Top story: Republicans think they can lay the blame for the effects of the sequester cuts on the president. They’re forgetting that, of the two, he’s the popular one.
- President Obama is taking his full-court press on the sequester cuts to local media. (The Hill)
- A simple, concise explanation for why it behooves Republicans to not fight President Obama over the sequester cuts. (Hint: it has to do with popularity) (The Fix)
- Letting the sequester cuts take effect could take away 700,000 jobs from the economy. (Think Progress)
- “But even if March 1 arrives without a deal to avert the cuts, it may be some time before many take effect. White House officials have said that the planned cuts would take $85 billion out of the budget this year. But the actual impact of cuts felt this year might be only about half that much, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated in a recent blog post.” (The New York Times)
- John Boehner takes his “get serious” act on the sequester to conservatives’ favorite Op/Ed page: (The Wall Street Journal)
- And the White House responds. (The White House)
- Counting sequester and the upcoming possible government shutdown, “We’re now on our 5th & 6th fiscal standoffs since ’11. What happens if the sequester sky doesn’t fall?” (Mark Murray)
- This all happens as Newt Gingrich takes a piece out of Karl Rove and Rove’s attempt to prevent “stupid” candidates: “The system of Tammany Hall and the Chicago machine. It should be repugnant to every conservative and every Republican.” (Human Events)
- However, Gingrich has worse things to say about Romney 2012 campaign advisor Stuart Stevens: “it seems he is indifferent to the facts and has no sense of responsibility for a presidential campaign that he dominated.” (Human Events)
John Flowers