Remember that around a year ago, President O said that he would veto any congressional attempt to avoid the sequester of funds, which he demanded?
Nah, they didn't think you would.
For the last six years (that includes Bush, doncha know, but doesn't exclude Obama) the American population has suffered continual erosion of their family budgets, both through price increases, like gasoline, and through loss of revenue, from job losses and income reductions. And our federal rulers can't find a way to reduce expenses and are yelping about national disaster in the form of a mere 1 or 2 percent reduction in spending? When spending already exceeds income by a hell of a lot more?
The sequester would be a decent first step towards resolving the problem, even though insufficient in and of itself. And it won't be a disaster, that is, it won't be a disaster unless it is implemented disastrously to punish the impertinence of people who don't think that increased government spending must be supported in any and all cases and by any means possible.
We have fallen in amongst bandits.