We live in a leaderless country governed, in effect, by two opposition parties: the anti-war movement in the Senate and the Tea Party movement in the House.
With a normal government–with a president actually interested in performing his duties rather than destroying his opponents, for instance–we would have avoided the sequester.
After all, it makes no sense to cut discretionary spending when entitlement spending is the problem. It makes even less sense to cut defense in a time of rising global threats.
But the sensible plans put forth by Paul Ryan and Simpson-Bowles were demonized and ignored, respectively, by the nation’s chief executive, who has other priorities.
So we may be left with the least common denominator in American politics: fiscal and foreign policy restraint. Which is fine–until there is a military or economic crisis. Then what?