In response to:

Carney: The Whole Point of Sequestration Was to Avoid Those Spending Cuts

Jeff2422 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 12:36 PM
As you see from the chart above, "cuts" really does not mean "cuts" as the rest of us would understand it. In DC, there is an assumption of "base line budgeting". The word "base" is a bit skewed, too. You see, they assume an ever increasing budget, about 4-6%, regardless of inflation being less. Thus, the "base line" for each year is always higher. Thus, a "cut" is from the base line. It does not mean the feds will spend an amount less than the prior year. It means they won't spend as much as they "wanted" too. It is rather pathetic, after raising the bar over a trillion dollars between 06 and 12, they cannot even just freeze it and let the economy catch up. We run by a bunch of children.

Last night, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney picked a Twitter fight with Republican Congressman Justin Amash over sequestration.  We'll get to that online battle in a moment, but first, a word on Rep. Amash's misguided comments that caught Carney's attention in the first place.  Amash has been publicly blasting Republican leadership for aggressively pinning the sequester on President Obama, arguing that it's "disingenuous" for members of Congress to vote for a compromise, then blame it on the other party.  This needlessly and foolishly undermines the GOP's messaging on the issue.  Republicans are not saying that the sequester is...