In response to:

Obama Suffers a Painful Loss in the First Big Fiscal Battle of His Second Term

ROBERT3033 Wrote: Mar 05, 2013 9:54 AM
A real leader, one who actually cares about the people he serves, as opposed to an entitled leader with a willingness to lie, bribe, and bully his path to high office and who couldn't care less about the people who serve him, would not have allowed sequester to occur in the first place. If it was likely to occur anyway, he would not have used it to scare the people who look to him for leadership. He would have reassured them. He would have instructed his department heads to submit a plan that does not cut salaries and services. BHO has and will do just the opposite. Watch and see.
ROBERT3033 Wrote: Mar 05, 2013 9:56 AM
I meant to say, He would have instructed his department heads to submit their plans that cuts their costs by 2.5% but does not cut salaries and services. BHO has and will do just the opposite. Watch and see.

The statist agenda of ever-growing government requires more money going to Washington, which is why I think that proponents of limited government should do everything they can to block tax increases.

This is the “starve the beast” theory, and I’ve previously explained why I think it is a necessary part of any long-run strategy to restrain the burden of government spending.

He would never admit it, but Obama seems to agree, which is why he is dogmatically fixated on doing...

Related Tags: second term