to know.....hypothetically now...let's say that tomorrow morning Barack Obama wakes up and walks out on to Pennsylvania Avenue where he sticks a fork into the eye of the first baby he sees, spits in the mothers face and has the father executed. What would be the excuse you made to justify that behavior?

Click to expand...

Why do you beat your wife?

tererun said:

Actually, it is nothing about any of that. This is about some guy pulling a quote OOC from a meeting and then emailing it out to a bunch of people. It is not a quote from Obama, nor does it even say Obama says to do this. So really this has nothing to dow ith obama and is another OOC right wing BS fest that simply adds another layer to the heap by having an email take things out of context instead of their creative editors. But don't let that stop your victory dance, i am sure they have truly exposed obama for what he is this time. i am sure the world will look at that and realize the republicans are totally right and this is all obama's fault. I am sure no one will sigh and roll their eyes thinking that the republican hate machine has done this stupid thing again. You should all get together and dress up as obama and do the harlem shake. That will ensure your victory over him this time.

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is obama does not have a clue what some bureaucrat said or did, he never seems to know what anybody is doing, things just swirl around the poor man like a tornado. Some president huh.

tererun said:

OK, so the opinion of the guy who wrote the email was taken completely out of context of a meeting he quoted only a small part of. I cannot imagine the meeting he quoted only consisted of a sentence or two.

Click to expand...

I think you are mistaken here.. It sounds as if they had a teleconference. During that teleconference Mr Brown asked a question about flexibility. No one on that teleconference knew the answer, so they forwarded the question (probably via email) APHIS BPAS. He then quoted the reply he recieved from APHIS BPAS.

Lutherf said:

Email tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised - Washington Times

Are you freaking kidding me? So the simple premise would be "We told them it was going to be bad so make sure it IS bad."?

And they go on to say, essentially, "We are trying to make it as painless as possible but we probably won't be able to inspect meat so that will be in short supply."

Man, those of you who still believe that a gigantic government is your friend had better be paying attention because this is the antithesis of governance and is running headlong into "ruling".
​

Click to expand...

Mess with the bull, you get the horn.

Washington Times is the fox of the newspaper industry.

I am sure they are twisting the facts or lying.

Slateriesling said:

This is disgusting. Reminds me of the employers that told their employees you better not vote for Obama or I might have to cut your hours and did it to make good on the threat.

Again, I have trouble believeing so much in the media. I am going to have to wait to get to upset about it, waiting for more information. But I can believe it, sounds like politics as usual in America.

Click to expand...

.
Everyone that voted for Obama deserves what they get including hours or job cuts.

LiberalAvenger said:

Mess with the bull, you get the horn.

Click to expand...

Give the rancher the horn, become a steer.

Come on. Sooner or later, we all knew this was going to happen. Seqestration, whatever you wanna call it.

Money aint free, it doesn't come from nowhere. At some point, people HAD to realize that there are not enough taxable earnings to fund our government. Period.

This is just like all those teacher's unions going on strike.

I was laughed at previously when I suggested the President will be marginalized and become irrelevant to the power struggles in Washington and the country because of his dishonesty. As more and more of these issues come to the fore, I feel vindicated.

CanadaJohn said:

I was laughed at previously when I suggested the President will be marginalized and become irrelevant to the power struggles in Washington and the country because of his dishonesty. As more and more of these issues come to the fore, I feel vindicated.

Click to expand...

Don't feel that way. It's only an allusion. 4 more years!

CanadaJohn said:

I was laughed at previously when I suggested the President will be marginalized and become irrelevant to the power struggles in Washington and the country because of his dishonesty. As more and more of these issues come to the fore, I feel vindicated.

Click to expand...

CJ, your post reminded me of a quote I heard once..."Anything that can't go on forever, eventually won't." I don't recall who said it, but it seems human nature can be counted on when things get out of balance...

buck said:

I think you are mistaken here.. It sounds as if they had a teleconference. During that teleconference Mr Brown asked a question about flexibility. No one on that teleconference knew the answer, so they forwarded the question (probably via email) APHIS BPAS. He then quoted the reply he recieved from APHIS BPAS.

Click to expand...

I don't think this is clear. What we need to see is the email that was quoted, not the e-mail doing the quoting. In other words, what did APHIS say? That's the important point. What this fellow says they said may or may not be what they actually said.

It occurs to me to add: of course, if the administration really is saying to various agencies that the sequestration should be made to be as painful as possible to ordinary folks, I would say that's grounds for impeachment, conviction, and recall of whoever is doing the saying. I doubt very many people at any point in the spectrum of American politics will find that a defensible act. I certainly won't. But so far, there's no evidence that this is in fact the case.

ashurbanipal said:

I don't think this is clear. What we need to see is the email that was quoted, not the e-mail doing the quoting. In other words, what did APHIS say? That's the important point. What this fellow says they said may or may not be what they actually said.

Click to expand...

Obviously there is no way for me to know, but it sure as heck seems obvious that it was a quote from an email response. We do it at my place of employment all the time (I assume most people do). Quote a response inside the email and change the font/color - just as was done in Brown's email.

Lutherf said:

My anger? My side?

Lady, my "side" is that of the American people and my anger is that our bloated, self serving government is flexing its muscles trying to prove that it is entirely indispensable....and that's dangerous.

Click to expand...

Oh give me a break, we all know you side with the republicans. Don't try to pretend to be neutral. You don't like obama, and you love the republican rhetoric. I can see it to a certain extent. They go after obama who is a powerful politician which makes him pretty much a scumbag. they put on a pretty good show on tking on the liberals. the problem is that they are part of the problem, which you seem to ignore. granted I preferred obama to romney, but i was well aware it was a choice between **** and **** with a sprinkling of hope. they are both still piles of ****, and I did not put much faith in the hope so I am not terribly disappointed to find obama really did not grow a backbone. i guess my point is that after every time the reps have failed and caved how can you still have this great hope of a huge victory?

buck said:

I think you are mistaken here.. It sounds as if they had a teleconference. During that teleconference Mr Brown asked a question about flexibility. No one on that teleconference knew the answer, so they forwarded the question (probably via email) APHIS BPAS. He then quoted the reply he recieved from APHIS BPAS.

Click to expand...

if it was in an email then the original email should be quoted rather than the selected OOC line that the article was based upon.

buck said:

Obviously there is no way for me to know, but it sure as heck seems obvious that it was a quote from an email response. We do it at my place of employment all the time (I assume most people do). Quote a response inside the email and change the font/color - just as was done in Brown's email.

Click to expand...

I guess I would respond with two points:

1) Indeed, there is no way for you or any of us to know. We should therefore withold judgment until more conclusive evidence emerges.

2) Just as importantly: suppose this is a direct quote. If this appears as part of a longer e-mail, the meaning of the quoted bit might change completely when placed back in context. I agree the word "impact" used toward the end of the quoted section seems a little suspect, but then again, which one of us hasn't bungled with the correct word to use?

All of this said, I repeat what I said after the quoted post. If it turns out that an administration official, someone in Congress, or whoever, is saying that the spending cuts ought to be made to hurt people as much as possible, they ought to be fired at the very least. I wouldn't care if it was the President, or whoever. But, I would point out that it's unlikely this guy got an e-mail directly from the President. If other e-mails insinuating the same sort of thing appear in other agencies across multiple secretariats, that increases the likelihood such orders come from higher up.

Despite my remarks, I am absolutely disgusted with our government in general. I'm none too happy with Obama, and even less happy with Congress. It seems to me that there are obvious solutions to our problems that simply are not getting any play at all. Austerity measures have done nothing to help the economies of countries in which they've been tried so far. I fear we are watching our nation unravel...and I don't just say that because of the spending cuts. Whether the process can be stopped is anyone's guess at this point.

This is another unsubstantuated republican dirty trick, much like they tried to smear Menendez with.

Long-time escort confirms Senator Bob Menendez paid her for sex | The Daily Caller

Recently the witness has recanted and has said that she was paid to lie.

Lutherf said:

Email tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised - Washington Times

Are you freaking kidding me? So the simple premise would be "We told them it was going to be bad so make sure it IS bad."?

And they go on to say, essentially, "We are trying to make it as painless as possible but we probably won't be able to inspect meat so that will be in short supply."

Man, those of you who still believe that a gigantic government is your friend had better be paying attention because this is the antithesis of governance and is running headlong into "ruling".
​

Click to expand...

Better be paying attention?

Have you picked up a MSM newspaper lately? The man who is currently trying to make it hurt is being framed as the hero.

Good. I hope it f'n hurts. I hope it hurts like all hell, I hope the public grows a collective brain and pushes the Dems out of Senate and elects a sensible POTUS, and I hope that they work together to actually BALANCE something along the lines of a budget.

The simple truth is that if you think sequestration hurts, wait until you feel someone actually trying to push for an end to deficit spending and trade imbalances. At least if you can pour salt on the 2.3%, you can kind of acclimate yourself to the real pain that comes along when these spoiled entitlement babies have to actually do something for themselves and not knock on the doors of the White House and rattle a tin cup.

Make it hurt.

I think the point of this whole battle is to establish today's government spending levels as a base line for minimum spending. Once that is established, the WH can use that base line to demonize anyone that tries to implement real cuts and pressure the opposition into raising taxes with the most likely targets being "the rich" and businesses.

Gipper said:

Good. I hope it f'n hurts. I hope it hurts like all hell, I hope the public grows a collective brain and pushes the Dems out of Senate and elects a sensible POTUS, and I hope that they work together to actually BALANCE something along the lines of a budget.

The simple truth is that if you think sequestration hurts, wait until you feel someone actually trying to push for an end to deficit spending and trade imbalances. At least if you can pour salt on the 2.3%, you can kind of acclimate yourself to the real pain that comes along when these spoiled entitlement babies have to actually do something for themselves and not knock on the doors of the White House and rattle a tin cup.

Make it hurt.

Click to expand...

maybe if it hurts enough the partisan fans on both sides will wake up and realize removing either party doesn't help when the other party is just as corrupt, wasteful, and happy to take your tax money. This idea that there is some fiscal responsibility on the side of the republicans is laughable. part of the problem is that people beleife that picking one side or the other matters. this allows them to live in the fantasy world where the overwhelming victory of either side will solve the country's problems.

tererun said:

maybe if it hurts enough the partisan fans on both sides will wake up and realize removing either party doesn't help when the other party is just as corrupt, wasteful, and happy to take your tax money. This idea that there is some fiscal responsibility on the side of the republicans is laughable. part of the problem is that people beleife that picking one side or the other matters. this allows them to live in the fantasy world where the overwhelming victory of either side will solve the country's problems.

Click to expand...

I never said that Republicans were blameless, but I tend to focus on the 80% fault of the Dems and less about the 20% fault of Repubs. Now if we had a mass exodus election where Republicans were a supermajority, with a Republican POTUS, and things were still this bad...I'd climb on the other soapbox. God knows I railed against Bush 43 enough - not for "problems" the ignorant populace blamed on him fraudulently, but for real things he did that were a travesty. Things like No Child Left Behind, Department of Homeland Security, and TSA come to mind.

I'll wait for the boat to rock until one side seems sensible. The problem is that Democrats these days are complete idiots. Reagan did great things while in office, and he did it with a Democratic majority. Back then, they actually had an IQ worth writing about. These Vietnam burnouts today though...God help them.