NEVER Mention sequestration in PA?!?

[waterskier]

Hey man. Hate to burst your bubble, but Congress controls this, not the executive branch. They didn't get a deal, so here we are.

Yes they control the spending, but sequestration was originally obama's idea that his cronies in congress put into law. The reason we are here in sequester is because the republicans finally got the balls to say "NO" to more spending (the responsible thing to do) and push for a more fiscally responsible budget. It is the democrats that are unwilling to make cuts so we don't bankrupt our country. They are too concerned with sending money back to their voting block... They spend my tax dollars to buy votes from those who don't pay taxes. I am under no illusions that republicans don't do the same thing, the difference is that when pressure is applied to republicans, they tend to do the conservative thing, the dems are only concerned with pandering to the uninformed voters... unfortunately with the culture and education system in this country today, the uninformed voter (you) are growing faster than the informed.
Can you honestly say that you think this country is on the right path..... how is our current level of spending and government outreach sustainable?

 

[EL10]

Back to my original comment you have true spending cuts in place and people are bitching about the effects of those cuts now.

As far as the comment as to "uninformed" voter and pandering to a voter block. You just keep telling yourself that. Who exactly are they pandering to?

 

[waterskier]

I am willing to bet your company is afraid that someone like you will say something exactly like what you've just said.

believe it or not, I would not mention obama's name directly, but would make it clear, that the delay IS the result our government's inability to agree on a responsible budget.

 

[waterskier]

Back to my original comment you have true spending cuts in place and people are bitching about the effects of those cuts now.

As far as the comment as to "uninformed" voter and pandering to a voter block. You just keep telling yourself that. Who exactly are they pandering to?

First off, we did not get spending cuts... we got a reduction in the rate of growth! And back to my original responce, I am happy that there is actually a national conversation about reducing spending.... But this NOT a cut!
My original complaint was that my co. is TELLING me to provide cover for obama, by blaming ATC delays, and not telling the truth about obama and the politics he is playing.

Wow! do you actually believe that the dems don't pander to the bottom 47% that don't pay taxes?
Just about everything on their agenda directly benefits the bottom half, and not the country as a whole.
Guess I just have a hard time with all the growing social entitlement programs... there is a legitimate need for a social safety net, but don't think the fed gov. should admin this... This was origionally (and more efficently) provided by family, & church.... but since the libs discourage and don't see the value of these two institutions, they expect gov. to pick up the slack.

 

[Smarta$$]

First off, we did not get spending cuts... we got a reduction in the rate of growth! And back to my original responce, I am happy that there is actually a national conversation about reducing spending.... But this NOT a cut!
My original complaint was that my co. is TELLING me to provide cover for obama, by blaming ATC delays, and not telling the truth about obama and the politics he is playing.

Wow! do you actually believe that the dems don't pander to the bottom 47% that don't pay taxes?
Just about everything on their agenda directly benefits the bottom half, and not the country as a whole.
Guess I just have a hard time with all the growing social entitlement programs... there is a legitimate need for a social safety net, but don't think the fed gov. should admin this... This was origionally (and more efficently) provided by family, & church.... but since the libs discourage and don't see the value of these two institutions, they expect gov. to pick up the slack.

Um, actually, a very high percentage of the 47% actually vote Republican. Something Fox forgets (intentionally) to tell you. Do some research.

 

[waterskier]

I think it is funny how everybody loves to hate on fox... not a fan of any of the tv news networks, get my news from trusted internet sites... but I'm sure you will hate those too because they tell it like it is, and don't kiss obama's a$$

 

[wms]

But Fox News says its Obamas fault not the republican controlled house which controls the purse strings. Anyways both are at fault but Fox News is just propaganda to fire up the right wing nut jobs. Now go back to watching Hannity.

The president crafted sequester and now has to eat it when he has nothing to offer politically in return for its termination. He'd rather see citizens suffer as a political instrument than shift the cuts to other areas.

The BIG fact is, we ALL took a 2% pay cut in the roll back of the pay roll tax cut as a result the fiscal cliff. If the prez can expect us to live with 2% less, the govt can too.

 

[waterskier]

Um, actually, a very high percentage of the 47% actually vote Republican. Something Fox forgets (intentionally) to tell you. Do some research.

But you can't deny that almost all of the dems agenda benefits those that pay little or no taxes.... the bottom 47%...

 

[wms]

It's not the BOTTOM 47%. It's the 47% at ALL income levels that receive some sort of government entitlement.

Wealthy people have paid into social security and are rightfully entitled to payments later in life.

 

[Twisted Mind]

It is true the Repulicans are all about fiscal responsibliy. That is why the federal spending and defict was reduced during the Regan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.

Both parties love to spend money. The only diffrence is HOW they spend money.

 

[Smarta$$]

It is true the Repulicans are all about fiscal responsibliy. That is why the federal spending and defict was reduced during the Regan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.

Both parties love to spend money. The only diffrence is HOW they spend money.

Careful bro, most people on here are too stupid to catch what you just did there....

 

[Smarta$$]

But you can't deny that almost all of the dems agenda benefits those that pay little or no taxes.... the bottom 47%...

Honestly, I don't agree. It is far more complicated than a bumper sticker slogan would suggest.

 

[Smarta$$]

The president crafted sequester and now has to eat it when he has nothing to offer politically in return for its termination. He'd rather see citizens suffer as a political instrument than shift the cuts to other areas.

The BIG fact is, we ALL took a 2% pay cut in the roll back of the pay roll tax cut as a result the fiscal cliff. If the prez can expect us to live with 2% less, the govt can too.

The president did not craft sequester, and the sequester we have today is actually quite different than the one he SUGGESTED.

 

[Carl_Spackler]

As most of us are union pilots tell me this. If we go on strike to "cause as much pain as possible" to achieve our cause what is wrong with this tactic to accomplish the something else. If you would look at the big picture the whole point of this was to force each side to come to a deal. No one is going to budge until they get enough pressure.

Personal opinion is a three hour delay for someone is a far better choice than bankrupting a senior to pay for health care or cutting the SS checks. Why are the right wing side not excited and praising the country for reducing spending? That after all has been your rally cry for the last five years?

The difference is that pilots don't go in strike to cause pain to the traveling public. They go on strike to attempt to get what they think they are worth. The pain felt by the public is a byproduct.

This is a pure political stunt. The FAA budget covers much more than controller salaries. They could have cut other in other areas or cut salaries across the board and still maintained staffing at previous levels.

Not sure if its true but I heard that controllers are getting 3 furlough days a year. 1 every 4 months. I'm sure they call in sick more than that. It doesn't add up.

 

[Sam Snead]

Please, please, go on an Obama-hating Sequestration rant in your public address about delays. Please.

I'll enjoy reading about it in the aviation news. And you will be doing a big-time carpet dance.