The best retort to Pres. Obama that I have heard came from Herman Cain -- yes, that Herman Cain -- who pointed out recently that in January we all took a 2% hit when the payroll tax went up. Why, Mr. Cain asked, can't the government absorb the sequester when we've all had to do the same (not to mention increased fuel prices)?

Even though it would negatively impact me and my area, I'm 100% in favor of the sequester cuts. I don't see any other practical way to meaningfully rein in federal spending. Military spending is easily 2 to 4 times what it should be, and it's growing all the time in a way that is not at all proportional to the actual threats to our nation. My distinct impression from 1-2 hours on the metro listening to Pentagon employees is that most of those thousands of people earning healthy six figures don't do anything useful at all.

The sequester is an intellectually painful solution because everyone in government knows who the deadweight employees are and where the money is being wasted (particularly on unnecessary contractors), but federal labor laws and bureaucratic mandates prevent anyone from doing anything about it. The solution therefore has to be something "bigger" than all of us.

@brassband... the sad part is the gov't cut isn't even 2% cut, it's much closer to 1%.

The arrogant Hussein, Dems and a lot of Repubs want ALL of our money. They will find a way to take it. The elitisit govt. is bankrupting the country under the guise of "helping us" while in reality they are helping themselves like ants at a picnic. An increase is a "cut" in elitist parlance. This from the same people who exempt themselves from laws they enact and vote themselves a pay raise. America...we hardly knew ya.

You rayzist, anti-science, women-hating xenophobes are too dumb to understand that a 2.5% cut that's not really a cut is going to be THE END OF THE WORLD as the carbon heated seas rise 60 feet and drown us all!!!!!

I do not see why it cannot be handled thusly. The Secretary is ordered to cut by a specific amount. He/she then determines where the cuts can be most easily obtained. Orders are then cut and filter down to appropriate department heads to cut by a specified amount. Further decisions are made as to efficiency and the orders are then passed down. I am sure a lot of department heads have deadwood they would like to cut. All I hear is an upgrade of "we will have to let police and firemen go".

I am reminded of passing through the Norfolk County Registry of Deeds some years ago. I walked passed a door reading "Comparing Room". Taken by the term, I looked in to see two women. One was reading a photocopy to the other who was "comparing" it to the original. Perhaps necessary when "copies" were hand written, but this was the 1980's. I long ago learned, if I suspected alteration, to place one copy over the other and then hold it to the light.

" There are no cuts as regular people define them."

So why does the President say that, immediately upon the sequestration taking place, police and firefighters and teachers will get laid off and we're all going to die (paraphrasing) from rotten meat b/c the inspectors all had to be laid off???

"You rayzist, anti-science, women-hating xenophobes are too dumb to understand that a 2.5% cut that's not really a cut is going to be THE END OF THE WORLD as the carbon heated seas rise 60 feet and drown us all!!!!!"

Heh. Only one step removed from the sort of hysterical, non sequitur argument that one hears too often from some on the left.

I'm with Dan. I will take a hit...but it is needed and only a first step. What I and many object to is the lack of prioritization. This "peanut butter spread" is the cowards way out. We need leaders to fund what is needed vice what isn't. However, courage is a rare commodity in DC. .