In an undisclosed location in the White House, unnamed Obama Administration advisors huddle to discuss the impending sequestration.  No official transcript exists because (for the record) this meeting NEVER happened.

The mood was grim.  The hot topic was a statement from Emily Holubowich, a lobbyists who represents a coalition of 3,000 nonprofit groups fighting the cuts, who accidentally spoke the truth to aWashington Post reporter:  “The worst case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens!”

Advisor # 1:  Emily is right.  What if nothing bad happens as a result of the sequester?  The president is going to look like a doofus.  He will be a laughing stock, the brunt of all the jokes on late night TV.

Advisor # 2:  We’ve got to turn up the rhetoric.  Send out Janet Napolitano to say that we will no longer be able to enforce immigration laws.

Advisor # 1:  We already did that, and besides, we’re not enforcing immigration laws now.!

Advisor # 3:  We could not enforce them more.

(Silence)

Advisor # 2:  We can close the Washington Monument and the White House Visitors Center.  That’s never failed in past budget standoffs.

Advisor # 1:  That’s not enough.  The president said there will be real pain and there must be REAL PAIN!  Remember, no pain, no gain for us.

Advisor # 2:  We can tell them TSA agents screening airport passengers will have to be furloughed.  It will mean long lines.

Advisor # 1:  The lines are already long.  Besides, if the agents are forced by time constants to stop groping grannies and toddlers, who is going to complain?

Advisor # 2:  Scare them.  Tell them it means less air traffic controllers.  Airplanes will be flying blind.

Advisor # 1:  Hell, Reagan fired all of them and there was barely a hiccup.

Advisor # 3:  We could limit the number of children who attend Head Start.  When the going gets tough, hide behind poor children.  That always works.

Advisor # 1:  The program is already a disaster.  All the benefits are erased by the third grade.  It might cause further scrutiny of this program and, worse still, it might stir the pot for real education reform and increase the call for vouchers. That will bring the teacher’s union down on us.  No, we’d better drop that.

Advisor # 4:  I know!  Tell the it will cut out school lunches.  Imagine the angst it would create among the nation’s poor parents!

Advisor # 1:  Another boondoggle! We’re spending so much on food stamps and other food assistant programs, folks are wondering why welfare recipients can’t take some of that free food and pack lunches for their kids.  Better not hit that one too hard.

Advisor # 6:  Let’s  stay on the subject of the poor.  We can bring up the weatherization program for low income homes.  Energy Secretary Stephen Chu said it will mean up to 1,000 homes won’t receive free makeovers.  Think of all those people who won’t get new drywall, calking and new appliances.

Advisor # 1:  Yes, but some smart journalist would point out that we could simply  reduce the regulations that are driving up the cost of energy.  Energy costs for the poor (and everyone else) would remain the same and we could save millions by eliminating this program.  Also, that might trigger another discussion about all the money we’ve thrown at failed energy companies like Solyndra.  No, no, that is much too risky.  Let’s not beat that drum.

Advisors # 5:  I know. We can go back to scaring seniors.  They know their Social Security benefits are safe, but if we could tell them there won’t be enough workers to process those checks and they might arrive late . . .

Advisor # 1:  At best we’re only talking about cutting less that one and a half cents on the dollar.  That’s not going to happen unless we order the federal workers who process those checks to go to sleep at their work stations.

Advisors # 2:  Yes, but they already go to sleep at their work stations and it would take an act of Congress to be able to fire even one of them.

Advisor # 4:  An act of Congress, hum.  What if, what if Congress acts in the 11th hour and gives the president “transfer authority”?  You know, gives him the ability to pick and choose where to make those cuts in order to lessen the pain or eliminate it entirely?

Advisor # 1:  That would put the ball squarely in our court.  We’d have to eliminate worthless programs.  We could no longer reward our friends and get away with it. (Cringe) That would be a real disaster!

Advisors 2 – 6:  Agreed!

 

 

3 thoughts on “

  1. The fly on the wall sees and tells all. Nice reminder of the way things are and some of the areas that could be eliminated. The scare tactics of this administration are atrocious – the lies are so evident but the unseeing, unhearing, unthinking general public seem to have gotten drunk on Obama’s Kool Aid. Nice job, Jane.

    Like

  2. Reminds me of the “what if they gave a war and nobody came?”
    What if they gave a “sequester” and nobody cared?

    The Dem’s are stretching our gulability when they say that the sequester will cost 170 million jobs. That must include the jobs of 30 million illigal aliens and the 140 million working Americans.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s