Yes, American families and some businesses have been tightening their belts - but I see there is no mention of those that haven't had to, those whose incomes and wealth and bottom lines have increased - often at the expense of those who are already sacrificing and have little left to give.

If the President "knows" that the government needs to tighten its belt, he doesn't know as much as I, at least, would like him to; the federal budget is not, in any way, shape or form, like a household or business budget.  Why does he continue to advance the myth - and Republican position (at least with respect to things they don't want to pay for) - that it is?  Inquiring minds...

What Democrat is his or her right mind would agree that freezing anyone's pay is the smart thing to do in a struggling economy desperate to maintain what marginal increases in demand there have been?  What person of any political persuasion thinks this is the right message to send at the beginning of the holiday spending period?  Why would you want to give people any more reason to be afraid to spend?

And I guess you will have to pardon my laughter when I consider the request to "get the truth out there."  What is being requested is for more Republican propaganda to be disseminated via a media that is already with the anti-government, anti-old, anti-poor and anti-sick campaign, and still on board with WAR! WAR! WAR! And TERROR! TERROR! TERROR!

It's disheartening to know we have a so-called Democratic president who doesn't understand the power and ability of the government to help the millions and millions of ordinary, average Joes and Janes who comprise the population, and has, instead, chosen the Republican fork in the road.

President Obama's proposal, which has to be passed by the GOP/Tea Party House, will freeze all non-military government workers' pay (not including GOP/Tea Party elected officials or staff) for two years.  

Since the sole purpose of this action is to show fiscal discipline, if we freeze pay on all government workers we must include all employees of government contractors, and reduce contractors costs to the equivalent government job they are replacing.

For those contractors with overhead expenses like wasteful executive pay (in excess of the equivalent government executive), obviously we cannot afford with our budget deficit to keep them on and would have to save money by bringing the jobs into the government.

Since on average government workers are paid 22% less than the equivalent private sector worker, this would apply to most contracts and would result in a vast saving especially if we apply it to Defense contractors.

We shouldn't use government workers in cases where private contractors are more cost effective (with equivalent benefits and working conditions).

For deficit reduction, we must put a freeze on lobbyist pay to the equivalent of the standard unrepresented voter.  In order to hire a lobbyist, the hiring firm would have to freeze pay increases for two years also.

Lawyers pay in suits where the government is involved must be limited to the equivalent pay for the government lawyers. This will make business more efficient and increase profits.