2013 Budget Sequestration: The Fault Of Congress, not President Barack Obama.

Many ill-informed people believe that POTUS (the President of the United States, Barack Obama) is responsible for the current sequester and the fact that the United States has been operating without an annual budget since 2009. Much of the misinformation that the general public and naive political pundits who consequently place the blame at the feet of President Barack Obama have about the federal budget process comes not only from a poor knowledge and education of our government but also from a manipulating and deceitful Republican Party leadership and from irresponsible members of the Tea Party movement.

The “power of the purse” is a function of the United States Congress as designated by the Constitution of the United States of America.

By law, the President is required to send a budget request, which is technically only just a proposal, to Congress no sooner than the first Monday in January and no later than the first Monday in February. However, it is the United States Congress consisting of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate that is required by law to pass an annual budget and to submit that budget to the President for signature. Note that the federal fiscal year does not begin until October 1.

So, people, if you are going to cast stones, point fingers, and place blame for the budget sequestration in 2013, at least do it honestly in an informed manner. The fault for this continuing fiscal dilemma lies with the Congress of the United States and not with our President, Barack Obama.

ref:
Bill of Rights Institute: The Federal Budget and the Constitution
Wikipedia: United States federal budget
National Priorities Project: FEDERAL BUDGET 101, Federal Budget Process
House of Representatives, Committee On The Budget: The Budget

Am I really a washed-up has-been???

At one time, when I was in my prime, I was a "somebody" but then I fell out of grace with some people; and I became a "nobody." It was quite a transition for me to go from being a someone to being a no one. But really, is it necessary to call names? (That's a rhetorical statement.)

I wonder how many people have used the the phrase "washed up" or the phrase "has been" or any other number of similar phrases. Heck, I know of a few people who have used the phrase "washed-up has-been" in making reference to me.

Curiosity got the better of me concerning that type of phraseology in making reference to people, so I did my usual thing and turned to the wide wonderful world of the web on the internet.

I came across one definition of washed up that goes like this:
"The definition of washed up is someone or something whose time has come and gone; someone who was popular or who had a good career but who now doesn't and has little to offer."

The term "has-been" as defined in The Free Dictionary By Farlex is "One that is no longer famous, popular, successful, or useful." or "a person or thing that is no longer popular, successful, effective, etc."

Even, the Urban Dictionary has definitions of hasbeen!!!

Actually, a few years back, I had written a little bit about this before on my other blog, Roland's Ramblings, that you can read by clicking over to Has-Been.

Incidentally, did you know that Has Been is the second musical album of William Shatner?

In doing my internet research on this topic, I came across the blog Washed Up Celebrities that you may read if you click upon the embedded link that I placed within the blog title.

I found some other interesting reading that starts out with:

See what happens when a washed-up has-been "star" gets old and decrepit?
As in Pat Boone, of course.
Pat Boone is a longtime birther and Obama-hater, so it's no surprise he would keep up the Obama-hate.

You may read that entire piece by clicking here.