That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic.

"Obama has been racking up the debt at the rate of $1 trillion a year."

One TRILLION dollars a year.

That's $31,709.79 per second.

Repeat: PER SECOND!!

As of the 2010 Census, there are 281,421,906 people in the US. So, over the course of his presidency, Obama has tossed $20,881.50 onto the debt load of EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN.

What was it this lying thief said when he was running against Bush?

Oh yeah, June, 2008:

"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents - #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic."

Obama has added $5.9 trillion - 1.475 TIMES MORE than Bush and in a shorter time - "by his lonesome."

$31,688.96 "for every man, woman and child."

Hey, Obama never claimed to be patriotic, so he's simply living up to that.

Remember, $31,709.79 per second; he's got 66,843,593.65 seconds to go and the clock is ticking.

$31,709.79 for each tick.

Tick tock, tick tock...

Is The Sequestor All That Big a Deal?

What is this "sequestor" being bandied about on all the fashionable news stations?

Is it the end of the world, or is it just Chicken Little running about crying, "Wolf?"

What it is, is an $85 billion reduction in spending. I can see Obama being antsy about this - after all, he's failed to produce a budget for a long time now and these sorts of big numbers probably upset his apple cart.

Another big number he ignores is the $16.5 TRILLION in debt that he's given us. Is it all his? No, not really. But, bear in mind that it wasn't too long ago that he was berating another president that it was irresponsible and unpatriotic to give us $4 trillion in debt over eight years, while he ups it $6 trillion in just four.

Also bear in mind that mere months ago, the "fiscal cliff" gave us a $630 billion tax hike.

$630 billion vs. $85 billion.

Taxes went UP more than 7 times the amount of the pending spending cuts and Obama and his media cronies are harping about the "disaster" of the sequestor?

Panetta, the good little Obama lapdog that he is, cries out between heaving sobs that he'll have to furlough 800,000 civilian workers.

Really, Larry? Seriously?

Tell us, Larry, if less than 1/7th of the tax hike is being cut, why is it these civilian workers had jobs BEFORE the tax hike?

Give it a rest, Barry and ilk.

And, here's a just a little bit more Sequester Math for your viewing pleasure;

Current Federal Spending: $3.8 trillion.
 "Fiscal Cliff" tax hike: $630 billion
 Sequestor spending cuts: $85 billion

That's a big number, 85. Way bigger than 3.8.

Thing is, there a little difference in letters. The 3.8 is Trillion, with a "t." The 85 is Billion, with a "b."

The difference in those letters is enormous.

1 trillion is 1,000 billion.

What does that mean? Here comes the math;

It means that of the $3,800,000,000,000 that the feds want to spend, they'll only be able to spend $3,715,000,000,000 of it. A whole 2.2% less.

Wow.

Let's put it in terms that are more down to Earth, maybe easier to grasp.

According to the federal government, the national average wage is $42,979.61. That's $826.50 every week.

If this were cut by the same percent as the sequestor is to federal spending, you'd have only $808/week.

That's a cut of only $18.50/week.

Boy, that mean ol' sequestor.

Oh, but don't forget that tax hike coming in. That $808/week will become $945/week.

So, does that $18.50 mean all that much, after all?