Obama to cut muscle and bone, leave the fat

Scene: Family sitting around kitchen table. Dad’s hours have been reduced at the plant. The family has to do some cutting back. Dad speaks…

“Well, there is no two ways about it, we are going to have to cut back on expenses. I figure we will stop paying the electric bill and the mortgage. That should free up enough funds for us to keep renting a storage facility for my old car with the blown engine and other worthless junk. If we don’t pay the gas bill, I should be able to keep buying $9.00 a day for coffee shop coffee rather than drinking the free stuff at work. Any objections?”

This is the Obama administration’s approach to budget sequestration. Every time Obama talks about cuts, he talks about teachers and firefighters but he never talks about cuts to wool and mohair inspectors, National Endowment for the Arts, Obama-Phones or, I dunno, the entire, worthless Department of Education, useless Department of Energy or crapulent EPA. Obama goes right for the things that will really piss the American people off. For example…

If lawmakers and President Obama can’t agree on a plan to avert the $85 billion across-the-board spending cuts set to take effect March 1 — known as the sequester — then the federal background check system for vetting gun buyers could face cuts, according to a letter FBI officials sent to lawmakers earlier this month.


“Travel has the very real potential of becoming the face of the March 1 sequester cuts,” Roger Dow, president and CEO of the U.S. Travel Association, said in a statement.

“These across-the-board cuts may punish travelers with flight delays, long security lines at Transportation Security Agency checkpoints and multi-hour waits to clear Customs and Border Protection.”

Dow warned of not only the inconvenience to travelers, but the economic impact to the industry.

This is absolutely, positively a conscious strategy of the administration. If they were to cut bureaucratic bloat, Americans wouldn’t object. By cutting services Americans actually care about while protecting the shadowy drones in the central bureaucracy, Obama hopes to turn the public against all cuts. It will likely work too.

His financial logic is no better than the mythical dad at the top of the page. His political logic, however, is razor sharp.

Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Obama to cut muscle and bone, leave the fat

  1. Ray Davies says:

    I wish to hell the American public would just stop and think about these things. My wife (gotta love her) was believing all these dire things she was hearing on the MSM and took it as THE WORD. I took a couple minutes and explained to her that all this is is not spending less than 5% of the budget. Then she heard on the news that it was only 2 1/2 %. Yes, she has voted democrat in the past, but she’s learning.

  2. buzzdaddy says:

    At least Jimmy Carter adjusted the thermostat and wore a sweater. You’d think Barry could pony up and maybe not go on vacation every other month.

  3. EastBayLarry says:

    Let us not forget that this ‘drastic cut’ is actually only a small percentage of the scheduled INCREASE in spending. It will not reduce anything unless you consider scheduled increases as indispensable. I don’t.

  4. notamobster says:

    If they cooked up the animals, they could sell them and donate the proceeds to the treasury.

  5. notamobster says:

    I would pound a hammer through the skull of every last animal in captivity if they would agree to cut federal entitlement spending by 20%.

  6. DGMith says:

    “I would pound a hammer through the skull of every last animal in captivity if they would agree to cut federal entitlement spending by 20%.”

    Yeah, that’s pretty much the idea I get from many of the posts from the people who frequent this blog. “I’ll murder animals for the sake of making sure people who have been put out of work by the recession have to eat less, and so that grandma has to find a cheaper apartment in which to eat her cat food.”

    You are nuts. Maybe if you could pull your head out of your butt, our country could pull its head out of its.

    • R.D. Walker says:

      1) You can’t murder animals, you know, by definition.

      2) The recession was caused and people have been put out of work by the governmental policies that the economic simpletons of the Democrat Party promote.

      3) I could turn around and say that it is you who wants grandma to eat cat food because it is you who supports the governmental policies that result in that sort of thing. I don’t think you really want that, however. I think you want grandma to be healthy and happy. You support those policies not out of malice, but out of profound ignorance. For that, I pity you.

    • notamobster says:

      To save my nation from the future you and those you vote for are imposing upon it? You’re absolutely right. I’d murder* each and every one of those animals in cold blood, with a smile on my face.

      As to whom has recto-cranial inversion disorder, I would point to the policies you support:

      our absolutely unsustainable debt and the entitlement system which creates that debt – as supporting evidence of whose position is correct. Your position created the problems we have. Mine would help to eliminate them.

      Would I be willing to kill the animals being held in captivity to cut 20% (nearly 400 billion dollars in spending, annually)? You’re damn skippy.

      In which scenario will your grand-children be better off?

      a) They don’t get to see federally subsidized animals held in captivity.
      b) They don’t get to eat or have heat because your policies destroyed our economy and with it our nation.

      Maybe they could eat the animals in captivity when the whole thing collapses around them…

      Oh, if grandma can’t afford the apartment she’s in, maybe her worthless grandkids could help her out, or she could start living within her means. Crazy, I know. I’m nuts.