As elements of the Mass Hysteria Media question their role in promoting Obama's 'Apocalpyse Now' approach to the upcoming sequester, even the NY Times finds itself wondering about its commitment to cheerleading against the sequester.
First, they point out that there are liberals who love the idea of cutting defense and sparing entitlements:
Parties Focus on the Positive as Budget Cuts Draw Near
WASHINGTON — With time running short and little real effort under way to avert automatic budget cuts that take effect Friday, substantial and growing wings of both parties are learning to live with — if not love — the so-called sequester.
For weeks, President Obama has barnstormed the country, warning of the dire consequences of the cuts to military readiness, educators, air travel and first responders even as the White House acknowledges that some of the disruptions will take weeks to emerge.
The reverse side has gone unmentioned: Some of the most liberal members of Congress see the cuts as a rare opportunity to whittle down Pentagon spending. The poor are already shielded from the worst of the cuts, and the process could take pressure off the Democratic Party, at least in the short run, to tamper with Social Security and Medicare.
My, my. The Times also wonders about the devastation we should expect at one minute after midnight of the sequestration. Or even one month...
White House Counts on G.O.P. to Bend as Cuts’ Effects Are Felt
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s team concedes that the almost certain arrival of across-the-board budget cuts on Friday will not immediately produce the politically dramatic layoffs and airport delays that the administration has been warning about for days.
But White House strategists say they believe that a constant drip of bad news will emerge in Congressional districts across the country in the weeks ahead, generating negative headlines and, they hope, putting Republicans on the defensive for their refusal to raise taxes.
The mission of the Mass Hysteria Media is clear - somewhere out there a granny will be eating catfood or have a cat stuck in a tree because of the sequester, and it is their job to find that person, or cat, and bring them to John Boehner.
Yet the Times seems to be having a bit of angst about their assignment:
In accepting the inevitability of an extended Washington stalemate, the White House is risking the possibility that Americans may eventually blame the president, not members of Congress, for job losses, smaller paychecks, longer lines at airports, a reduction in government services and a less well-equipped military.
Mr. Obama could also ultimately emerge as a kind of president who cried wolf if Americans just shrug at the slow-rolling budget cuts and think the crisis atmosphere that he created was more hype than reality. On Wednesday night, the president acknowledged to a group of business leaders that “a lot of people may not notice the full impact of the sequester” for weeks.
Well, yes, the public may think the President cried wolf and the media played along.
The battle lines are clear:
Republicans are trying to make the case to the American public that the president and his staff are trying to frighten people by overstating how difficult it will be for government agencies to trim their spending. Mr. Boehner said in an interview on Wednesday on the CBS program “This Morning” that the president had “traveled over 5,000 miles in the last two weeks doing campaign-style events,” adding, “this is a time to lead.”
Every news organization covering this has gone through cutbacks in the last few years. Yet they are now supposed to report to us that the provision of basic services will end if the government is cut back to funding levels last seen in, oh, 2008. One worries about an impending botox shortage as anchormen strain to keep a straight face.