General Discussion

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)

5. I think you are missing the point--you can do indiscriminate cutting of sequestering

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:47 PM

Jan 2012

if no budget passes, or you can do discriminate cutting, under the FY 2013 defense budget, proposed, in part, today.

You can do cutting the military with the Republican axe, or the Democratic scalpel. Who will suffer the most under the former? Military families. Because sequestering doesn't allow you to cut projects (see, PORK) that have been protected.

Panetta was right---put EVERYTHNG on the table, including the pork, and cut.

Supporting the sequestering supports the protection of pork.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Panetta on TV , lying his ass off.. [View all] surfdog Jan 2012 OP

He's right--the sequestering of 2013 is indiscriminate cutting across the board msanthrope Jan 2012 #1

I disagree. surfdog Jan 2012 #2

I think you are missing the point--you can do indiscriminate cutting of sequestering msanthrope Jan 2012 #5

It's not one or the other.. surfdog Jan 2012 #8

Mandatory cuts that screw our veterans should not happen. Precise cuts that target earmarks msanthrope Jan 2012 #11

I had not thought of it that way. Strategic cuts are always better than across the board. jwirr Jan 2012 #6

Look at it like this... surfdog Jan 2012 #10

Not quite. The 2013 cuts only go in if no budget happens. Why conceed that to the Pukes? msanthrope Jan 2012 #12

Damn lying ass Republicans.. Fumesucker Jan 2012 #3

This message was self-deleted by its author HereSince1628 Jan 2012 #4

If it walks like a duck.. denbot Jan 2012 #7

I didn't hear him say that Motown_Johnny Jan 2012 #9

That's not what he said at all. grantcart Jan 2012 #13