Hail Armageddon sayeth Krauthammer.

“The worst-case scenario for us,” a leading anti-budget-cuts lobbyist told The Post, “is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens.”

Think about that. Worst case? That a government drowning in debt should cut back by 2.2 percent — and the country survives. That a government now borrowing 35 cents of every dollar it spends reduces that borrowing by two cents “and nothing bad really happens.” Oh, the humanity!

Let’s start drinking!

Don’t let the big campaign on sequestration dissolve your nerve. By doing nothing you are doing good! The biggest problem that Obama sees out there with sequestration is that no one will notice the affects.

Right now in the news they are listing all the millions that will be cut. It sounds devastating. Horrible. The children…..!

f you want a clue as to what some sequester opponents fear the most, though, check out what health care lobbyist Emily Holubowich, who represents 3,000 nonprofits opposed to the sequester, told The Washington Post on Saturday: “The good news is, the world doesn’t end March 2. The bad news is, the world doesn’t end March 2,” she said. “The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens. And Republicans say: See, that wasn’t so bad.”

[ht Maggie's Farm]

I think the sequester was the best idea of Obama’s ever! Hold fast! He is now working in campaign mode rather than working to create a workable budget. He is now just begging Republicans to bend “just a little” and increase taxes. Hold fast!

This isn’t even a real cut. It’s a cut in planned future spending. Hold fast.

In other words this isn’t even really a cut – “devastating” or otherwise – it’s a modest growth rate reduction following years of unnecessary, embarrassing and unsustainable excesses.

Where the sequester debate deviates from the norm is in its dramatis personae. Unlike prior spending debates, the sequester features Republicans attempting to shift the onus for cutting government onto Obama. U.S. Speaker John Boehner has repeatedly referenced “the president’s sequester” while decrying its “harmful cuts.”

You can do it. And then when the world doesn’t end, you can try some real spending cuts. Let’s start talking about tarts instead of pies, eh? ht protein wisdom

I saved this column yesterday to blog on, but then got too busy to write. No need as really the headline here on Complete Colorado says it all.
The headline, “Yeah, Cut Government, but not MY big government program”, is seen here in this screen shot.

And the story?

Farmers and ranchers at the stock show said they fear Congress will do an across-the-board cut that could hobble crop insurance, research and loan programs they consider vital to their industries.

Oh brother. “Farmers and ranchers” are probably some of the most conservative citizens in this country, yet they too get their fill at the government trough. Everything is “vital” if it affects me.
Instead of “Wake up A merica” that saying ought to change to “Grow up A merica”

via Charles Krauthammer concerning our fiscal fun.

Aren’t you failing the country, say the insurgents? Answer: The country chose Obama. He gets four years.

Want to save the Republic? Win the next election. Don’t immolate yourself trying to save liberalism from itself. If your conservative philosophy is indeed right, winning will come.

We followed one the other day regarding the new Food regulations.

Today lets follow mortgages.

1) Government involves itself in the mortgage industry in an effort to get more home ownership in this country.
2) Banks hand out iffy loans to people who happily sign on the dotted line (most with an understanding of what this means)
3) Good stuff happens
Banks make a lot of money, but then start to go under.
Home owners live the good life (including borrowing more money on their homes)
4) Bad stuff happens
Home prices quit rising
Home owners can’t keep up the good life
Banks almost go under
5) Government intervenes, saving banks
6) Government makes more rules to prevent people from ever having to suffer the consequences, or enjoy the fruits, of risky decisions.

This marks the first time the government has spelled out what constitutes a “qualified mortgage,” an effort to prevent the widespread toxic loans that hurt millions of Americans during the housing crisis.

Seriously – a LOT of people became home owners during those times and not all of them ended up in “hurt”. And even those who ended up hurt, just lost homes they couldn’t afford and went back to renting. The people who got hurt the worst are the tax payers who had to bail out the banks, but if the banks hadn’t been “incentivized” to give out bad loans by government……

Oh good Lord, I can’t even go on.

It seems to me that the military can handle a $50 billion yearly cut. (though it’s the “across the board” bit that has people worried) These days, that isn’t much money. If the military is going to be led by someone else who thinks so too, then, by all means….let the sequestration begin.

Hagel is a Vietnam War veteran who became a critic of the U.S. operation in Iraq. He left the Senate in 2009 and told The Financial Times in 2011 that the Pentagon was “bloated” and needed to be “pared down.”

But we have a Democrat Senator who voted no because he thought more ought to be done about spending! Actually – that’s not clear, he may have just wanted more taxes, but either way – good for him. PLUS he was trying to come up with a plan waaaaaay back in November.

Democratic Colorado Senator Michael Bennet voted “nay” on the fiscal cliff deal from Monday night. He created his own plan to avert the fiscal cliff in November alongside Republican Senator Lamar Alexander.

I grant Kudos.

Certainly more kudos than to those in the NE who want Federal Money for Sandy damage even though tons of that money goes to the entire other coast. Let’s hope the new Congress can write a decent bill.

For fun read about famous rich Democrats hiding their money from the higher taxes coming down the pike. Let’s call them the Obama tax hikes while some of us enjoy our permanent Bush tax cuts.

Marc Thiessen and I agree on the fiscal cliff.

If they don’t like paying higher taxes to allow for more spending, there’s a simple solution: Demand that politicians in Washington cut taxes and spending instead of expanding them. And if they won’t do it, elect men and women who will.

Until then, Republicans need to stop protecting Americans from the consequences of their decisions to elect profligate politicians.

People voted for this guy, he wants to lead us over the cliff, let’s go.

Luckily, I’m not in charge of anything. My nose has long been gone from cutting it off to spite my face.