ExiledInIllinois Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Even know they aren't closing down the federal waterways (like the inland river system), the USACE (Corps) is closing down their recreation sites... Like @ their campgrounds, bike trails, etc... around reservoirs. They are telling people to go home. I am guessing this is more of a sweeping shutdown than the prievious ones since it is happening right @ the end of the fiscal year, meaning almost nothing is getting funded?
Nanker Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 As an impartial observer, it seems to me that it is not the political parties, nor the health care issues that are the problem. It is your system itself that has become the problem. At some point a loophole in the system was discovered and exploited(the first government shutdown, whenever that was). It enabled the congress to attempt to bypass the law making process. As I see it, laws are made/changed/rejected etc through a series of checks and balances, voted on by elected representatives of the people of the day. Having a situation where any new congress can dictate what laws(that have been made and passed through the system) should or shouldn't be changed/removed seems counter intuitive to the entire process and relocates a lot of the powers controlled by the other arms of government to the congress. The fact that it is being done specifically on an important issue is quite irrelevant to the concept that it can be done at any point on any issue. Though this situation has only been a rare occurrence, it doesn't necessarily have to be. In theory a congress could hold the rest of the government to ransom and threaten to shut it down(by not passing funding) if they don't change/remove hundreds of laws that philosophically they didn't agree with. Until your government shuts this loophole, this could become a far more common thing in the future.....particularly considering the progressive polarization of views in the modern western world. In theory... no, in fact. So we're supposed to go back to having slaves and women not voting because those were original laws? Not a very "progressive" view I'd say. The reason Congress is not bound by the actions of a previous one is precisely one of the checks and balances designed to correct the exact kind of cluster gang rape of the system that Pelosi's Congress committed three years ago. The House of Representatives is elected for follow the wishes of "the people" and Senators are supposed to follow the wishes of their state's legislatures. That's it. Congresscritters are elected every two years which gives the people the right to throw the bums out expeditiously when they go off the reservation. The passing of the ACA was nothing short of a political rape the kind of which has never been seen in this country before. Say what you will about the "merits" of the legislation its self, the way it was passed was abhorrent to the majority of Americans, and they elected a new Congress that is now expressing the will of the people now. Pelosi's Congress was elected in reaction to hatred many Americans had for the Bush Presidency, i.e., it was a historical anomaly but their leadership seized the moment to ram through every leftist wet dream program that under normal conditions they would never have had the votes to pass. So in that respect - a more historical perspective shows that what this Congress is doing - moderating the excesses of the previous one - is symptomatic of the system of checks and balances working. What's different about this Presidency is the shrill tone and harsh rhetoric from the leadership which demeans the debate. "hostage taking, guns-to-the-head, Anarchists, people with bombs strapped to their chests" etc., are little more than name calling and inspire vitriolic responses and intransigence rather than true compromise and bipartisanship. This President leads by fiat and hissy fit. He's made it abundantly clear that the only "bipartisanship" he's interested in is when the opposition buys what he's selling without modification. He's acting like a king and that is not what the American people want. We want a leader, not a ruler.
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 But, the "wishes of the people" are gerrymandered. And both parties do it! I am not calling one out over the other.
Nanker Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 But, the "wishes of the people" are gerrymandered. And both parties do it! I am not calling one out over the other. You of all people should recognize the importance of leverage. You repeatedly have applauded, cheered, and egged on the leftist leaders to crush the opposition because they could. Well, when the shoe's on the other foot and its being kicked up your guy's backside, the game is still being played by the rules.
Gary M Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 You of all people should recognize the importance of leverage. You repeatedly have applauded, cheered, and egged on the leftist leaders to crush the opposition because they could. Well, when the shoe's on the other foot and its being kicked up your guy's backside, the game is still being played by the rules. What's odd is that they think they are winning!!
Dibs Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 In theory... no, in fact. So we're supposed to go back to having slaves and women not voting because those were original laws? Not a very "progressive" view I'd say. ...... Umm....I don't understand that in reference to what I had said. I wasn't implying that laws do not (should not) change.....simply that there is an entire law making/changing process that has attempted to be circumvented by the shutdown. .....and if a congress can resort to such drastic action over an extremely important existing law, they can also in theory resort to such drastic action over lesser existing laws if is their want......instead of going through the regular law making/changing processes.
Gary M Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Umm....I don't understand that in reference to what I had said. I wasn't implying that laws do not (should not) change.....simply that there is an entire law making/changing process that has attempted to be circumvented by the shutdown. .....and if a congress can resort to such drastic action over an extremely important existing law, they can also in theory resort to such drastic action over lesser existing laws if is their want......instead of going through the regular law making/changing processes. You forget that the ACA was written by the Senate. All Tax laws must come from the House. The law should be invalid. http://www.silverdoctors.com/obamacare-now-invalid-because-tax-bills-must-originate-in-house/
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 You of all people should recognize the importance of leverage. You repeatedly have applauded, cheered, and egged on the leftist leaders to crush the opposition because they could. Well, when the shoe's on the other foot and its being kicked up your guy's backside, the game is still being played by the rules. Sarcasm detector must be on the fritz?
Dibs Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 You forget that the ACA was written by the Senate. All Tax laws must come from the House. The law should be invalid. http://www.silverdoc...inate-in-house/ I didn't forget about it.....because I didn't know about it. (I'm Australian and don't really know the inns and outs of all of the intricacies on this particular governmental shut down). I have no view one way or the other on Obamacare. It is irrelevant to the point that I was making though. The point being that there is a standard way in which laws are made/changed/removed and forcing a shut-down is effectively a loophole in this system(first used in 1976). I'm sure there would also be a standard way in which an unconstitutional law could be reviewed and subsequently revoked/expunged without resorting to the shutdown loophole.
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 I'm sure there would also be a standard way in which an unconstitutional law could be reviewed and subsequently revoked/expunged without resorting to the shutdown loophole. Yep, The SCOTUS (Supreme Court) and it passed muster... Even by the conservative Chief Justice.
3rdnlng Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) http://www.newburypo...-at-Yellowstone NEWBURYPORT — Pat Vaillancourt went on a trip last week that was intended to showcase some of America’s greatest treasures. Instead, the Salisbury resident said she and others on her tour bus witnessed an ugly spectacle that made her embarrassed, angry and heartbroken for her country. Vaillancourt was one of thousands of people who found themselves in a national park as the federal government shutdown went into effect on Oct. 1. For many hours her tour group, which included senior citizen visitors from Japan, Australia, Canada and the United States, were locked in a Yellowstone National Park hotel under armed guard. The tourists were treated harshly by armed park employees, she said, so much so that some of the foreign tourists with limited English skills thought they were under arrest. When finally allowed to leave, the bus was not allowed to halt at all along the 2.5-hour trip out of the park, not even to stop at private bathrooms that were open along the route. Edited October 9, 2013 by 3rdnlng
Just Jack Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Someone forgot to put a cork in Old Faithful....
3rdnlng Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/10/08/government-gives-445-million-to-corporation-for-public-broadcasting-on-first/ LOS ANGELES – Funding for clinical cancer trials and other life-saving research under the National Institutes of Health was cut off in response to the government slimdown, but it looks like the cookie monster will still be knee-deep in chocolate chips (or is it carrots now?) According to the Daily Treasury Statement and first reported byCNS News, the administration dished out $445 million to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) on the first day of the slimdown, which means funds for the likes of PBS Newshour, NPR and “Sesame Street” are being spent before cancer research. “It’s more than irresponsible, it is reprehensible. It’s an ‘in-your-face’ move by the administration, blatantly picking winners and losers in this shutdown,” C. Edmund Wright, a columnist for Breitbart.com and American Thinker, told FOX411. “Public broadcasting is a staple of liberal propaganda.” And as Media Research Center’s Director of Media Analysis, Tim Graham, pointed out, PBS has hosted two “very friendly” interviews with President Obama in recent weeks. “It certainly looks like ‘you scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours,” he continued. “Liberals see PBS and NPR as their own personal sandbox, as a supposed balance of the ‘capitalist bias’ of the commercial networks, as silly as that sounds.”
3rdnlng Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) Priest: Obama Admin. Denied Mass to Catholics How about trying this one on for size? Here is the press release headline from Congressman Tim Huelskamp’s office this afternoon: Obama Administration Denies Mass to Catholics Apparently, a priest was denied access to a military chapel this weekend. Father Ray Leonard serves at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in Georgia but because of the government shutdown, he wasn’t allowed to go to celebrate Mass this past weekend. He is contracted by the Defense Department to meet the spiritual needs of Catholics, but not now. The chapel doors were locked and the sign said, “Shutdown: No Catholic service till further notice.” Father Leonard said the following: “This is our church, Catholics have an expectation and obligation to attend Mass and we were told, ‘No you can’t go to church this week…“ My parishioners were upset. They were angry and dismayed. They couldn’t believe that in America they’d be denied access to Mass by the government.” Rep. Tim Huelskamp had this reaction: “Time and time again this Administration demonstrates it is waging a war against the very religious freedoms upon which America was founded. This is exactly why we worked to pass legislation (House Concurrent Resolution 58) this past weekend – to protect the religious liberties of all those who bravely serve in our Armed Forces.” http://blogs.cbn.com...-catholics.aspx http://cnsnews.com/n...c-troops-during (CNSNews.com) – Some Catholic priests under contract or GS (general schedule) to the military are not allowed to offer the Catholic sacraments--including saying Mass, consecrating marriages, or performing baptisms--on military property during the government shutdown, and if they do, even on a volunteer basis, they risk being arrested, according to the general counsel for the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA. About 25% of the U.S. military is Catholic, some 275,000 service members, but there are only 234 active-duty priests. To fill the gap, contract or GS priests are brought in. But under the rules of the shutdown, many of those priests cannot perform their religious duties on military bases unless their contracts allow it. “These men are employed by the government to ensure that a priest is available when an active duty Catholic Chaplain is not present,” said John Schlageter, general counsel for the archdiocese for the Military Services, USA. “With the government shutdown, many GS and contract priests who minister to Catholics on military bases worldwide are not permitted to work – not even to volunteer. “ “During the shutdown, it is illegal for them to minister on base and they risk being arrested if they attempt to do so,” said Schlageter. He explained, for example, if a Catholic family has a baptism scheduled for this weekend on an Air Force base staffed by a GS or contract priest, that baptism “is most likely cancelled.” If you are stationed in Japan or Korea and served by a GS or contract priest, “then you have no choice but to go without Mass this weekend.” - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/n...h.vlmdDIO2.dpuf Edited October 9, 2013 by 3rdnlng
/dev/null Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 So SNAP and EBT are not affected, nor are federal workers paychecks for not working But death benefits to the families of fallen soldiers, nope the Obama Administration can't find funds for that http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/09/complete-betrayal-a-war-widows-thoughts-on-the-government-withholding-death-benefits-from-families/
Koko78 Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 So SNAP and EBT are not affected, nor are federal workers paychecks for not working But death benefits to the families of fallen soldiers, nope the Obama Administration can't find funds for that http://www.theblaze....-from-families/ This is Boehner's and Bush's fault. Probably Bush Sr.'s, Reagan's, Ford's and Nixon's too. The buck passes here!
Azalin Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 This is Boehner's and Bush's fault. Probably Bush Sr.'s, Reagan's, Ford's and Nixon's too. oh, this mess can be traced all the way back to that SOB Lincoln.
Gary M Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 More of the same http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/85674-nancy-pelosi-confronted-illegal-immigration-rally-filmmaker/
IDBillzFan Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 This is Boehner's and Bush's fault. Probably Bush Sr.'s, Reagan's, Ford's and Nixon's too. The buck passes here!
boyst Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 http://www.the-dispatch.com/article/20131009/NEWS/310099986/1005?p=1&tc=pg Thousands of low-income Davidson County citizens could soon lose their benefits due to the ongoing partisan gridlock in Washington. Federal lawmakers’ inability to approve a budget immobilized funding streams that funnel down to service programs at the county level. More than 4,300 citizens and 60 families who qualify for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children learned Tuesday that their benefits are in jeopardy. State health officials, who administer the federal funds across North Carolina’s counties, announced that there is not enough money flowing to continue issuing vouchers.
Recommended Posts