West – 'Make Your Blood Boil', Lt. Cmdr. White to be Charged

Editor’s Note – Obama and his appointees so loathe the military; that is plain to see; no need to point out the many ways in which that has been proven, but what is about to happen is as Allen West said – ‘blood boiling’ and enough to make one ‘dog fighting mad’!

To those of us with family and friends on active duty around the globe, what the Navy is about to do to Lt. Commander Timothy White, a Sailor who is reportedly responsible for preventing further mayhem in Chattanooga, is about to have his career ended, for defending himself and his fellow warriors.

Their brave acts saved many lives.  Since our military is currently unarmed on U.S. bases and recruiting stations, there’s no telling just how many dead military personnel we might have today if these two brave heroes didn’t shoot back.

But now, under the Obama Administration, the Navy has been ordered to do the most despicable of things to this Navy Commander.  They can’t also do it to the Marine since he died in the gunfight. (Federalistpapers)

Why? Because those leading our men and women in uniform are puppets of an administration hellbent on tearing America down to her very knees. How best to do that? Eviscerate our military; make it unbearable for all but the toadies of the left. “Transformation complete,” mission accomplished!

What’s happening to this heroic Navy officer from the Chattanooga shooting will make your blood BOIL

By Allen West – Allenbwest.com

I never like to be reactionary and follow anything that may just be hyperbole or conspiracy theory. That’s why I held off on addressing this issue until I got confirmation — which came Friday afternoon via text message.navy-hero-charges2

There are things which make you just upset, like the liberal progressive left and media accomplices’ rage over the shooting of a lion in Africa but abject disregard and disdain reference Planned Parenthood dismembering babies and selling their body parts.

But this story has me dog fighting mad and seriously pissed off.

As reported ten days ago by Western Journalism,

A Navy officer and Marine reportedly returned fire at the shooter who killed five service members in Chattanooga, Tenn., even though current policy does not permit military members to carry firearms on facilities such as those where the attack occurred.

The cold-blooded assault killed four Marines and one active-duty Navy reservist. The center’s commanding officer, Lt. Cmdr. Timothy White, used his personal firearm to engage the shooter during the attack, according to sources quoted in the Navy Times. A report from The Washington Post said that one of the Marines killed in the shooting might have been carrying a 9 mm Glock and possibly returned fire on the shooter.

At the time, Western Journalism wrote,

Lt. Cmdr. White could face disciplinary action for violating policy about possessing a weapon on the facility that was supposedly a gun-free zone. The investigation into the attack is ongoing, and authorities will not know if White or the Marine hit the shooter until an autopsy and a ballistics report have been completed.

Ladies and gents, resulting from the text message I received yesterday, I can confirm that the United States Navy is bringing charges against Lt. Cmdr Timothy White for illegally discharging a firearm on federal property.

The text message asked if it would be possible for Lt.Cmdr White to reach out to me. To wit I replied, affirmative.

What kind of freaking idiots are in charge of our Armed Forces — pardon me, our “unArmed Forces”? What would they prefer that Abdulazeez had been able to kill all the Marines and Sailors at the Naval Support Reserve Center?

Let me draw an interesting contrast: Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus is more concerned about lifting the ban on transgendered Sailors.

President Barack Obama meets with Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus in the Oval Office, June 17, 2010.  (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.
President Barack Obama meets with Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus in the Oval Office, June 17, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Mabus has a problem in that for the first time since 2007 the US Navy will not have a Carrier Battle Group operating in the Persian Gulf.

But this knucklehead has no problem with the Navy seeking to destroy the career of a Sailor, a commander of an installation, returning fire against an Islamic jihadist attack.

I do not care if it was his personal weapon, he deserves a medal for facing the enemy.

Folks, this has become the Obama military that will not implement policies for our men and women in uniform to be protected — but will punish them if they do protect themselves.

What ever happened to the Navy of John Paul Jones, Farragut, Halsey, and Nimitz? What has happened in our America where we believe that our men and women in uniform — especially the commanders — are just targets for these damn Islamic jihadists?

Can you imagine the message this sends to ISIS and all the enemies of America? We are going to end his career and court-martial a man who drew his sidearm to protect his command, and the assigned Sailors and Marines.

What is the difference between Lt. Cmdr White and the reserve officer in Moore, Oklahoma who went to his vehicle and armed himself to prevent a second woman from being beheaded? Is it that we expect less from our uniformed warriors? Are they just supposed to sit and be butchered, gunned down, until local law enforcement come along?lt-cmdr-white

Let’s be very clear here, I can attest that there are many reserve and National Guard troops who are carrying concealed during their drill periods…why? Because they are lions, not sheep, like the imbeciles who are making the decision to punish Lt. Cmdr White.

Doggone, what does it take? Here we have a known [deserter] Bowe Bergdahl, out getting picked up smoking marijuana, or at a house growing marijuana. According to Susan Rice, he served with honor and distinction. The real men of honor such as Army 1LT Clint Lorance, and now it seems Lt. Cmdr White, are forced into jail.

Ponder this, Obama will pardon drug dealers, but men who fight the enemy are imprisoned? Now, can someone, any one of you inane characterless liberal progressive trolls explain that to me?

Explain it to us that you would rather have had more Sailors and Marines die than for this Navy Commander to draw his personal weapon in defense of his command. That’s what the Naval Support Center was for Lt. Cmdr White — his responsibility to defend, protect.

Here we have a president and secretary of state sitting down with a sworn enemy in Iran who holds four Americans hostage, and we’re going to bring charges against an American Naval Commander who returned fire against the enemy.

This is indeed FUBAR!

Here’s what needs to happen. Flood the phone of SecNav Ray Mabus and SecDef Carter and ask them whose side they’re. Demand the charges being brought against Lt.Cmdr White be immediately dropped. If those charges are not dropped, I will personally lead the charge to have Carter and Mabus removed from their positions.

America, this cannot be tolerated and must not be allowed to stand. I guess the life of an African lion means more to these liberal progressives than one of our brave Sailors.

It is beyond belief that the Navy would embark upon this folly — they could simply issue a “local letter of reprimand” that would not enter into Lt. Cmdr White’s permanent personnel file — then immediately pin a medal upon his chest and fast track him for promotion to Commander.

White exemplifies the highest and finest of character and tradition of the US Navy. Those who would bring charges against him are indeed cowards and need be exposed.

Lieutenant Commander Timothy White, I await your call, and I will not rest until these charges against you have been dropped. You stay strong. You showed that you are Steadfast and Loyal. And we will not allow you to be abandoned to the perfumed princes of the Pentagon…and the White House. America shall rally to your cause!

This is just another in the long line of reasons why we must NEVER allow a progressive socialist to be commander-in-chief.

MG Vallely – Reining in National Insecurity

Editor’s Note – Paul E. Vallely is a retired U.S. Army major general and is chairman of Stand Up America.

Obama’s policies pose dire threat to Americans’ safety

By Paul E. Vallely – Washington Times

MG Paul E. Vallely, US Army (Ret.)
MG Paul E. Vallely, US Army (Ret.)

This Election Day, patriotic Americans must vote to rein in President Obama. Informed and objective observers can only conclude our president and his followers work hardest to weaken U.S. military superiority, to the manifest advantage of our global enemies.

Moreover, in bypassing Congress wherever possible, the current administration seized unilateral control over foreign policy and national security, flouting the original and express intent of America’s Founders.

To begin with, two specific concerns are worth noting, among many more that deserve lengthier discussion. When did the American populace endorse unilateral reduction in our nuclear arsenal, supposedly in line with comparable Russian actions? Russia is not a trustworthy partner in any respect.

President Barack Obama traveled to the Pentagon in 2012 to announce that the “tide of war is receding” for the United States, thereby justifying massive cuts to the U.S. military. “In short, we’ve succeeded in defending our nation, taking the fight to our enemies, reducing the number of Americans in harm’s way, and we’ve restored America’s global leadership. That makes us safer and it makes us stronger.”
President Barack Obama in 2012: “In short, we’ve succeeded in defending our nation, taking the fight to our enemies, reducing the number of Americans in harm’s way, and we’ve restored America’s global leadership. That makes us safer and it makes us stronger.”

Moreover, Mr. Obama’s policies support and enable the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic State, known militant and radical Islamic groups. He backed the election of Mohammed Morsi as Egypt’s new president, even as Mr. Morsi tried establishing an intolerant Islamic caliphate.

We should never forget that Mr. Morsi’s military and police attacked non-Muslims and persecuted Christians, who were beaten, raped, robbed and killed.

Meanwhile, Mr. Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said and did nothing other than support Mr. Morsi and his radical government. Luckily, destiny and understanding the “realities” of Islamic terror brought Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi and his patriots to the Egyptian people.

Do Americans in both political parties really wish to lay down their arms, cripple our military defenses and cede our sovereignty to rising nations such as Russia and China, to shadowy actors such as the Islamic State, to the United Nations or to some new global superstate?

Is the illusion of peace worth the mounting costs?

Throughout the 238-year history of the United States, our military forces experienced many transformations. Initially, the Army, Navy and Marines were patriots who organized to fight against the tyranny of England.

They banded together to win a revolution and became a force for securing the fledgling nation.

11obama_c0-34-800-500_s561x327Over ensuing decades and centuries, our military expanded, evolved, and eventually became the strongest fighting force on earth.

These changes all reflected the need and threats of the day and the political will of the government and its elected officials.

What has the Obama administration been seeking to achieve since Jan. 20, 2009? As Adm. James Lyons has stated, “With the weakest national security team since World War II, it is no wonder that both our foreign and national security policies lack coherence and direction.

The administration’s faculty-lounge logic that, in the 21st century, ‘diplomacy’ will substitute for military solutions to international crisis, overlooks or chooses to ignore a key factor: recognized military power that provides the essential underpinnings to successful diplomacy. It is called ‘peace through strength.’”

After six years, is it clear what Mr. Obama’s military objectives are anywhere on this earth? Do Americans truly believe that their national security is better protected by the Obama administration than it was before its inception?

As we approach a pivotal set of elections that affect all Americans, we who care deeply about the defense of this great nation must ask and answer a series of probing questions.

What were Mr. Obama’s intentions toward the military after taking office?

What impact has he had on the military ever since?

What will his impact be through Jan. 20, 2017, when he completes his second term in office?

A review of the president’s record and informed consideration of the current state of play suggest that America occupies a precarious position, before numerous, clear and present dangers.

To date, Mr. Obama’s actions and inactions across the globe and at home compound a long list of failures. Whether by design, malfeasance or stark ineptitude, this past is prologue for a deeply disturbing future.putin_obama

Left unchecked, Mr. Obama will degrade further America’s credibility, respect, trust and standing in the community of nations.

Thinking past Election Day, Americans should consider threats posed to this country under the president’s “leadership,” including Syria, Iran, Russia, China, our eroded relationship with linchpin Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood, North Korea, the Islamic State and al Qaeda.

Why does our president give billions of dollars in aid and supply arms to regimes that declare America and our ally Israel to be mortal enemies, worthy only of destruction?

Why would Mr. Obama work so hard to disarm American citizens while he rushes to arm our worst enemies?

Mr. Obama is relentlessly wrecking the Defense Department, downsizing and overburdening our military forces, overwhelming the U.S. economy, and speeding this country toward national suicide.

As we pause before voting, Americans need to think carefully about the risks involved letting Mr. Obama rule for two more years with little counterbalancing influence from the legislative branch.

This November your vote counts a lot more than ever before.

Pentagon Police Security Systems Fail

Editor’s Note – We are in deep trouble electronically and our national security is at stake. This we have seen and heard many times, but when the Pentagon security systems fail ‘catastrophically’, with repairs expected to be finished by January 2015, it is time to find a new level of worry.

The cause is unknown to date but we ask, why did it take so long for this to be released to the public? The event began on January 3rd, here we are in May.

Pentagon Police Agency Hit by ‘Catastrophic’ Network Outage

By Bob Brewin – NextGov.com

The agency that manages the Pentagon Police Department and also runs networks and computers used the by the  Office of the Secretary of Defense experienced a “catastrophic network technological outage” on Jan. 3, and it could take until January 2015 to complete the repairs, an obscure document on the Federal Business Opportunities website revealed.Force Protection Agency

That document, posted on May 2, disclosed that the outage experienced by the Pentagon Life Safety System Network and Life Safety Backbone left the Pentagon Force Protection Agency “without access to the mission-critical systems needed to properly safeguard personnel and facilities, rendering the agency blind across the national capital region.”

The Force Protection Agency provides security and services to 100 military buildings in Washington, Maryland and Virginia.

The agency estimated it would take six to 12 months to “effect repairs and to upgrade the network core to mitigate future outage risks.” Repairs include recovery of data after the catastrophic network technological outage and upgrade and replacement of switches and routers.

sadfdsafaSRA International Inc. won a $56 million contract for the Life Safety System Network in 2008 that expired on April 30.

The Force Protection Agency falls under the Washington Headquarters Service, which extended the SRA contract through Oct. 31, with a value of $7.3 million, and a four month option through Feb. 28, 2015, with a total value of $11.4 million.

The sole source contract extension with SRA called for refreshed hardware and software for the Life System Safety Network, a new network design that minimizes single point failure, including dual homing, which reduces the risk of failure.

As the incumbent on Life Safety System Network contract, “SRA is the only known vendor who has expert security-cleared personnel that can immediately accomplish this urgent upgrade given their existing knowledge of the specific LSB technical and architectural challenges, and in-depth knowledge of the existing infrastructure to include the known and potential failure points of an extremely complex environment,” the Washington Headquarters Service said.

The Pentagon has not yet responded to a query submitted Sunday on the general cause of the outage nor to a query earlier Tuesday morning on whether or not it was caused by a hacker.

Hagel Cuts Pentagon Back to Pre-WWII Levels

Editor’s Note – Prior to World War II, despite FDR’s desires, the nation preferred to stay out of the war raging in Europe, for right or wrong. What we did not know was that Japan was about to make us enter, and FDR had already been supplying England through the Lend/Lease Act to avoid ceding so-called neutrality.

A portion of every purchse from our partners at Lear Capital will be donated to the Scott Vallely Soldiers Memorial Fund
A portion of every purchase from our partners at Lear Capital will be donated to the Scott Vallely Soldiers Memorial Fund – Click Here.

No matter what the tenor of the nation, the war was about to pull us in, and we were not prepared. The signs were there, in broad colors, and in large measure, the signs of World War are present today, some say in starker terms. Fortunately, when Japan unleashed the ‘sleeping giant’, we quickly turned the foremost industrial engine on the Earth into overdrive and we eventually overwhelmed our enemies and saved our allies.

Now, we are decreasing our military, at a time we should be modernizing it and insuring it fits the threat, not just a bottom line number, but we do not have the money allocated by threat priority in other budgets due to waste, fraud and abuse. At a time when our collective intelligence reports read that the threats are greater today than ever, supported by the Intelligence Community congressional testimony, what criteria did Hagel use?

It is also clear that our nation is considered weaker than ever, and now our enemies see us cut further. This emboldens the likes of Iran, Putin in Russia, China in the Pacific, and al Qaeda. Let us also not forget the Taliban threat once we leave Afghanistan.

Of course, past bad fiscal management by all parties has brought us to the brink of financial ruin, the Obama Administration has only deepened the abyss and now Secretary of Defense Hagel announced massive cuts; cuts that will place us right back in the pre-WWII levels. The question is, if World War comes again, we will be able to recover as quickly, and strike our enemies into total submission?

You be the judge, but you also need to ask why, that for at least three generations we have not reined in unreasonable spending in the Pentagon as well – a ‘perfect storm’ appears on the horizon, and we have a ‘paper tiger’ in the White House. Bad management has reduced our national security because of politics, not priorities.

perfectstorm

The Defense Budget vs. History

 – Commentary Magazine

Traditionally, military planners have operated under a worst-case scenario: i.e., what do we need to have in place to respond if nothing goes as planned? The Obama administration and Congress appear to be operating under a best-case scenario: i.e., what is the minimum force we can field on the assumption that nothing will go terribly wrong?

Thus the new defense budget, being unveiled today, which cuts the army’s active-duty force size to the smallest level since before World War II–just 440,000 to 450,000 soldiers. That’s down from a wartime high of 570,000, although even that figure was painfully inadequate to allow the U.S. to respond to two unforeseen wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

defense-budgetAs critics of the Bush administration–including Senator Barack Obama–were once fond of pointing out, Bush never sent enough troops to stabilize Iraq until 2007 and that commitment was only made possible by keeping a ludicrously small force in Afghanistan, once known as the “necessary” war.

The failure to send more troops early on allowed the Taliban to rebound from near-defeat in 2001 and allowed various insurgent groups to sprout all over Iraq.

So if 570,000 troops were not enough to handle such relatively weak foes as al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Taliban, how on earth would 440,000 troops be able to handle more robust contingencies–unlikely but not impossible–such as simultaneous wars with Iran and North Korea and a stabilization mission in, say, Yemen? The answer is that they couldn’t.

Actually the situation is even worse than the news would have you believe. Because the army’s plan to cut down to 440,000 to 450,000 is premised on the assumption that Congress will continue to provide relief from half a trillion dollars in sequestration cuts.

But the budget deal reached by Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray only provides sequestration relief in 2014 and 2015; unless Congress is willing to turn off sequestration in future years, the army will have to go even lower in end-strength.

Moreover, the defense budget includes modest cuts in personnel spending–spending on pay, pensions, and health care–which are long overdue but which are likely to be blocked by Congress, as was the case with a recent attempt to cut cost-of-living adjustments for military retirees by a measly one percent.

"Peace for Our Time" was spoken on 30 September 1938 by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in his speech concerning the Munich Agreement and the Anglo-German Declaration
“Peace for Our Time” was spoken on 30 September 1938 by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in his speech concerning the Munich Agreement and the Anglo-German Declaration

Unless Congress goes along with cuts to personnel costs, which now constitute half of the defense budget, other parts of the budget–including, no doubt, the army’s end-strength–will have to endure further scaling back.

That is a responsible decline in military strength only if you assume that we will never fight another major land war, or engage in simultaneous stabilization and counterinsurgency operations. And that, in turn, is a tenable assumption only if you assume that the laws of history have been repealed and a new era is dawning in which the U.S. will be able to protect all of its vital interests through drone strikes and commando raids.

We all hope that’s the case but, as the saying has it, hope isn’t a strategy. Except, it seems, in Washington defense circles today.

If history teaches anything, it is that the era of land wars is not over and that we will pay a heavy price in the future for our unpreparedness–as we have paid in blood at the beginning of every major war in American history.

Our failure to learn from history is stunning and (from a historian’s standpoint) disheartening but not, alas, terribly surprising: Throughout history, supposedly enlightened elites have been able to convince themselves that the era of conflict is over and a new age is dawning.

The fact that they have always been wrong before does not, somehow, lead them to question those assumptions in the present day, because this is such a convenient belief to have.

Today, for both Republicans and Democrats, the president and Congress, these hope-based assumptions about defense spending allow them to put off the truly difficult decisions about cutting entitlement spending. But at what cost? If history is any guide, the cost of unpreparedness will be steep and will be borne by future generations of American troops.

'Obamaquester' – What it really entails and who thought it up

By Denise Simon – The ‘sequester’ is close to implementation and we may see exactly what happens when political wrangling trumps our security. The President blames the Republicans in the House of Representatives, but it was Obama and Jack Lew who came up with the idea of ‘sequestration’. He can deny it, or obfuscate, or change the focus, but it was done as a political ploy first and foremost.

FactCheck.com tries to sell that it was an agreement by the House, Senate and the President, but it was all done as ploy. The ploy had America’s back to the wall and they know it – it was a pressure tactic that was agreed upon to force Obama to lead in spending cuts, which have not happened.

The White House and its sycophants, apologists, and surrogates want America to believe its the Tea Party and and the entrenched Republicans who are causing the harm. That however is far from the truth. Harry Reid and Jack Lew made it happen at the behest of the Obama team and it was clearly part of reelection efforts.

John Boehner, speaking with Hugh Hewitt lays it out clearly (Read the whole interview here.):

The clock is closer than in the picture, but March 1 is almost upon us.

Having first proposed and demanded the sequester, it would make sense that the president lead the effort to replace it. Unfortunately, he has put forth no detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Senate—controlled by his Democratic allies—hasn’t even voted on a solution, let alone passed one. By contrast, House Republicans have twice passed plans to replace the sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect national security.

The press is only recently understanding the machinations of the Obama team, albeit, four years late, but we can still hope that America will finally see that the king has no clothes on after all. Meanwhile, upon any level of inspection, Obama is clearly striving to destroy our military, and is scaring people by saying cuts will be severe.

Mark Levin lays out the argument here. This audio by Levin is a must listen piece on waste and big government and why Obama is lying to us. There have been almost zero cuts, yet Obama claims so much has already been done – its all lies.

Much has been mentioned in the last 18 months regarding the far and wide devastation of ‘Sequestration’.

A Super Committee was created to work through the process to avoid Sequestration but that measure also failed. The White House and the lobby groups have been on a loud and vocal quest to blame Republicans and the House of Representatives for what looms as Sequestration takes affect on March 1, 2013. The House has worked diligently to pass laws that stop the devastating cuts, most especially cuts in defense, while none of the measure by the House have been provided attention or vote by the Senate.

Lets take a look at what Sequester impacts on both sides. This is not a complete list and the depth of the cuts are not explained as that can be determined by a review of the associated links here and here.

What gets cut:

TSA, FDA food inspectors ,Head-Start, Defense, Parks Service, National Guard, Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Secret Service, FEMA, Air Federal Marshalls, FAA, Special Education Teachers, Center for Disease Control, NASA, Security and Exchange Commission, Foreign aid with particular emphasis on Israel and Mexico (130 countries affected), and among others, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (nuclear weapons)

What is exempt:

Social Security, Railroad employees retirement, Veteran’s Administration benefits, Unemployment, Tribal and Indian Trust Accounts, Child nutrition, Children’s Heath Insurance, Pell Grants, Medicaid, SNAP, food stamps, Highway Safety Grants, Motor Carrier Safety Operations, Federal pay, Child Support Enforcement, FDIC, Farm Credits, and among others, the Tennessee Valley Authority.

In a snapshot assessment of what stays and what goes, it is clear that programs related to National Security and Foreign Affairs are set to feel the the brunt in ‘Sequester’ while domestic programs geared to funding the indigent remain. In short, the dangerous world will be even more dangerous and education and healthcare remains protected. We have yet to understand the large numbers of those that will be unemployed and what our enemies will take advantage of regarding our homeland. But here is one area that will be effected immediately:

Pentagon informs Congress of plans to furlough 800K civilians

By Jeremy Herb – The Hill

The Pentagon notified Congress on Wednesday it will be furloughing its civilian workforce of 800,000 employees if sequestration goes into effect March 1.

Defense officials have warned lawmakers that sequestration will devastate the military and lead to a hollow force, but the civilian furloughs will be one of the first major impacts felt by the across-the-board cuts.

The Pentagon furloughs will affect civilians across the country. Pentagon officials have said that civilians could face up to 22 days of furloughs, one per week, through the end of the fiscal year in September. The employees would receive 30 days notice before being furloughed.

“We are doing everything possible to limit the worst effects on DOD personnel — but I regret that our flexibility within the law is extremely limited,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta wrote in a message to the department. “The president has used his legal authority to exempt military personnel funding from sequestration, but we have no legal authority to exempt civilian personnel funding from reductions.”

The Joint Chiefs also testified before both the House and Senate last week to lay out the dangers of sequestration, as the Pentagon has taken a much more proactive approach to the cuts than when they were set to hit in January.

The potential for furloughs was one of the few things DOD officials announced before the Jan. 2 deadline, which was delayed two months in the “fiscal-cliff” deal.

President Obama on Tuesday spoke to first responders who he also warned could be furloughed due to sequestration. He urged Republicans to compromise and stop the cuts.

Obama will be on the road again next week with campaign-style events arguing that Republicans are at fault for the cuts, while the GOP blames the White House for the sequester.

“Republicans in Congress face a simple choice,” the president said Tuesday. “Are they willing to compromise to protect vital investments in education and healthcare and national security and all the jobs that depend on them? Or would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations?”

But Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in response to the Pentagon furloughs that Obama has yet to put forward a plan to stop the across-the-board cuts, while the House has passed an alternative.

“I agree with the secretary of Defense that the impact of the president’s sequester would be devastating to our military,” Boehner said in a statement. “That’s why the House has acted twice to replace the president’s sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect our national security, and it’s why I’ve been calling on the president for more than a year to press his Democratic-controlled Senate to do the same.”

The back-and-forth is part of a blame game between the White House and congressional Republicans as the cuts are less than two weeks out, with no apparent movement to stop them before March 1.

Preparations for cuts from sequestration and the department’s budget uncertainty are continuing in the defense industry.

BAE Systems notified 3,600 employees Tuesday that they could be laid off over a loss of work from the Navy, due primarily to the Pentagon facing a continuing resolution.

Bill Clifford, president of BAE Systems Ship Repair, told Ship Repair employees that the notifications under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act were going out to employees at four BAE locations in Norfolk, Va., Mayport, Fla., San Diego, Calif., and Hawaii.

“We do not take these decisions lightly, and we regret the anxiety it causes our employees and their families. I also recognize this news is unsettling, but rest assured we are working closely with our Navy customer and members of Congress to mitigate the impact of these proposed reductions,” Clifford wrote.

The WARN Act notices were a major political fight between Congress and the Obama administration during the 2012 campaign. After defense contractors threatened sending out mass notices before sequestration, the administration told contractors not to issue them 60 days before the cuts took effect — and also took the step of promising to cover layoff costs if contractors had to immediately fire workers.

In this case, BAE appears to be issuing the notices with enough time that it will follow the WARN law and not incur extra costs.