The sequester was pushed by the republican party in 2011 during the debt ceiling battle in which the GOP took the country hostage and demanded that there be a series of harsh spending cuts. These spending cuts effected everything from defense, education, research and development, and infrastructure. Because the sequester is not liked by the majority of Americans, the GOP is claiming it’s the “President’s Sequester”. A phrase I’ve heard over and over again on CSPAN during the republican’s response to no deal being reached. They think by associating the sequester with the President that it’ll hurt his ratings with the American people. Unfortunately for them, we are all too well familiar with republican obstructionism and the fact that they would love to see President Obama fail. I’m not sure what makes them think that we will not notice it now….but no harm in trying right? Here’s the republican’s response and President Obama’s response to the sequester released today,
I’m certainly not happy with the way both sides handled this issue, but if the sequester lasts too long because the republican party failed to compromise, American’s aren’t going to solely blame Pres. Obama. Additionally, I think it’s smart to say that the GOP needs to be focusing on issues that will help boost their party image. We should be focusing on immigration reform, real tax reform, and creating jobs. Because of GOP obstructionism, infrastructure reductions will mean, less construction jobs, a field historically dominated by Hispanics. There are so many sectors of the population that will be hurt and once again because the GOP wanted to protect the top 1% of wealthy Americans, the rest of the country is currently being held hostage til they get their way. Here’s a great video created by Think Progress,
Republicans could care less about the working poor. Just let them starve while the income disparity widens. People won’t forget this. First, hold the country hostage during the debt ceiling debates, and the outcome being the sequester. Second, prolong the fiscal cliff negotiations and the outcome being delayed tax refunds that disproportionally hit middle-low income tax filers. Now, obstruct negotiations initiate the sequester and the outcome once again hurting the middle and low income people. Great way to kick people while they’re down.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg decided it was a good idea to ban soda (or caffeinated drinks) over 16oz so that he can help “curbed obesity”. This story has been making headlines even more now because the
Mayor Bloomberg’s rational is that if you don’t have a 20oz soda in front of you, you won’t drink 20ounces of soda. Does Bloomberg not have kids? Is he completely withdrawn from reality? If people want to drink a lot of soda, then they’ll find a way to drink it. You can’t curb obesity by forcing people to eat the way you want them to eat. You have to use educational and fitness programs. Matter of the fact, the reason why low income people may be disproportionally obese is due to the lack of exercise facilities and these expensive gym memberships…and lets remember that not every neighborhood is safe to run in.
The more important issue here for me is personal freedom. Obesity is a choice unless you have a medical condition. People choose to drink soda over 16oz because they want to and not everyone who drinks large soda is obese. Honestly, the only reason I get a 20oz drink is because they usually serve it with a bunch of ice. Another reason is because there’s a party and people need drinks. People have reasons for buying certain products and it’s their right. Everyone should be allowed to drink and do whatever makes them happy if it’s not hurting anyone else. The government should not feel like it has to babysit the public.

