The White House is out with its Sequester Doom & Gloom – but what does the chart really say?

by Skip

Ah yes, Obama hoisted on his own petard.  How “smooth” is it for the White House to start hauling out these “the Sequester is going to hurt children and old people” stats, but fail to note “Oh yeah, our boss was the one that first suggested this with his last self-serving hissy fit on the last debt ceiling fight”:

  • Some 600,000 poor women and children will no longer get free milk and cheese
  • 2,100 fewer food inspections will take place if federal budget cuts expected to kick in March 1 actually take place.
  • federal agencies notified hundreds of thousands of federal workers that furloughs could be around the corner
  • 70,000 children would get kicked out of early childhood intervention programs that help poorer children catch up to middle-class peers, heading into kindergarten.
  • 1,000 fewer criminals would be prosecuted due to furloughed federal prosecutors.
  • 4 million fewer “Meals on Wheels” would be delivered to the elderly.
  • 1,000 fewer research grants would be awarded, cutting research and laboratories for some 12,000 scientists and students.

Oh, the horror of it all – this PROGRESSIVE policy of “try to trick the Republicans” – Obama set this up to take a hard toll on the Military, believing that the Republicans would cave before letting that happen.  Seems, however…

that in this game of Chicken, Obama is blinking because the House Republicans are doing the reverse political jui-jitsu of “look, we’re in the briar patch”.  Oh the other hand, how much money are we REALLY talking about:

sequester-savage

These are large and arbitrary cuts, and will have severe impacts across government,” said Danny Werfel, federal controller of the Office of Management and Budget.

Severe?  Really?  There’s not much of a spit’s difference between pre- and post-sequester amount spent, right?  As my friend Doug used to say all the time when it comes to Government spending our money “Every Dollar is sacred” – no, not when it is in your wallet but in theirs – and it doesn’t stay there long!

(H/T: image at Hot Air)

Leave a Comment

  • C. dog e. doG

    I wunder if the Federalés have a Dept. of Cultured Affairs too? And a Lilac Lady.
    – C. dog bombarded by low hanging fruit

  • http://granitegrok.com/author/mike Mike Rogers

    Ralph Benko thinks that Boehner actually painted Obama into a corner – it would be so nice to think he’s right:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2013/01/28/how-president-obama-lost-his-shirt-to-john-boehner/

  • Scott Morales

    Firstly, it’s my understanding that Kaptain O can prioritize what get’s cut, so if children go hungry, look to the perpetually smiling one in the WH. Secondly, I say, Helloooo sequester, I’ve been waitin’ for ya!

  • http://granitegrok.com/author/mike Mike Rogers

    Let us bring the boys home from afghanistan, and then cut government spending the way it was done after the 2nd world war: by 2/3. Better yet, cut total gubmint spending the way it was done after the first world war: by 4/5 !
    Now, THAT’s a sequester!

  • Sam Adams

    Once upon a time, these groups called nato an un took over the entire business and govt of sea,s to shining sea,s. They created a war story, and attacked 3 continents, along with destroying 12 nations, financially usurped eu with make believe debt. Their objective was to destroy all wealth and imperialism and have the globe on a level playing field. Their vision was/is to create 7 world unions without any nations/states, then they would rule over as a one world govt and singular currency. They knew they must start a small arms treaty to disarm all before they realized what was happening. Folks thought their parties govt would save them, so they told the 2 parties to continue with dead-lock until BK set in.

  • Pingback: More on the dreaded Sequester Numbers – Department of Defense (aka-Big Obama screw-up) — GraniteGrok()

  • Pingback: Sequester Madness – And Guv Maggie is complaining about the Feds?? — GraniteGrok()

Previous post:

Next post: