Ryan: ‘I Think The Sequester’s Going To Happen’

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM


PEMA LEVY 11:04 AM EST, SUNDAY JANUARY 27, 2013

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) predicted Sunday that sequestration, the $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to domestic and military spending that was put off as part of a last-minute effort to avoid the fiscal cliff at the beginning of January, will ultimately go into effect.

"I think the sequester's going to happen, because that $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, we can't lose those spending cuts," Ryan said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "That was to pay for the last debt ceiling increase let alone any future increases."

Ryan said this is because Democrats have refused to offer any alternatives to the sequester, unlike Republicans who have passed legislation with alternative spending cuts.

"We think the sequester will happen because the democrats have opposed our efforts to replace those cuts with others and they've offered no alternatives," Ryan said.

-30-

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ryan-no-sequestration-if-romney-i-had-won

---

Ryan: No Sequestration If Romney And I Had Won

PEMA LEVY 11:08 AM EST, SUNDAY JANUARY 27, 2013

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Mitt Romney's vice presidential candidate, predicted Sunday that sequestration, the $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to domestic and military spending, will go into effect in March. But, he added, if Mitt Romney had won the election, he would have found an alternative way to cut spending and avoided sequestration.

"If Mitt Romney and I won the election, they would not have happened," Ryan said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "You know why? Because we would have gone and worked with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to actually put the budget on a path to balance, would have saved defense."

-30-

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ryan-no-sequestration-if-romney-i-had-won

[Cirque du So-What]

1. If Lyin' Ryan's mouth had three or more sides

he would be talking out of all of them simultaneously.

[marble falls]

2. That nit wit thinks he could have won the WH if he had gotten the nod.

[factsarenotfair]

5. Or he thinks he can next time with electoral college gerrymandering. n/t

.

[marble falls]

10. I don't think he can be made palatable to most folks. He looks like a portrait of Romney's soul....

I don't think there's any sort of viable GOP candidate. The GOP has had too much time at the trough and they've extremed themselves into a political corner. They've become a mockery of themselves and the public has taken them less seriously each year since 2008. There's all clowns on that bus. And I am a Republican.

I've been voting for Democratic Presidential candidates for the last three elections. I voted for Clinton in his re-election. I didn't vote for Gore because I didn't think he had the fire for it and W did. I regret that now - beginning with Florida's vote. I see myself voting for a Democrat in the next cycle for President, as I have for the Senate and House since I've been here in Texas. The extreme of the extreme Teapublicans are who we get here for the GOP. I mean, CRUZ?

Most Democrats out here in Texas are moderate or progressive Republicans most of the time.

[AndyTiedye]

28. He Doesn't Have to be Palatable to Most Folks, Only the RAPEuglican Base

If the gerrymanders go through, they get a lock on the Presidency, no matter who they run.
We have to stop this somehow.

[marble falls]

29. That's a pretty small niche voting crowd. Going for it is what lost Mittski the election.

[AndyTiedye]

32. Mittski Would Have Won with the Gerrymandering They Have in the Works

[broadcaster75201]

3. Paul Ryan ... irrelevant to the human condition N/T

nt

[Enrique]

4. the sequestration sounds like the new fiscal cliff n/t

[PuffedMica]

6. The Department of Defense is already down for it.

The Chief of Naval Operations has issued internal directives for all military and civilian personnel to "Standby to stand by". Both the Army and the Navy are putting policy into place before the sequestration is called for in order to implement it.


Navy orders layoffs of thousands of temps, issues civilian hiring freeze

Army announces hiring freeze

[woo me with science]

21. The Democratic Senate passed a $600+ billion military funding bill in December.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022060449

and the administration has now agreed to go into Mali, too.

There is no way either party will deprive the military as they seem willing to deprive our children and seniors.

[lovuian]

7. The Republicans will be the Military's worst nightmare

The Defense Department makes up a disproportionate share of the cuts – $500 billion, at least $55 billion of which would go into effect immediately. It’s not clear yet how the Pentagon would put them in place.

Washington state, with its dense concentration of military-related industries, could lose at least 41,000 jobs, according to a July study by Stephen Fuller of George Mason University’s Center for Regional Analysis.

The heavy cuts also would impact federally funded domestic programs such as courts, farm subsidies, national park rangers, air traffic controllers and public housing projects.

Fuller’s report, funded by the Aerospace Industries Association, estimated the country would lose 2 million jobs under sequestration as federal layoffs mount and drag down the economy.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/20/2959718/sequestration-sparks-military.html#storylink=cpy

[customerserviceguy]

26. Even the Repukes know there's a lot of fat in the military budget

That's the only reason they voted for the sequester in the first place, a year and a half ago. They knew that they could live with the worst-possible-case scenario.

And I have no problem believing that Romney-Ryan would have saved the military from cuts through the sequester, if only they were in power right now to take down the ACA.

[TwilightGardener]

8. See? Repubs want to gut the military.

[randome]

9. Sounds like he wants to tank the stock market.

Can't let the market look too good while Obama's in charge.

[Joey Liberal]

11. GOP wants it to happen so they can blame Obama

What a twisted bunch the republicans are.

They are willing to throw the military (who supported them) under the bus.

[malibea]

16. They would throw "thou" or their mommas under the bus!

These repugs would throw "thou" -or their mommas -under the bus in order for them to win! They want POWER just that bad- and I know it is killing them that they can not control the WHITE HOUSE-what an oxymoronic noun!!! Oops, my bad.

[judesedit]

12. They made the bills and deficit. Now they don't want to pay China back. When China decides is wants

it all or nothing by a deadline, they will be sorry. I wonder if they are secured loans and what was put up for it. Probably us. Congress could give a rat's ass if they can make money on it. Total losers. I pray to God 2014 shows them who their bosses are. US! We don't like the way they don't do their jobs and we want them outta there. This vote rigging bullshit has got to go. I pray Anonymous and pals can withstand their probing so we can assure a legal election.

As stated in Wikipedia...over time, the federal role in elections has increased through amendments to the Constitution and enacted legislation, such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.[2] At least four of the fifteen post-Civil War constitutional amendments were ratified specifically to extend voting rights to different groups of citizens. These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:

Birth - "All persons born or naturalized" "are citizens" of the U.S. and the U.S. State where they reside (14th Amendment, 1868)
"Race, color, or previous condition of servitude" - (15th Amendment, 1870)
"On account of sex" - (19th Amendment, 1920)
In Washington, D.C., presidential elections after 164 year suspension by U.S. Congress (23rd Amendment, 1961)
(For federal elections) "By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" - (24th Amendment, 1964)
(For state elections) Taxes - (Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966))
"Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age" (26th Amendment, 1971).
In addition, the 17th Amendment provided for the direct election of United States Senators.

Get rid of the electoral college NOW! One person...one vote.

[Angry Dragon]

15. +960

[jeff47]

33. The China boogeyman is rather tiresome.

First, the vast majority of US debt is owed to ourselves. You don't have to be another country to loan the US government money.

China bought up some debt as part of a currency manipulation scheme - make the Dollar worth more against the Yuan - in order to remain 'cheap' to US business. But that's like using a bucket to make water not run downhill - you can only move so much water before the flow is too great to overcome. So they stopped buying much in 2006. And the total amount they owe is a small fraction of our outstanding debt.

What did China buy? Standard US treasuries. Was there any sort of special deal/secured loan/other bullshit? Nope. What happens if they demand we pay it back now? Nothing. They pay out on a fixed schedule. If China wants to cash them in early, China can sell them to someone else. The treasury won't pay early.

But hey, good job catapulting the propaganda! "We're in hock to China" works great when cutting social services. Be sure to keep talking about it.

[StarryNite]

13. Paul Ryan?

Who's he? The name sounds vaguely familiar but I just can't place him.

[malibea]

18. I agree with you- but he won't let us forget his dog faced ass!

I agree with you sweetheart! As the saying goes, "don't go away mad, just go away, PLEASE"!

We hear more from this moron now than when he was runnning on the repugnant ticket with that other moron what's his face. Didn't he get the memo?:

[Angry Dragon]

14. Lyan Ryan reminds me of what one would find at the bottom of a cesspool

[AlbertCat]

17. Ryan: No Sequestration If Romney And I Had Won

but ya didn't, Blanche..... ya didn't.

[malibea]

19. And if he had (God forbid!) he would say something different!

This a-hole will say anything to try to make people happy. He is a lying sack of you know what and will say anything at anytime to get along. Who wanted to see his ass on television any way? I know I did not watch the program specifically because he was on!

[Zorro]

20. I think the sequester -- if allowed to happen -- will seriously hurt the economy

It's not only going to affect the DoD's budget, but also stress a variety of social programs.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Because the Republican alternative is far worse

The House last year passed two bills to replace the sequester cuts for fiscal 2013, sparing any reductions for military programs, while shifting more of the cuts onto many domestic programs aimed at aiding the poor, including the Medicaid healthcare program and social services block grants.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/23/us-usa-fiscal-idUSBRE90M11F20130123

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. Correct URL for the first excerpted article here:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ryan-i-think-sequesters-going-to-happen

(you gave the one for the 2nd article twice)

[DCBob]

24. Its amazing how flippant some people are about this sequester mess.

If it actually happens there will be huge negative economic effects across the country and probably the world.

[Zorro]

25. I agree

It will be very painful for hundreds of thousands of workers, and that pain will not be limited to government employees.

[DCBob]

27. Yes, all sectors will be impacted.. including investors and big business.

which is why I think thr GOPers will ultimately back down since their masters will be very very pissed if their bottom line is affected.

[TwilightGardener]

30. Remember they caused us to have downgraded credit in 2011 with their debt ceiling bullshit.

If they can damage the economy for Obama, they'll do it. They lost the election, but they're looking ahead to 2014. Good governance and continued recovery don't help them, only chaos and crisis do.

[malibea]

36. And yet people keep voting for them! What's up with that?

And yet, some people continue to vote for these moronic repugnants. What's up with that? I seriously want to know. And these are not RICH PEOPLE voting for these jerks. Are these people that stupid-really- or exactly what is going on? Do these people really think that these gutless morons will change for the better? Do these idiotic repug voters believe that voting for these repugs will help them, the people? Come on- give me a break- for goodness sake!

[Ken Burch]

31. In other words, they're admitting that they'd have cut all spending for human needs down to nothing

Just to preserve(and if possible increase) spending on the perpetual war machine...a machine they'd have found some excuse to crank up into overdrive again.

[nikto]

34. It is worth it to get those military cuts

It's a price to pay, but there's no other way to get those military cuts with our
Empire-lovin' representatives in both houses.

Get out the chainsaw and start cutting the fucking military.

[TwilightGardener]

37. Not that way. The Pentagon budget needs to be cut, but it should be

only with good and thoughtful planning.

[lunatica]

35. Oh good! I love when the bloviating Idiocrat talks publicly

He's trying so hard to position himself as the party's leader. I do hope he succeeds.

Please proceed Ryan...