It's almost like McMorris Rodgers and other Republican House leaders like John Boehner are talking about a completely different sequester from the one Senate Republicans are talking about. When McMorris Rodgers explains to us how these cuts are "devastating," she might want to tell that to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has said, snickering, "will the economy be adversely affected by a 2.4 percent reduction in government spending? I think not." Or to Sen. Tom Coburn, who, asked if the sequester would go into effect, said "it needs to."
And when she laments that "yet this week, the president traveled 180 miles to Newport News, Virginia, instead of traveling one and a half miles to Sen. Harry Reid's office, on Capitol Hill, to negotiate a replacement of smarter spending cuts," are we not supposed to notice that she's saying the sequester can only be ended by Democrats negotiating with Democrats, with Republicans not negotiating and not acting to replace the cuts? Are we supposed to forget that Senate Democrats did vote for a bill, but Republicans filibustered it? Are we not supposed to notice that ending the sequester without raising revenue means making the same amount of cuts, just shifting them around a little?
I guess that's where the talking-to-idiots voice comes in.