In this case it's a staple of modern law that agreements made under duress are not legal. So if people want to blame Obama for the sequester, that's the first hurdle. Then they need to consider those who voted against it and then engineered partisan stalemate in the Supercommittee so that the sequester was realized. Finally, sensible commentary requires a credible motive for Obama to want the sequester. Seems to me it's more a symptom of the awful depths to which politics has sunk rather than an albatross to hang around one person's neck by dramatic fiction about his dastardly thoughts and deeds that led to it.

And how is this statement demonstrable fact? You don't have an IMHO anywhere and I want sources and proof that this statement is demonstrable fact. You seem to be a lot like our congress - they want to pass laws that don't apply to them (BTW, this is demonstrable fact - see congressional exemptions from the ACA).

The idea that statements of opinion are inappropriate in a chatter forum is absurd (and, yes, that is my opinion).