I like the idea of sequestration. Granted there are ideas for reducing government spending that I like even more. Since none of those are on the table, I'll take what I can get. Which in this case is nothing, nada, a big fat zero. Obummer sequestration is only a hypothetical reduction in all ready out of control spending. By hypothetical I mean we (our government) is going to spend more money than they actually have. Which was more than they projected to spend last year. A great deal of that money was borrowed against future tax revenues, which aren't likely to exist at some pretend date in the future.
In other words, Sodom on Potomac is open for business as usual. So what's the big deal that the Whiner in Chief is making about "cuts"? As far as I can tell, he's pissed that he can't dish out even more money that we don't have to more worthless recipient's than he did in his first term. I'm all for cutting worthless government programs, and lets face it all government programs are at best wasteful. If we got rid of the worthless ones, and cut the fat out of the wasteful ones, we'd be in better shape economically.
The Golfer in Chief currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania isn't about to show any real leadership and propose doing what we all know needs to be done, and make real cuts to the Federal budget. Instead he's having an executive fit and "cutting" things that he hopes will upset voters in an effort to have the surfs pressure their congress critter into wasting even more money. Among his proposed solutions to the "sequestration crisis" are stopping White House tours, canceling the GI Bill's college tuition provisions for veterans and laying off air traffic controllers.
I have a solution I think we should take a look at. Right now the First Daughters are enjoying their spring break at the exclusive Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Since I haven't read in the news that Sasha and Malia got a job at McDonald's (no doubt their mother disapproves) and saved up for the trip themselves, my guess is that this trip, like all the rest, is being paid for by the struggling American tax payer. How about sequestration of lavish first family vacations? Since they seem to take one every month or so this might add up to some serious cash.
We don't need to take away all of O's golf. After all he's a better golfer than a president, and he does us less harm when he's on the links, instead of in his office. We should only cut him back a little bit. For instance, he should be allowed to play all the putt-putt he wants. Putzing around is what he does best.