In response to:

Embrace the Sequester

RJBJr Wrote: Feb 22, 2013 7:39 AM
Stop calling it "CUTS"! That word is extremely misleading. Why can't Republican wordsmiths come up with a more accurate word? Maybe we can help. I suggest "spending deceleration". I'm sure you can come up with something better. Suggestions please.
Texas Chris Wrote: Feb 22, 2013 9:19 AM
"No raises this year"

"Same amount of money as last year, not one dime more or less."
James365 Wrote: Feb 22, 2013 9:05 AM
So true, Government spending has increased 4.64% every year for the past 5 years. The sequester will cut 2.24% of that increase for 2013. The other nine years? No one can predict what the next Congress will do in the future.

Something odd happened a few months ago as I weighed the various aspects of the dreaded Sequester Monster, a creature vilified across party lines.

It is often true that if enough people in government say something is bad, there is a strong chance of redeeming qualities.

So my journey began. The only element of the sequester that bothered me in the least was military cuts. But my friends at the Institute for Policy Innovation properly observe that defense spending will not fall below 2007 levels, which were 75% above pre-9/11Pentagon budgets.

High enough for me? Of course not. I actually want...