Bring on the sequester"!
His reasoning? Defense spending won't be cut.
Actually, if that is true, that just its rate of growth would be cut by the sequester, I'm OK.
But, that may not be true, and beyond that, Texas is going to take a worse-than-average ding, overall.
That's per information I blogged about yesterday.
But Long John Cornyn (appearing in a Clarence Thomas production near you) doesn't care.
Besides, he approved all the off-budget war spending in the first place, so he's a bit of a hypocrite even on defense spending.
But beyond that, the sequester rules don't allow the Pentagon to shift money around from department to department. (Or other executive agencies to do similar.)
If I'm assigning overall blame factor on the sequester, right now?
I give one-third to Maximum Leader. Obama apparently thought that he was dealing with folks who would bring more rationality to the table with this financial version of Prisoner's Dilemma. (The grammar Nazi in me says it should be Prisoners' Dilemma, because it involves two.) By the fall of 2011, he had plenty of information to disabuse himself of that belief. Or, maybe he still believed in the power of his mellifluous voice.
The other two-thirds, House and Senate GOP can tussle over who's more to blame.