Government Shutdown

[lo country]

I am a Republican I am a conservative. The current group in DC makes me sick. So do the Dems. This whole fiasco should show all Americans how little we truly matter to DC. Save the he said she said arguments. Depending on what sources you look at, one party or the other (depends on your party leanings) has the lion share of the blame. BS. No party has the monopoly on this screw up. They all own it. Act like the paid "professionals" you are and do your friggin job. From the Republicans having no plan at all (like a dog chasing a car, what will you do when you catch it) to the Dems selectively closing what they want and allowing others to remain open. Even the Republicans wanting to take away the medical equipment tax. Who does this impact? Will it help the end user? No, IMO, it helps their lobbying groups. ALL WHILE GETTING PAID. If anyone on this board performed like Congress (House and Senate) they would be fired.

 

This shows nothing, but the inherent disfunction that is DC. It is broken. It is beyond repair IMO. The whole system sucks. Vote them all out. Maybe Americans should all agree to vote against the incumbent in 2014. Across the board, vote against "your guy". After this, Americans have no "guy" in office.

 

End of rant.

[tschu]

The Last Days of the GOP:We could be witnessing the death throes of the Republican Party

"What Washington business lobbyists say on-the-record about the House Republicans and about Tea Party activists pales before what they are willing to say if their names aren't used. One former Republican staffer says of the anti-establishment groups, “They want to go in and f#*k sh#t up. These non-corporate non-establishmentarian guys—that is exactly what they are doing. And the problem with that is obvious. What next? What happens after you f#*k sh#t up?”

 

lol

[JJ Husker]

It's no wonder our government is as out of control as it is. Not only do we allow them to operate the way they do, many people are convinced it makes sense and go out of their way defending the lunacy.

You claim to not be able to understand how things work, so how are you sure that it is out of control and full of lunacy?

I understand how things work just fine. I also understand that they could work much better. Not sure why that is such a difficult concept for you. It's not my problem if you can't recognize obvious deficiencies and problems with how our government operates. Most reasonable people will at least admit that there are indeed problems and that they aren't all solely the result of one wacko party. But you just keep on doing what you do.

Well you've clearly shown so far in this thread that you don't. And I never said that the government doesn't operate without obvious deficiencies. Clearly it does and I never made an argument or statement claiming otherwise, in fact I believe in one of my prior posts I went out of my way to say that the government should always promote less waste and more responsible spending.

 

You're funny. You claim that said I don't understand how things work. I did not make any such statement. I then disagree with you and you think that means I don't understand how things work. Newsflash for Mr. Bighead- disagreeing with you does not make a person clearly wrong. I've sufficiently exhibited that I do know how things work but that I feel it is jacked up and could be much better. Maybe your head hurts for a reason that has little to do with me or BRB. I would suggest pulling it out of your ass and seeing if that provides any relief. Just trying to help.

[tschu]

Now JJ sees if resorting to insults will improve his position in the argument...ah, failure again.

 

I could break down exactly what your hilarious discrepancies have been over the last couple of pages but I just had a couple of beers at Lazlos and I feel like enjoying my Friday night so you're safe until tomorrow

[JJ Husker]

Now JJ sees if resorting to insults will improve his position in the argument...ah, failure again.

 

I could break down exactly what your hilarious discrepancies have been over the last couple of pages but I just had a couple of beers at Lazlos and I feel like enjoying my Friday night so you're safe until tomorrow

 

Have fun tonight. Don't ruin it on account of this bullsh#t we're squabbling over. You can take some shots at me later . Seriously, have a good one.

[MLB 51]

drunkdialcongress.org.

[tschu]

The best part about the low GOP poll numbers is that they probably think that they have to go even FURTHER to the right to solve their problems

[lo country]

Can someone explain exactly what concessions the Dems and POTUS are willing to give the Republicans? After seeing Collins get shot down in the Senate, I am assuming the Dems want everything and are not willing to give in on any issues?

 

It is obvious some blame the R's exclusively on this board, can you please explain what the Dems are offering in concessions to get this budget and debt ceiling passed. I seem to be missing what they are offering. It doesn't seem like anything other than a lot of NO.

 

Sadly, in the real world there is a difference between concessions and capitulation.....................

 

For the record, I still blame both sides. Especially since all parties involved won't meet again until Tuesday so that they can enjoy their holiday and continue to get their pay. Glad THEY ALL take this event so seriously.........

[zoogs]

Why in the world should there be concessions made on something passed into law, affirmed by elections, and upheld by the Supreme Court? How is the Republican minority's Tea Party wing in any position to say "Hey, you have to give us something" on this?

 

This is a case of an unhappy minority-within-a-minority throwing their weight around by threatening to hurt the country unless they're given concessions. That's no way for a government to function and the proper response is for the public to lose faith so utterly in that Tea Party wing that their absurd control over their party is wrested away from them.

 

Otherwise, you have to realize that there is always a minority that isn't happy with something passed. Should they always say, "OK, you HAVE to give us concessions now"? There is a huuuuuuge difference between being fair in negotiating and being expected to concede at all times to every whim. Which is the precedent set by yielding to a hostage situation. That's exactly what this is, and they're trying to get away with it by appealing to our natural sense of fairness and balance. It's laughable.

 

See: the theater of taking pictures with the empty seats at the table. Hasn't the Senate requested to go to conference over this, numerous times, only to be repeatedly rejected? There's also the spending levels that are far lower than what Democrats prefer - isn't that a concession? - which Boehner agreed to and subsequently decided to renege because his party would rather play the hostage game.

 

Part of doing what they're doing and trying to survive as a party, by sheer necessity, is trying to pretend that they aren't the ones causing the shutdown. In my opinion, it would be madness to accept their sell.

[lo country]

Why in the world should there be concessions made on something passed into law, affirmed by elections, and upheld by the Supreme Court? How is the Republican minority's Tea Party wing in any position to say "Hey, you have to give us something" on this?

 

This is a case of an unhappy minority-within-a-minority throwing their weight around by threatening to hurt the country unless they're given concessions. That's no way for a government to function and the proper response is for the public to lose faith so utterly in that Tea Party wing that their absurd control over their party is wrested away from them.

 

Otherwise, you have to realize that there is always a minority that isn't happy with something passed. Should they always say, "OK, you HAVE to give us concessions now"? There is a huuuuuuge difference between being fair in negotiating and being expected to concede at all times to every whim. Which is the precedent set by yielding to a hostage situation. That's exactly what this is, and they're trying to get away with it by appealing to our natural sense of fairness and balance. It's laughable.

 

See: the theater of taking pictures with the empty seats at the table. Hasn't the Senate requested to go to conference over this, numerous times, only to be repeatedly rejected? There's also the spending levels that are far lower than what Democrats prefer - isn't that a concession? - which Boehner agreed to and subsequently decided to renege because his party would rather play the hostage game.

 

Part of doing what they're doing and trying to survive as a party, by sheer necessity, is trying to pretend that they aren't the ones causing the shutdown. In my opinion, it would be madness to accept their sell.

 

Why can't there be a discussion on the debt ceiling and have actual budget cuts in place prior to raising it again? What is wrong with getting cuts instead of raising the debt AGAIN, with no off setting cuts? IIRC correctly in 2006, the senate Dems all voted against raising the debt limit to include then senator Obama.

 

This is what I am trying to point out, defend your side all you want. This is the friggin problem. THEY were against it in 2006, BUT now they all think it is a great idea. The Republicans all wanted it, BUT now it is horrible. This is my point. It was great/bad before, but now it is the opposite right down party lines. BOTH SIDES ARE AT FAULT. The system is broken. This is yet another example.

 

Using the budget (well actually a CR as we haven't had a real budget in years) and the debt ceiling is a tool that has been used by both sides for years. So again, to get the govt running and not default, what have the Dems offered. The idea of "we don't have to offer anything" is what has gotten us in this mess.

[zoogs]

I don't have a 'side' here....but it seems that you might.

 

Haven't the spending level cuts already been agreed to?

 

http://www.dailykos....use-he-s-afraid

 

According to Harry Reid, in early September he and John Boehner not only negotiated over a clean continuing resolution that would have avoided a government shutdown, they came to an agreement on one.

 

“I know that that’s not the path he preferred,” Reid said. “I know that because we met the first week we came back in September and he told me that what he wanted was a clean CR and the $988 [billion] number.

“We didn’t like the 988 number. We didn’t like it but we negotiated. That was our compromise,” Reid added. “The exact bill that he now refuses to let the House vote on. That was our negotiation.”

 

“He twisted [my arm] a little bit to get that number,” Reid said.

 

“Now he refused to let his own party vote because he’s afraid to stand up to something he originally agreed to,” he added.

 

This is one side doing something incredible and trying like hell to get away with it.

[sd'sker]

Why in the world should there be concessions made on something passed into law, affirmed by elections, and upheld by the Supreme Court? How is the Republican minority's Tea Party wing in any position to say "Hey, you have to give us something" on this?

+1 for all of it. did not want to quote the whole thing, i know how you hate that.

[lo country]

Most recently, the senate did not allow a vote on a "clean" Republican bill to raise the debt ceiling through 2014. Not to be outdone, the house did not allow a proposal by the Dems to re-open the govt. Yep. Both sides....... sad

[zoogs]

Most recently, the senate did not allow a vote on a "clean" Republican bill to raise the debt ceiling through 2014. Not to be outdone, the house did not allow a proposal by the Dems to re-open the govt. Yep. Both sides....... sad

 

Do you mean the Democrat proposal that was blocked with 53 supporting and 47 against, because it doesn't pass the 60 threshold to invoke cloture?

 

I wonder which side it was that blocked that effort.

[lo country]

Most recently, the senate did not allow a vote on a "clean" Republican bill to raise the debt ceiling through 2014. Not to be outdone, the house did not allow a proposal by the Dems to re-open the govt. Yep. Both sides....... sad

 

Do you mean the Democrat proposal that was voted down with 53 yes votes to 47 no votes, because it doesn't pass the 60 threshold to invoke cloture?

 

I wonder which side it was that blocked that effort.

 

Actually cloture is used to simply put legislation forward so as to not allow its debate to last longer than 30 hours. It was not an actual vote on S. 1569 (default act). This Bill, proposed by Reid and co-sponsored by Baucus wanted to extend the debt ceiling to Dec 31, 2014. (IIRC). Cloture failed, but the bill is still open for debate.

 

Reid actually changed his vote to a "NO" on cloture as it relates to the most recent senate activity.

 

 

Roll Call Vote on cloture on MTP to S.1569, debt limit (Dec. 31, 2014)

5]

OCT 12, ’1311:58 AM

5]

CATEGORIES

Votes

 

 

5]

12:00 noon The Senate began a 15 minute roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to

S.1569

, a bill to ensure the complete and timely payment of the obligations of the United States Government until December 31, 2014;

5]

Not Invoked: 53-45

 

 

 

Senator Reid changed his vote to no and entered a motion to reconsider the failed cloture vote at a later time.<img class="UMSRatingIcon" id="ums_img_tooltip" />

 

This bill was also "clean" of any debt reduction measures or Obamacare cuts, so yes the Dem proposal was voted down. Again, the R's want debt reduction as part of their agreeing to raise the debt ceiling.

 

The thing is we can both go back and forth all night. It doesn't change my position that both sides are wrong. Neither willing to sit down with the other and actually try to remedy the situation. To use your analogy of the "hostage situation", it seems if the Republicans are that extreme then they are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water. Might want to meet them and give them something because they are "crazy" and might do something as rash as letting us default. Seems like a leader would sacrifice his own needs for those of the country. Give them something. Just my thoughts.

I am out. Didn't want to get dragged into a cut and paste "who is right" argument. regardless of blame, the countries largest employer ie Fed Govt has for all intensive purposes laid off the largest company in the US. Essential employees are working with no pay. Bills are still due Non-essential are not working and unsure if they will be paid. Depending on the length, this could have a trickle down effect.

Both sides, act like paid professionals and fix the problem. Plain and simple.

<img class="UMSRatingIcon" id="ums_img_tooltip" />

<img class="UMSRatingIcon" id="ums_img_tooltip" />

 

Have a good weekend. I am out. Off to the football board.

<img class="UMSRatingIcon" id="ums_img_tooltip" />