Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Sequester — already the biggest lie of 2013

Sequester — already the biggest lie of 2013

On the very short drive to work this morning, I heard an interview on local AM 870 radio with the Tompkins County town administrator.

The radio host kept trying to scare everyone about the Sequester cuts, repeatedly asking how it would affect people in Tompkins County.  The administrator couldn’t go there.  The best he could muster was a possible, potential, maybe down the road cut of $40,000 out of $18 million in federal funds Tompkins County receives in one form or another from the federal government.  Much to the obvious disappointment of the radio host, the adminsitrator said there would be no affect on police, fire or other first responders.

But it didn’t stop there, the two of them then went into a series of hypotheticals about what might happen if the Sequester caused the economy to go back into recession, without any analysis of whether such fear was justified.  The two of them then spent several minutes speculating about the effects of a double-dip.

It all was rank fear-mongering.

But it’s important to note how deeply the fear-mongering emanating from the White House has permeated — local radio in upstate New York struggling for some way to scare people about the Sequester.

Obama’s messaging gets out, ours doesn’t.  That’s reality.  Instead of reality, we get Republican leadership Chicken Littles playing right into Obama’s narrative, and taking all the blame.

We have managed to position ourselves so that we lose no matter what.  That’s a hard thing to accompish, but we’ve managed to do it.

Rand Paul has the facts straight and can explain them like few other Republicans (via The Other McCain):

What a depressing drive, all 10 minutes of it.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

The key point here in my opinion is that so many in the media work to amplify the “death from sequestration” message as you described by the radio host. How many try to amplify the accurate words of Rand Paul? Sure, there are voices in radio, and a few isolated examples in other types of media. But in sheer volume, the left’s message is much more amplified. Even when it doesn’t make sense, or really cannot be supported.

It will take more than battling in the ‘culture’ arena as has been suggested. That is a part of the fight, but perhaps the larger impact will come from a focus on growing the outlets for information, first. I’ve read recently about HuffPo Live being “successful” by some reviewers standards, for example. Efforts by the likes of Glenn Beck, PJMedia, etc., need to be multiplied as much as practical from a business sense. It is futile to try and change the old guard of traditional media, I think.

    Michelle Malkin said the same this morning on Fox and Friends. Traditional media is so yesterday. She suggested the R’s get themselves to YouTube and Twitter far more than they are now. However, I saw some stat recently that it’s 77-1 for Obama fans versus conservative fans on Twitter. So just stepping up the game isn’t go to work either.

    I’ve often wondered why The Donald hasn’t thought of starting a network. TNN, Trump News Network…it has a nice ring. He could hire via The Apprentice, The News Anchor and really find those who can actually report, not just read. I’m ready for a new conservative TV channel. This morning I turned off Fox. How bad it that?

      MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to eosredux. | February 21, 2013 at 12:16 pm

      I’ve gotten to the point where I can’t stand watching Hannity. Obama once insinuated that Republicans want “dirty air and dirty war”, and I have heard Hannity work that into so many broadcasts now that I immediately click to another channel whenever I hear Hannity repeat those words.

      There is nobody more sympathetic to conservatism than I am, but Hannity’s shtick is way past stale. At least to me. I think Roger Ailes made a mistake renewing his contract last year without at least demanding a change in the show’s format. If we need to reach more young people, they should move Greg Gutfeld’s Red Eye into a better time slot.

      casualobserver in reply to eosredux. | February 21, 2013 at 12:21 pm

      I’m surprised Trump isn’t at least investing in ‘new media’ in the background. I would be surprised if he launched anything on his own. I think it would put a crimp on his ability to speak as openly and often in public as he does now. I know, I know, it didn’t stop Gore from investing in a cable channel. But how did that work out?

As detailed brilliantly in editorials in The Wall Street Journal, the total amount of “cuts” from the Sequester are as insignificant as a tiny pimple on Mooch’s humongous butt. Nobody with a brain should give a nanosecond’s thought to the Sequester. The ONLY reason the lunatic-left is squawking is because to them, even ONE PENNY cut from their out-of-control, destructive, massive spending extravaganza is unacceptable. Sane people have a different view.

Uncle Sequester from the Obama Family would sure like to scare us out of our wits…and make us bend over.

Ain’t gonna happen.

[…] Update II: Legal Insurrection links, “Sequester — already the biggest lie of 2013” […]

Doubting Thomas | February 21, 2013 at 11:32 am

How come they are the Bush Tax Cuts only because they were passed during his administration and signed by him?

How come they are the Clinton Era Welfare Reforms only because they were passed during his administration under a Republican congress but were signed by him?.

How come they are the Washing Imposed Sequesters although they were instituted by Obama and signed by Obama?

How come the Republicans don’t refuse to answer any questions about sequester unless they are identified as the Obama Sequester?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Oh, pleeeezzz, Prof. Don’t open your veins just yet.

How many budgets has the House passed since the sequester deal?

I’ve lost track, but several.

And EVERY one went to languish in the Senate.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/02/signs-of-intelligent-life-in-the-house.php

“I have it on excellent authority that, with the sequester looming, House Republicans will pass a bill to provide the various federal departments and agencies with the power to prioritize where cuts go in each organization. The total amount of cuts within a department or agency would be the same, but the cuts could be made on a more rational basis.”

Which takes all the ooga-booga off the conservatives, and puts the onus on the Executive.

Given Baseline Budgeting there are no cuts. There are never cuts. The only way past biased media is to quit playing by their rules. Repubs are incapable of doing that because they look at the world from their vantage place at the same trough the stateist dems swill from.

Bob Woodward’s “The Price of Politics,” Page 215 (July 12, 2011):
“A trigger would lock in our commitment,” [White House national economic
council director Gene] Sperling explained. “Even though we disagree on the
composition of how to get to the cuts, it would lock us in. The form of the
automatic sequester would punish both sides. We’d have to September to avert any
sequester” — a legal obligation to make spending cuts.

“Then we could use a medium or big deal to force tax reform,” Obama said
optimistically.

“If this is a trigger for tax reform,” [House speaker John] Boehner said, “this
could be worth discussing. But as a budget tool, it’s too complicated. I’m very
nervous about this.”

“This would be an enforcement mechanism,” Obama said.

Obama Nov 21, 2011: “I will veto ANY attempt to prevent the
sequester.”

Obama Oct 22, 2012: “First of all, the sequester is not something that
I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.”

During one of the presidential debates, Obama declared that he did not propose the sequester, but that Congress did. Drawing largely on the reporting of our colleague Bob Woodward, we concluded that claim was worth Four Pinocchios.

In sum, during the debt-ceiling showdown, the White House originally proposed the idea of a compulsory trigger, with White House aide Gene Sperling calling it an “automatic sequester.” Initially, the White House plan was to include tax revenue, not just spending cuts. House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) was “nervous” about using it as a budget tool.

But once tax increases were off the table, the White House staff came up with a sequestration plan that had only spending cuts and sold Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) on the idea. The White House put together the plan for sequester, using language from a congressional law approved 25 years ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/who-is-responsible-for-the-looming-sequester-spending-cuts/2013/02/10/a4f39dfe-73b4-11e2-aa12-e6cf1d31106b_blog.html

We are doomed! The Celebrity-in-Chief has won the war! He has so successfully marginalized FOX and Limbaugh that I’m afraid we will not recover. Did you see this poll? http://www.people-press.org/2013/02/21/if-no-deal-is-struck-four-in-ten-say-let-the-sequester-happen/

While everyone knows sequester is an Obama creation, Republicans will still be “blamed” when it happens! Anyone with a brain agrees with Rand Paul that this is a pittance and yet Obama will sell this as the next Great Recession caused by Republicans!

I’ve lost hope!

listingstarboard | February 21, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Republicans never fight back. Breitbart did and he was eliminated.

Professor. I have learned to avoid short depressing drives around Ithaca by switching down to AM850 for golden oldies. Blood pressure measurements have improved dramatically.

A cautionary note: Rand sounds great when talking fiscal policy. So does his Dad.

There are lots of areas where they do not sound so wonderful, such as taking money from white supremacists or the entire sphere of foreign policy. Rand was Daddy’s campaign manager twice and never found anything objectionable in his stances.

    listingstarboard in reply to Estragon. | February 21, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    We are never going to find a perfect candidate, better to have a flawed fiscal Conservative than a completely morally bankrupt Leftist transforming our Republic.

“We have managed to position ourselves so that we lose no matter what. ”

You guys don’t seem to be “getting” it. It isn’t going to matter what the “messaging” is. The other side controls the communications medium. Nobody is ever going to hear it. The only thing that is going to be heard in the 5 minute top of the hour news broadcast on the commuter radio station is the Democrat message. They own the communications medium. They own the broadcast radio, TV, newspapers, teachers, magazines, movies, everything. You could have absolutely the most perfect message possible and they are never going to hear it.

Until some conservatives start buying media outlets aside from talk radio, nobody is going to hear a word of it. The messaging doesn’t really matter.

[…] » Sequester — already the biggest lie of 2013 – Le·gal In·sur&middot… […]

[…] As William Jacobson rightly pointed out today, the Sequester is already the biggest lie of 2013. […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend