Tuesday, October 01, 2013

ACA Takes Off, GOP Crashes Govt

Grover Norquist said "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." Ninety-five percent of Republicans in Congress signed his pledge to reduce funding to the federal government, and they have been moving forward with the plan.

Today the halls of the federal agencies are dark and silent, the people's work is not getting done, as the Republican Party drowns the government.

Also today, the airwaves are brimming with talk about the new Affordable Care Act. The exchanges opened up today, you can now shop around and see what your options are. I have spoken to several people who are going to cut their health insurance costs in half. Last week I talked with an uninsured guy who was just going in to be tested for a debilitating nervous-system disorder -- he would have been uninsurable yesterday, today there is hope for him, even if the tests confirm his doctor's diagnosis. It is really going to be nice for a lot of people.

The Republicans disagree. They feel that affordable health care for Americans is so threatening, so heinous, that it is better to shut down the federal government than to provide access to it. As I write this, the House has passed four budgets, all of which de-fund affordable care, and sent them to the Senate, where there is no chance in hell it will pass. They know it will never pass the Senate, and they know the President will never sign it. This is irrational, expensive, time-wasting.

You might not feel it at first, unless you work for the government, and lots of our Washington-area readers do. A lot of government work happens behind the scenes, working with the economy, with regulations that protect the citizens, funding and conducting medical research, investigating fraud and white-collar crime, all kinds of things that you might not immediately miss.

The government does the things that private industry can't do, especially things that require impartiality and things that do not make a profit. Government success is not measured in stock dividends or profits, government is successful when people can live their lives in peace, prosperity, and safety. If Grover Norquist and the Tea Party and the NRA got their way, every American city would be like Mogadishu, controlled by armed gangs. Everybody complains about government but we're lucky to have it.

I don't see a way out of this. You know, don't you, that if they voted on the simple continuing resolution from the Senate it would pass. Even the majority of members of the House of Representatives would support it. This is a mess within the Republican Party, where pusillanimous whiners like John Boehner have to strike their tough-guy pose for the cameras because of challenges from the right in the upcoming primary elections. He won't allow a vote because a reasonable budget would pass, with Obamacare written into it. It's what the people want, it is even what Congress wants, it's what the President wants, but we're not going to get it.

The country is disgusted and the world is laughing at us. Our political process brings out the worst in people, it attracts those whose goal is self-aggrandizement, it invites corruption, and it is so complicated that nobody can really figure out what shell the pea is under. But it's as good as you can get. The populace is really in charge, we can only kick ourselves for electing these idiots in the first place.

Any bets on how long the government stays closed?

Oh, and in a couple of weeks the real fighting starts. Stay tuned.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obamacare's launch has already been paid for and that's why it has been able to launch today while on this the 123rd anniversary of the opening of Yosemite National Park, that park and all other federal parks are closed.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports Insurance markets open to surge of new customers

....As a sign of how ready Americans were to get started, Obama said more than 1 million people had visited the government's main website before 7 a.m. EDT – exceeding expectations....

October 01, 2013 3:36 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

"The country is disgusted and the world is laughing at us.".

Ha ha!

Just kidding. Seriously though nothing looks more insane than Republican efforts to bring down the U.S. in the vain hope that they can blame it on Democrats and get elected.

Republican=looney toons

59% of Americans said they didn't want the government shut down to stop the Affordable Care Act. Republicans are going to pay for this but they're so blinded by their desire to oppose Obama regardless of what is good for the country they can't see it comming.

October 01, 2013 3:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what great fun!

TTF is back

just in time for Halloween month, I feel like I'm watching an episode of Walking Dead

"today the halls of the federal agencies are dark and silent, the people's work is not getting done"

all the "essential" people are working

for example, at the White House 1728 are employed and 436 had to keep working because they're essential

don't worry, if a light bulb burns out in the Oval Office, Barry will be able to say it took a dozen people to screw it in good

"The Republicans feel that affordable health care for Americans is so threatening, so heinous, that it is better to shut down the federal government than to provide access to it. As I write this, the House has passed four budgets, all of which de-fund affordable care, and sent them to the Senate, where there is no chance in hell it will pass."

actually, the final one only delayed the mandate for ordinary slobs in the same manner Obama delayed it for big business

there was no defunding

Obama is simply unwilling to consider any correction of Obamacare proposed by Repubs even though he has unilaterally, and illegally, made 17 adjustments himself

for this, Harry and Barry shut down the government?

"A lot of government work happens behind the scenes, working with the economy, with regulations that protect the citizens, funding and conducting medical research, investigating fraud and white-collar crime, all kinds of things that you might not immediately miss."

Damn straight! and how about the guys who make Joe Biden a nice breakfast every day?

"He won't allow a vote because a reasonable budget would pass, with Obamacare written into it."

but a reasonable budget did pass, On Monday night, with Obamacare in it, with only the most minor correction and Harry sent it back

"It's what the people want, it is even what Congress wants, it's what the President wants, but we're not going to get it."

the people have made clear, time and again, that they don't want Obamacare

right now, the media is acting as a wing of the Democratic Party

Harry and Barry are responsible for this shut-down because they have flatly refused to negotiate with a House of Reps elected under our laws

they want the government shut down because they think they will have a political advantage

October 01, 2013 3:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The country is disgusted and the world is laughing at us."

not really

other than non-essential government employees, no gives a crap

btw, the Republicans will now win by voting separately to fund each and every department and agency, daring the Senate to veto it

this afternoon, funding was passed for National Parks, Veterans' Administration and the DC government

one by one, it will all be funded except for Obama's special exception for big business

October 01, 2013 4:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ROFLMAO, Anonymous.

Only you and your teabagged Koch-headed buddies think this shutdown was anybody's fault but the GOP's!

All that spinning has made you so dizzy you forgot all about Canadian-born SPEAKER Cruz' Me Me Me spectacle!

You forgot about Charles Krauthammer's GOP Suicide Pact too, didn't ya?

Here's the relevant part today:

"...(b) Obamacare

The other battle is about defunding Obamacare. Led by Sens. Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, the GOP insurgents are threatening to shut down the government on Oct. 1 if the stopgap funding bill contains money for Obamacare.

This is nuts. The president will never sign a bill defunding the singular achievement of his presidency. Especially when he has control of the Senate. Especially when, though a narrow majority (51%) of Americans disapprove of Obamacare, only 36% favour repeal. President Obama so knows he’ll win any shutdown showdown that he’s practically goading the Republicans into trying.

Never make a threat on which you are not prepared to deliver. Every fiscal showdown has redounded against the Republicans. The first, in 1995, effectively marked the end of the Gingrich revolution. The latest, last December, led to a last-minute Republican cave that humiliated the GOP and did nothing to stop the tax hike it so strongly opposed.

Those who fancy themselves tea party patriots fighting a sold-out cocktail-swilling establishment are demanding yet another cliff dive as a show of principle and manliness.

But there’s no principle at stake here. This is about tactics. If I thought this would work, I would support it. But I don’t fancy suicide. It has a tendency to be fatal.

As for manliness, the real question here is sanity. Nothing could better revive the fortunes of a failing, flailing, fading Democratic administration than a government shutdown where the president is portrayed as standing up to the GOP on honouring our debts and paying our soldiers in the field.

How many times must we learn the lesson? You can’t govern from one house of Congress. You need to win back the Senate and then the presidency. Shutting down the government is the worst possible way to get there. Indeed, it’s Obama’s fondest hope for a Democratic revival."

The GOTP preferred to close the government down rather than to allow people without health insurance to have access to the Supreme Court approved OBAMACARE that millions of Americans have been waiting for.

Quinnipiac Poll has found American voters oppose 72 - 22 percent Congress shutting down the federal government to block implementation of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

October 01, 2013 4:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

uh, don't know if you understand this

the government isn't shutting down

the essential parts, defined liberally, are up and running

further, the House intends to simply authorize funding for each agency separately

tonight, the Senate will have the opportunity to vote down funding for National Parks, the Veterans Administration and the DC government

that will put an end to the lie that the Repubs are shutting down the government

Harry and Barry need to come clean and approve government spending instead of holding every other agency hostage unless they get Obamacare with the flaws left in

October 01, 2013 5:38 PM  
Anonymous Obama piches a fit and shuts down America said...

well, Repubs are to re-open the government and Obama is holding the country hostage until he gets sacred status for his Obamacare disaster:

"WASHINGTON, Oct 1 (Reuters) - The White House rejected a Republican plan to reopen portions of the U.S. government on Tuesday as the first shutdown in 17 years closed landmarks like the Statue of Liberty and threw hundreds of thousands of federal employees out of work.

The quick dismissal offered no sign that President Barack Obama will soon end a standoff over health care that has sidelined everything from trade negotiations to medical research. An even bigger battle looms in coming weeks, when Congress must raise the debt limit or risk a U.S. default that could roil global markets.

Spending authority for much of the government expired at midnight on Monday (0400 GMT), but that did not prevent the Obama administration from unveiling the health-insurance exchanges that form the centerpiece of Obamacare.

The latest Republican plan, floated by party leaders on Tuesday, would restore funding for federal parks, veterans programs and the District of Columbia.

That, Republicans said, also would encourage talks to fully end the shutdown and craft a broader deal that would also raise the debt limit.

"We are asking Democrats to come to the table," Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said.

The White House did not take long to reject the offer."

October 01, 2013 5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

whom did you talk to that said their insurance was going down Jim ... really ?

UMD insurance went way up, and Raytheon insurance (family plan) went from 4119.48 to 5760.00... oh, and they cancelled the plan we picked last year, it's not available anymore...

Deductibles and co-pays are up almost 50% across the board.
30 co-pay to 40.00, 200 to 300 deductible.

Here's the kicker :

"For Raytheon, the combination of ACA mandated plan changes, current and new ACA-related taxes and fees, as well as increasing cost trends and experience rates will mean $49 million in additional medical plan related costs - and that's just for 2014.

While the company's goal to provide access to quality coverage remains strong, we must take the necessary steps to offset these costs and prepare for the next ACA milestone : 2018, when the federal government will charge a 40% excise tax on the value of the medical coverage provided to employees (listed as imputed income on your W-2) that is above a certain threshold ($10,200 for individuals; $27,500 for families).

Although the value of our plans currently falls below these limits, cost projections shows that it won't be long until the values cross over into taxable territory. As you can imagine, it is in our mutual best interest to do everything we can to avoid this future expense"

Obama is behaving like a dictator. send me a clean CR or I am not signing anything. hundreds of people are losing their health care or being transferred to part time work because of this monstrosity. and yes, it should be tweaked.

how in the world do you defend congress exempting ITSELF ???

October 01, 2013 6:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right Wing Obamacare Myths DEBUNKED

Posted on September 25, 2013 by The Matt Walsh Blog


Man, I hate these stupid, crazy, tea bagging right wingers. So foolish, so uncivilized. They run around screaming like crazed anarchists about how they want to stop Obamacare. Damned idiots don’t realize that the government needs to be involved in our health care decisions; we’re too helpless and feeble to handle it ourselves — unless we’re making the “medical” choice to get an abortion, in which case, THIS IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, YOU GOVERNMENT PIGS. GET OUT! I mean, leave your wallet on the table, ’cause I’m gonna need you to pay for this, but then GET OUT, JERK.
There are many scare tactics being used by the tea baggers in an effort to discredit Obamacare. Personally, I hate scare tactics. You should never let anyone scare you away from supporting socialized medicine, mostly because without it every poor person in the country will get sick and die. Anyway, like I said, I disapprove of scare tactics.
They claim that Obamacare will raise taxes, but this has been PROVEN false so many times. You know it’s been proven because I capitalized “proven.” Sure, there might be a few minor billion dollar taxes, like the individual mandate tax and the employer mandate tax, the Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans, the Tax on Health Insurers, the Tax on Innovator Drug Companies, the High Medical Bills Tax, the Medicine Cabinet Tax, the Tax on Indoor Tanning Services, and the Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals. And, yeah, there might be a small number of multi-billion dollar tax hikes on things like the Medicare Payroll tax and the “black liquor” tax and the HSA Withdrawal tax. And, OK fine, we’ll even see some tax deduction eliminations, like the deduction for employer-provided retirement prescription drug coverage.
But besides, like, 20 new taxes and tax hikes totaling, like, hundreds of billions of dollars, there aren’t ANY tax increases attached to Obamacare. None. NONE. See? I did the capital letter thing again. Pretty convincing stuff.

October 01, 2013 6:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The redneck Tea Party crazies have even gone so far as to completely LIE about the impact Obamacare will have on the workforce. They insist that businesses are actually being forced to cut hours and lay off employees just to comply with the “burdensome” Obamacare rules and regulations. Again, this is a fabrication. Businesses aren’t cutting hours. Besides Walmart, Regal Entertainment, Trader Joe’s, Subway, Firehouse Subs, Sea World, Lands End, Dave and Busters, White Castle, Burger King, Taco Bell, and Home Depot, and academic institutions like Philadelphia University, Sam Houston State University, Ball State University, Georgia Military College, Three Rivers College, Hillsborough Community College, and University of North Alabama, and county governments in Indiana, Florida, North Carolina, Texas, Michigan, Maryland, and Virginia, as well as school districts like Middletown Township Public Schools in New Jersey, Millard School District in Utah, and Shelbyville Central School System in Indiana, along with over 280 other businesses, universities, school systems and town governments, literally NOBODY is losing work because of Obamacare.

October 01, 2013 6:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The radical, anti-governmentFascistAnarchistNaziBible-thumpingPuritanOtherRandomConflictingDescriptors right wing conservatives like to drone on and on about “small businesses”. Well, news flash: Small businesses CAN’T WAIT for Obamacare to take hold. Half of them aren’t even planning on significantly cutting their workforce to comply with it, while the other half are super excited to cut their employees’ hours, because, like Nancy Pelosi said, it’ll free up time for all of these people to take up new hobbies and “follow their passions.” Sure, because of Obamacare they won’t have enough money to feed their families, but at least they’ll have plenty of time to work on arts and crafts projects.
Obamacare is just so wonderful. It could have only come from the mind of a brilliant man like President Obama. Think about it: We had a problem in this nation because so many people couldn’t afford health insurance. So what’s Obama’s plan? Simply charge those folks money for not having enough money! Brilliant! Oh, but his master strategy doesn’t stop there. It used to be expensive to buy insurance on the individual-market — now it will be TWICE as expensive for men, and only almost twice as expensive for women!
Do you see how this works?
Problem: Insurance is expensive.
Solution: Make it more expensive, and then tax people for not buying it.

October 01, 2013 6:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are a few other objections to Obamacare that I often hear raised by moronic neanderthals, such as the 200 economists who lobbied Congress to repeal the law. Let these so-called “economists” pretend they know something about the economy. I’ll take Harry Reid’s word over theirs any day of the week. Some say that this massive tax and spending program can’t possibly be sustained by a nation that’s already over 16 trillion dollars in debt. That’s where they’re wrong.
Little known fact: The economy works sort of like the card game Hearts. In Hearts, you’re supposed to avoid getting points. But if things go really poorly and you somehow collect ALL 26 points in a hand, you get zero and everyone else gets 26 — it’s called “Shooting the Moon.” It works the same way with the national debt. If a country can rack up 26 trillion dollars in debt, they go back down to zero and everyone else owes THEM 26 trillion. FACT. Look it up. It’s in, like, the UN Handbook or something. The good news is that Obamacare will get us to 26 trillion much quicker than you might think. Thank God!
Finally, you often hear the myth that the US Constitution doesn’t grant the government the authority to force citizens to buy a product. They even say the government doesn’t have the legal power to seize total control of an entire sector of the free market economy. Luckily, I don’t have to engage this argument because the Supreme Court already ruled. If the Supreme Court says it’s in there — it’s in there. Period. If the Supreme Court says dragons exist and Big Foot is real, then dragons exist and Big Foot is real. End of discussion. The Supreme Court is never wrong, just ask Dredd Scott.
Despite all of the FACTS I just laid out, these maniacs still find a reason to oppose Obamacare. They’d even risk a short-term, temporary shutdown of government just to make their point. SHUTDOWN THE GOVERNMENT?! BUT HOW WOULD WE EAT OR BREATHE?! This is a warning to Ted Cruz and all his ilk: If the government stops operating for even one day — chaos and cannibalism will reign in the streets. Mark my words. Yeah, a government shutdown would only impact “non-essential” federal government functions. And, yeah, some might even argue that the government should only be doing the essential things in the first place. But that will be of little solace when you’re bleeding on the ground, being eaten alive by the starving masses. I can scarcely imagine the horror. If non-essential government agencies and departments are forced to close for a short period of time, that means we’ll have to find a way to go without the Administration on Aging, and the Japan-United States Friendship Commission, and the Indian Arts and Crafts Board, and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. WHERE WILL I GET MY TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS?! You’re playing with fire, conservatives. Civilization is bound together by the strong, steady hand of bureaucracy. If you loosen its grasp, you risk plunging us all into a dark, perilous land of individual responsibility and liberty. Our Founders fought and died to rescue us from such a fate, and I’ll be damned if I sit here and let you undo their efforts.

October 01, 2013 6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the government isn't shutting down

the essential parts, defined liberally, are up and running

Thank you, Anonymous. Without you Vigilance readers might not have been aware of the fact that Fox News Says It's Not a 'Shutdown,' It's a 'Slimdown'

Have you noticed how millions of Americans hate Obamacare so much that they have been trying to get to it on-line, crashing, and gumming up the start up system all day long?

I plugged into Kaiser's Subsidy Calculator this afternoon and found a $591/month policy with much better Rx coverage than my current $922/month plan.

And our family income did not qualify for a subsidy.

That's why the GOP wants so hard to stop Obamacare.

October 01, 2013 8:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the law is not the same law as passed by congress.

he delayed the mandate on businesses
he exempted congress
he exempted 251 some other businesses
he delayed the cap on OOP expenses.

which is unconstitutional by the way

congress is just suggesting we delay the whole thing.

he is saying congress cannot propose what they are constitutionally entitled to propose, meanwhile he unilaterally changes parts of the law.

and if congress argues, he refuses to meet with them.

dictator, pure and simple.

tip o'neill attached provisions to funding lots of time, and some times the govt was shutdown as a result. Reagan would call him up and go meet with him, and they would figure it out.

Obama refuses to even discuss, flys out of the country.

we now have a dictatorship, or haven't you noticed ?

October 01, 2013 8:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

729 companies and unions have exemptions from obamacare

October 01, 2013 9:10 PM  
Anonymous Obama: worst President ever said...

the last post really stuck the landing

the DC government could re-open tomorrow

the House voted today to fund the DC government, the National Park and the Veterans Administration

and Obama said he would veto it


there was nothing changing Obamacare in the bills

so why did Barry and Harry refuse to consider it?

the welfare of the country is a game to Obama

October 01, 2013 9:13 PM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

that's right


October 01, 2013 9:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"congress is just suggesting we delay the whole thing."

Congress is doing no such thing. The House GOP is doing it all by themselves because they don't like the results of the 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections.

October 01, 2013 9:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the results of the 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections are irrelevant

Obama needs the approval of both Houses of Congress to make law

fact: the people of the United States elected Republican control of one of those Houses

fact: Obama needs their approval to enact laws

fact: Obama refuses to negotiate with the House

fact: Obama has illegally altered Obamacare 17 times

fact: Obama should be impeached

October 01, 2013 9:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"today, the airwaves are brimming with talk about the new Affordable Care Act. The exchanges opened up today, you can now shop around and see what your options are. I have spoken to several people who are going to cut their health insurance costs in half. Last week I talked with an uninsured guy who was just going in to be tested for a debilitating nervous-system disorder -- he would have been uninsurable yesterday, today there is hope for him, even if the tests confirm his doctor's diagnosis. It is really going to be nice for a lot of people."

if it's so wonderful, why is a penalty needed to force people into it?

October 01, 2013 9:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ask Chief Justice Roberts

October 01, 2013 10:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

why, because he errantly termed the penalty a constitutional tax?

still, doesn't explain why someone needs to be forced to do something so marvelous for themselves

of course, the dictator, Barry "Il Duce" Obomb-a has always said "they'll like it when I force it on them"

October 01, 2013 10:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

still, doesn't explain why someone needs to be forced to do something so marvelous for themselves

Because everybody know things are cheaper by the dozen.

In the case of health insurance, the rest of us will no longer end up paying for all those unpaid ER visits uninsured people have tended to rack up.

Yesterday millions of Americans searched healthcare.gov for new health insurance policies because they WANT AFFORDABLE health insurance, not because they have to have it. If they did it because they were being forced, we'd have millions of people showing up on the LAST sign up day, Dec. 15, not the first, Oct. 1.

Have you ever been to the post office on April 15?

I went to the website yesterday and posted a link to the calculator afterward. Plugging in a few bits of data, state of residence, family income, number and ages of family members, I found out that even without qualifying for any subsidy, my family will drop our monthly premiums in 2014 by $3,972.00 per year or$331 less per month. Our monthly cost will drop from $922 to $591 and more of our prescriptions will be covered.

Don't be like these folks. Check out Obamacare and find out your estimated 2014 healthcare costs.

October 02, 2013 8:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Melting sea ice displaced 10,000 walruses

"There’s no shortage of data and charts out there making the case that Arctic sea ice decline is a real and persistent problem. But the point is also made pretty strongly by this photo taken Friday by researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). It depicts over 10,000 Pacific walruses huddled on the shore of Alaska’s northwest coast, unable to find their usual ice floes.

According to the researchers, the walruses have been hauling themselves ashore since mid-September. For them to do so is a “relatively new phenomenon,” said Megan Ferguson, a marine mammal scientist with the NOAA. From the Associated Press:

'Pacific walrus spend winters in the Bering Sea. Females give birth on sea ice and use ice as a diving platform to reach snails, clams and worms on the shallow continental shelf.

As temperatures warm in summer, the edge of the sea ice recedes north. Females and their young ride the edge of the sea ice into the Chukchi Sea. However, in recent years, sea ice has receded north beyond continental shelf waters and into Arctic Ocean water 10,000 feet deep or more where walrus cannot dive to the bottom.

Walrus in large numbers were first spotted on the U.S. side of the Chukchi Sea in 2007. They returned in 2009, and in 2011, scientists estimated 30,000 walruses along one kilometer of beach near Point Lay.'

That so many of the animals are packed in one place poses a stampede risk. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working to keep people and airplanes from spooking the herd. It’s unclear how the government shutdown has affected this effort, or the NOAA’s plans to continue to monitor the area."

Click the photo, which is worth 10,000 words, to enlarge it.

October 02, 2013 10:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

US Chamber of Commerce
Multi-Industry Coalition Letter Regarding the Continuing Resolution and Debt Limit

"Release Date: Monday, September 30, 2013

The undersigned 251 organizations urge the House of Representatives and the United States Senate to pass a Continuing Resolution to ensure the uninterrupted funding of the federal government into the next fiscal year and to act expeditiously to raise the nation’s debt limit.

We appreciate fully the importance of restraining federal spending, both discretionary spending and mandatory spending, to reduce federal budget deficits, contain the growth of federal debt, and thereby re-establish fiscal discipline in the near-term and for the long haul. However, with the U.S. economy continuing to underperform, the federal government needs to maintain its normal operations pending a successful outcome of broader budgetary reforms. It is not in the best interest of the employers, employees or the American people to risk a government shutdown that will be economically disruptive and create even more uncertainties for the U.S. economy.

Likewise, we respectfully urge the Congress to raise the debt ceiling in a timely manner and remove any threat to the full faith and credit of the United States government.

However, entitlement spending remains the main driver of these deficits and high debt levels and must be addressed. Today we spend $1.6 trillion on just three of the nation’s entitlement programs – Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In 10 years, the total price for these programs will soar to $3 trillion.

Spending on entitlement programs and interest on the debt currently represent 65% of total government outlays and already exceed all federal income tax revenues collected. In 10 short years these payments are projected to reach 76% of government spending. During this decade and the next without reform, entitlement spending will rise more rapidly as the number of Americans 65 and older will jump by 70% while those of working age will increase by less than 7%. The biggest threat imaginable to our entitlement programs is to do nothing at all.

As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) just reported (September 12):

--“Historical and projected growth of federal spending relative to the size of the economy can be attributed almost entirely to growth in spending for a few large programs—namely, Social Security and the major health care programs.”
--“The fundamental federal budgetary challenge has hardly been addressed.”
--“The largest federal programs are becoming much more expensive because of the retirement of the baby boomers and the rising costs of health care.”

Congress cannot continue “kicking the can down the road;” it’s time to take corrective action to address the unaffordable path of entitlement spending, to stabilize federal finances and to undertake fundamental tax reform to strengthen the American economy.

We urge the Congress to act promptly to pass a Continuing Resolution to fund the government and to raise the debt ceiling, and then to return to work on these other vital issues.

Aeronautical Repair Station Association
Agricultural Retailers Association
Air Conditioning Contractors of America
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
Airlines for America
Airports Council International - North America
American Apparel & Footwear Association
American Beverage Association...

October 02, 2013 11:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"...American Coatings Association
American Concrete Pressure Pipe Association
American Council of Engineering Companies
American Farm Bureau Federation
American Forest & Paper Association
American Gas Association
American Hotel & Lodging Association
American Insurance Association
American International Automobile Dealers Association
American Iron and Steel Institute
American Land Title Association
American Rental Association
American Road & Transportation Builders Association
American Supply Association
American Trucking Associations
AMT - The Association For Manufacturing Technology
Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Arizona Small Business Association
Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce/Associated Industries of Arkansas
Arlington Chamber of Commerce – TX
Associated Equipment Distributors
Associated General Contractors of America
Associated Oregon Industries
Association Forum of Chicagoland – IL
Association of Equipment Manufacturers
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers
Association of Washington Business
Aurora Regional Chamber of Commerce – IL
Austin Area Chamber of Commerce – TX
Austin Chamber of Commerce – TX
Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association
Baltimore Washington Corridor Chamber – MD
Barrow County Chamber of Commerce – GA
Batavia Chamber of Commerce – IL
Bismarck-Mandan Chamber of Commerce – ND
Brainerd Lakes Chamber – MN
Buckeye Valley Chamber of Commerce – AZ
Buffalo Niagara Partnership – NY
Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International
Business Council of Alabama
Business Roundtable
Cabarrus Regional Chamber of Commerce – NC
California Chamber of Commerce
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
Carolinas Food Industry Council
Carpinteria Valley Chamber of Commerce – CA
Carson Valley Chamber of Commerce – NV
Central LA Chamber of Commerce – LA
Chamber of Commerce of Huntsville/Madison County – AL
Chamber of Commerce of the Mid-Ohio Valley – WV
Chamber Southwest Louisiana
Chambers of Commerce Alliance of Ventura & Santa Barbara Counties – CA
Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce – SC
Chicago Southland Chamber of Commerce - IL
Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce – IL
Connecticut Business & Industry Association
Construction Financial Management Association (CFMA)
Construction Industry Round Table
Consumer Bankers Association
Corn Refiners Association
Cushing Chamber of Commerce & Industry – OK..."

October 02, 2013 11:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"...Dakota County Regional Chamber of Commerce – MN
Dallas Regional Chamber – TX
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce – OH
DC Chamber of Commerce
Delaware State Chamber of Commerce
Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce – CO
Destination Marketing Association International
Edison Electric Institute
Electronics Representatives Association
Erie Regional Chamber & Growth Partnership – PA
Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce – VA
Fairmont Area Chamber of Commerce – MN
Fall River Area Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. – MA
Fashion Accessories Shippers Association
Financial Services Forum
Florida Chamber of Commerce
Fort Madison Partners – IA
Fremont Chamber of Commerce – CA
Fullerton Chamber of Commerce – CA
Gateway Regional Chamber of Commerce – NJ
Georgia Chamber of Commerce
Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce – NM
Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce – CA
Greater Beaumont Chamber of Commerce – TX
Greater Boca Raton Chamber of Commerce – FL
Greater Des Moines Partnership – IA
Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce – NC
Greater El Paso Chamber of Commerce – TX
Greater Homestead/Florida City Chamber of Commerce – FL
Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association – IA
Greater Irving-Las Colinas Chamber of Commerce – TX
Greater Lehigh Valley Chamber of Commerce – PA & NJ
Greater North Dakota Chamber
Greater Oak Brook Chamber of Commerce – IL
Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce – AZ
Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce – AZ
Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce – NC
Greater Reading Chamber of Commerce & Industry – PA
Greater Shreveport Chamber of Commerce – LA
Greater Spokane Incorporated – WA
Greater Topeka Chamber of Commerce – KS
Guitar & Accessories Marketing Association (GAMA)
Hanover Area Chamber of Commerce – PA
Harrisburg Regional Chamber & CREDC – PA
Hilton Head Island-Bluffton Chamber of Commerce – SC
Hudson County Chamber of Commerce – NJ
Illinois Manufacturers' Association
Independent Electrical Contractors (IEC)
Industrial Packaging Alliance of North America
Industrial Supply Association
International Dairy Foods Association
International Foodservice Distributors Association
International Franchise Association
International Housewares Association
International Warehouse Logistics Association
Investment Company Institute
Iowa Association of Business and Industry
Joliet Region Chamber of Commerce & Industry – IL
Junction City Area Chamber of Commerce – KS
Kalispell Chamber of Commerce – MT
Kansas Grain and Feed Association
Kentucky Chamber of Commerce
Kingsport Area Chamber of Commerce – TN
Lincoln Chamber of Commerce – NE
Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce – AR
Longview Chamber of Commerce – TX
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce – CA
Lubbock Chamber of Commerce – TX
Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS)
Manhattan Chamber of Commerce – NY
Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation
Marana Chamber of Commerce – AZ
Marshalltown Area Chamber of Commerce – IA
Maryland Chamber of Commerce
Maui Chamber of Commerce – HI
Metal Powder Industries Federation
Metro South Chamber of Commerce – MA
MetroHartford Alliance – CT
MetroWest Chamber of Commerce – MA
Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce – MN
Missouri Association of Manufacturers
Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce – AL
Montana Chamber of Commerce
Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce – CA
Monticello Chamber of Commerce & Industry – MN
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association..."

October 02, 2013 11:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"...Naperville Area Chamber of Commerce – IL
National Asphalt Pavement Association
National Association of Chemical Distributors
National Association of Government Guaranteed Lenders
National Association of Manufacturers
National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts
National Association of Trailer Manufacturers
National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors
National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA)
National Black Chamber of Commerce®
National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA)
National Electrical Manufacturers Association
National Federation of Independent Business
National Grocers Association
National Marine Distributors Association (NMDA)
National Marine Manufacturers Association
National Parking Association
National Restaurant Association
National Retail Federation
National Roofing Contractors Association
National Society of Professional Surveyors
National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association
National Utility Contractors Association
Nebraska Chamber of Commerce & Industry
New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce
New Orleans Chamber of Commerce – LA
Non-Ferrous Founders’ Society
North American Equipment Dealers Association
North Carolina Chamber
North Carolina Retail Merchants Association
North Star Consulting Group
Northeast Pennsylvania Manufacturers and Employers Association
Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce
Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce
Northumberland County Chamber of Commerce – VA
Northwest Food Processors Association
Nuclear Energy Institute
Ohio Chamber of Commerce
Orange County Business Council – CA
Orlando, Inc. (Orlando Regional Chamber of Commerce) – FL
Outdoor Power Equipment and Engine Service Association (OPEESA)
Outdoor Power Equipment Institute
Overland Park Chamber of Commerce – KS
Oxnard Chamber of Commerce – CA
Palm Desert Area Chamber of Commerce – CA
Pasadena Chamber of Commerce and Civic Association – CA
Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry
Petroleum Marketers Association of America
Port Hueneme Chamber of Commerce – CA
Portland Cement Association
Prince William Chamber of Commerce – VA
Retail Industry Leaders Association
Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce – MN
Rogers – Lowell Area Chamber of Commerce – AR
Salt Lake Chamber – UT
San Antonio Chamber of Commerce – TX
Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce – CA
Schuylkill Chamber of Commerce – PA
Secondary Materials and Recycled Textiles Association (SMART)
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
Sierra Vista Area Chamber of Commerce – AZ
Smugglers' Notch Area Chamber of Commerce – VT
Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA)
South Bay Association of Chambers of Commerce – CA
South Carolina Retail Association
Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce – MO
St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce – MN
St. TammanyWest Chamber of Commerce – LA
Summit Chamber of Commerce – CO
Tacoma-Pierce County Chamber – WA
Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry
The Aluminum Association
The Association for Hose & Accessories Distribution
The Business Council of New York State, Inc.
The Chamber of Commerce serving Johnson City-Jonesborough-Washington County (TN)
The Council of Industry of Southeastern New York
The Ohio Manufacturers' Association
The Real Estate Roundtable
Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce – NY
Torrance Area Chamber of Commerce – CA
Travel Goods Association
Tucson Metro Chamber – AZ
Tulsa Regional Chamber – OK
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
U.S. Travel Association
United States Telecom Association
Valley Industry & Commerce Association (VICA) – CA
Van Buren Chamber of Commerce – AR
Virginia Chamber of Commerce
Washington Retail Association
West Virginia Manufacturers Association
Window and Door Manufacturers Association
Wisconsin Grocers Association
Woodworking Machinery Industry Association
Yuma County Chamber of Commerce – AZ"

October 02, 2013 11:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Chamber of Commerce

The House of Representatives have passed several CRs which have been rejected by the Senate, acting at the direction of the President. He has also instructed them to follow his lead and refuse to negotiate the differences.

The designers of our democracy intended to have our two houses negotiate differences and come to a reasonable compromise.

Democrats have refused to do this. Please join with all Americans, including Eleanor Holmes Norton, and urge the Democratic Party to act with responsibility and come to the bargaining table.

October 02, 2013 12:09 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Democrats are just enacting a law they passed in 2010 and which was debated thoroughly throughout the 2012 election and declared constitutional by the U.S. supreme court. The public spoke in the 2012 election, the republicans ran against The affordable care act and lost, Obama has a mandate from the public to procede and is under no moral or legal obligation to negotiate with the Republicans to implement his law.

Gullible Americans Fuel Obamacare's Bad Rap

16 Right Wing Lies Republicans have Conned Americans Into Believing About The Health Care Law

October 02, 2013 12:56 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

October 02, 2013 1:04 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous often pathetically whines about me for posting a few comments in a row as though that means he's somehow scored a point against my irrefutable arguments and yet in his typical amazing display of hypocrisy and lack of self awareness here he makes 21 of the first 29 comments.

By his own oft-stated logic that means he's mentally ill, desperate, flailing, mentally ill, and freaking out because he's wrong.

October 02, 2013 1:07 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I'll leave bad anonymous to continue making a fool of himself.

As Napolean said "When your enemy is destroying himself don't interrupt him.

October 02, 2013 1:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Democrats are just enacting a law they passed in 2010"

oh, was that what that little game they played was called?


actually, they played a bunch of games after voters had clearly tried to stop them in a Congressional election in, of all places, Massachusetts

"and which was debated thoroughly throughout the 2012 election"

resulting in the House of Representatives flipping to Republican control

"and declared constitutional by the U.S. supreme court."

yes, by saying Obama lied when he said it wasn't a tax

"The public spoke in the 2012 election, the republicans ran against The affordable care act and lost,"

not quite

the main loser was Romney, who could hardly campaign against it since he had basically designed it

Republicans did quite well with the issue in Congressional and state elections, hence the reason Obama has to negotiate now

"Obama has a mandate from the public to procede and is under no moral or legal obligation to negotiate with the Republicans to implement his law."

actually, he wasn't elected Holy Roman Emperor

we have a bicameral legislature, one House of which voters gave to Republicans

Obama was elected to work with the legislature to achieve consensus

he doesn't possess the skills required for the job, which has been the problem from the beginning

"This comment has been removed by the author."

I guess schizophrenia is hard to cure...

"Bad anonymous often pathetically whines about me for posting a few comments in a row as though that means he's somehow scored a point against my irrefutable arguments"

a few?!?


oh, and when did you ever make an irrefutable argument?

"and yet in his typical amazing display of hypocrisy and lack of self awareness here he makes 21 of the first 29 comments."

I just counted. I made 10. They were largely responses, not the uncontrollable unprovoked fits like lazy Priya pitches

"By his own oft-stated logic that means he's mentally ill, desperate, flailing, mentally ill, and freaking out because he's wrong."

and this is, unbelievably, lazy Priya's pleasant side

but do any of Priya's personalities realize they used "mentally ill" twice in the same list?

"I'll leave bad anonymous to continue making a fool of himself."

that's the way-

a commitment to sloth

"As Napolean said "When your enemy is destroying himself don't interrupt him."

now, he actually was Holy Roman Emperor

Obama's a Bonaparte wannabe

October 02, 2013 1:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

House Now Has The Votes To End Government Shutdown, But It Won't

WASHINGTON -- Less than two days after the government shut down, 17 Republicans have come forward as of Wednesday afternoon to say they're ready to pass a bill to fund the government with no strings attached -- the magic number needed to pass a clean funding bill.

If all 200 Democrats stick together and team up with those Republicans, they have the votes for passage. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) would have to be willing to put that bill to a vote, but if he does, the votes appear to be there. The Senate would pass the bill in no time, sending it to be signed by President Barack Obama and ending the shutdown.

Latest tally:

Rep. Pat Meehan (R-Pa.): “At this point, I believe it’s time for the House to vote for a clean, short-term funding bill to bring the Senate to the table and negotiate a responsible compromise.” [Press Release, 10/1/13]

Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.): “Time for a clean [continuing resolution].” [Official Twitter, 10/1/13]

Rep. Jon Runyan (R-N.J.): “Enough is enough. Put a clean [continuing resolution] on the floor and let’s get on with the business we were sent to do." [Burlington County Times, 10/1/13]

Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.): A Fitzpatrick aide tells the Philadelphia Inquirer the congressman would support a clean funding bill if it came up for a vote. [Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/1/13]

Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.): Barletta said he would "absolutely" vote for a clean bill in order to avert a shut down of the government. [Bethlehem Morning Call, 10/1/13]

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.): King thinks House Republicans would prefer to avoid a shutdown and said he will only vote for a clean continuing resolution to fund the government, according to the National Review Online. [NRO, 9/30/13]

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.): The California Republican told The Huffington Post he would ultimately support a clean continuing resolution. [Tweet by The Huffington Post's Sabrina Siddiqui, 9/30/13]

Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.): “I'm prepared to vote for a clean [continuing resolution].” [The Huffington Post, 9/29/13]

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.): A Wolf aide told The Hill that he agrees with fellow Virginia Rep. Scott Rigell (R) that it's time for a clean continuing resolution. [The Hill, 10/1/13]

Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.): A Grimm aide told The Huffington Post that the congressman supports a clean continuing resolution. [10/1/13].

Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.): A local news anchor in Minnesota tweeted that Paulsen told him he would vote for a clean resolution if given the chance. [Blake McCoy Tweet, 10/1/13]

Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.): A constituent of Wittman's sent The Huffington Post an email she got from the congressman indicating he would vote for a clean funding bill but hasn't had "an opportunity to do so at this point." [10/1/13]

Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.): LoBiondo told The Press of Atlantic City he'll support "whatever gets a successful conclusion" to the shutdown and a clean funding bill "is one of those options." [The Press of Atlantic City, 10/1/13]

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.): Forbes told The Virginian-Pilot that he supports the six-week clean funding bill that passed in the Senate. [The Virginian-Pilot, 10/2/13]

Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.): The congressman issued a statement saying he would "vote in favor of a so-called clean budget bill." [Office of Rep. Jim Gerlach, 10/2/13].

Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.): Lance's chief of staff confirmed to The Huffington Post that he told a constituent on Wednesday that Lance has voted for clean government funding bills in the past "and would not oppose doing so again should one be brought to the floor." [10/2/13]

Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho): Simpson told a Roll Call reporter Tuesday night, "I'd vote for a clean CR because I don't think this is a strategy that works." [Daniel Newhauser Tweet, 10/1/13]

This is a developing story and has been updated.

October 02, 2013 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bad anonymous only made 1/2 Priya
I made the other half.

October 02, 2013 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe my eyes. Theresa called me bad anonymous.


October 02, 2013 4:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Harry and Barry are responsible for this shut-down because they have flatly refused to negotiate with a House of Reps elected under our laws"

"He [Obama] has also instructed them [Democratic Senators] to follow his lead and refuse to negotiate the differences.

The designers of our democracy intended to have our two houses negotiate differences and come to a reasonable compromise."

Time to teach more facts:

The President is not a member of either of the "two houses" that are supposed to come to reasonable compromise, which all of a sudden, seems to be all the GOP can talk about. Yesterday's photo stunt included.

The GOP serve ONE purpose, to block every bill. They have done precisely that for years because they followed GOP leaders like Mitch McConnell, whose "TOP PRIORITY" was to deny President Obama a second term. McConnell even filibustered his own bill.

The GOP are determined to be a DO NOTHING Congress.

"House Republicans have had an opportunity to conference [that's how bicameral negotiations take place] with the Senate since April. That’s when lawmakers in the Senate, led by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), passed a budget and opened the door to create a committee to hash out the differences between that bill and the House budget, which it passed in March. Republicans had made the lack of a Democratic Senate budget a talking point for three years, arguing that Congress should return to “regular order” by passing budgets in both chambers and conferencing to work out the differences. Yet after the Senate passed a bill and the opportunity to do so became real, Senate Republicans blocked Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) from creating a conference committee. [And this fact was also reported by TheHill.com GOP blocks Reid from creating conference committee on budget 04/23/13]

In the months after that, those Republicans blocked 18 separate attempts to go to a budget conference with the House.

Republicans have offered a variety of excuses for not wanting to go to conference on the Senate Democratic budget bill. They have cited the need to work out rules, the requirement that a “framework” be worked out before heading into negotiations (which would likely be setting up a deal that cuts spending without raising any new revenue), and the demand that conferees be barred from addressing the need to raise the debt ceiling, which will need to be lifted in mid-October, claiming they are “preventing a back room deal to raise the debt limit.”"

October 02, 2013 5:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Time to teach more facts"

let me know when you learn some
"The President is not a member of either of the "two houses" that are supposed to come to reasonable compromise,"

no he isn't

and I never said he was

but, if wants to control the agenda, as he clearly does, he needs to work at building relationships

Obama has been notoriously aloof while successful Presidents have established working relationships with the legislature

truth is, most key members of Congress barely know him

he didn't even contact most of them until after he'd been in office for years

"which all of a sudden, seems to be all the GOP can talk about"

pointless remark

the GOP has stated its willingness to discuss a compromise, here and now, and Obama has refused

"Yesterday's photo stunt included"

good visual of the situation

of course, those who don't want the situation understood would call it a stunt

"The GOP serve ONE purpose, to block every bill"

what a hypocrite!

they've passed several complete CRs only to be blocked by Harry and Barry

now, they are trying to open the government an agency at a time and still getting a stone wall from the grimmer twins

Harry and Barry could agree to delay the mandate one year and open the government tomorrow

it wouldn't hurt Obamacare

based on the horrendous experience of yesterday, sounds like Obama could use a year to get it together anyway

you and I both know that H & B wat the government closed because it's their only shot in the 2014 election

October 02, 2013 6:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

also, it should be pointed out that it is entirely appropriate for the republicans to attack this bill during the budget process.

after all, obamacare was only passed because the democrats used a budgetary reconciliation to pass it...to bypass the fact that the American voters elected a republican in MA to fill Teddy Kennedy's seat to stop this bill from passing.

so it is ENTIRELY appropriate that the republicans debate this law on a budgetary basis.

Theresa (not other anonymous) ... sorry about calling you "bad" other anonymous.

October 02, 2013 8:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh and you realize that the latest deal the republicans sent over was to delay the individual mandate (after he delayed it for big business) and cancel the exemption for congress. and FUND everything else.

and OBAMA campaigned against the individual mandate when campaigning against Hillary.

what the heck does your guy stand for anyway ?

October 02, 2013 9:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No need to apologize for calling me bad, Theresa. I thought it was funny.

Besides, it's a week for breaking bad anyway.

October 02, 2013 9:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"and OBAMA campaigned against the individual mandate when campaigning against Hillary.

what the heck does your guy stand for anyway ?"

Oh for heaven's sake.

Are you saying there's a problem with a candidate changing a position on something once they come into office?

How soon they forget.

Bush's carbon dioxide flip-flop came through staffer who had lobbied for car-exhaust

President Bush's decision to abandon his campaign pledge to limit carbon dioxide emissions was routed through a key Bush aide who had lobbied for one of the world's largest manufacturers of automobile exhaust systems....

October 02, 2013 10:30 PM  
Anonymous Democrats are disgraceful said...

House Republicans on Wednesday night succeeded in passing three measures to reopen various parts of the government.

Though the bill to cover operations in the District of Columbia passed by voice vote, votes on a bill to fund the National Institutes of Health and one to fund national parks, monuments and museums fell mostly along party lines, passing 254-171 and 252-173, respectively.

On the national parks bill, Rep. Don Young of Alaska was the only Republican to vote against the measure, while 23 Democrats voted for it.

But Senate Democrats have indicated those proposals will not pass the upper chamber. House and Senate Democrats have been united around the idea that the House GOP’s mini-CR strategy is no substitute for a “clean” CR to fund the whole government, which has been shuttered since Tuesday.

Republicans, however, hope passage of the NIH and national parks bills will force Democrats to go on record against funding popular government programs.

Republicans were particularly aggressive on Wednesday in reinforcing that narrative after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was asked by a CNN reporter, “If you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?”

“Why would we want to do that?” Reid replied, in an attempt to make the point that all government programs were important.

“It’s disgraceful for Sen. Reid to deny cancer patients … just because he wants to score some political points,” said Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise of Louisiana on the House floor Wednesday afternoon. “It’s not too late for the Senate majority leader to have a change of heart.”

“Stop holding people hostage,” Scalise said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Rep. James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the House’s third-highest-ranking Democrat, said at a press conference that “kids with cancer” should not be used as “pawns” by the GOP.

October 03, 2013 5:07 AM  
Anonymous I see sleaze said...

does anyone know why it is considered "essential" by Obama to put up barricades around monuments?

it doesn't cost anything for people to walk by them but having barricades put up does

oh, that's right

Obama is a sleazeball, playing politics

October 03, 2013 5:12 AM  
Anonymous he gives and gives and gives said...

poor misunderstood Barry

he's not thinking about himself

he just wants to make sure Scott Walker can govern effectively when he is elected the next President

what a matyr!:

"Speaker of the House John Boehner, a Republican from Ohio, stepped out of the White House this evening after a 90-minute meeting with President Obama and reported no progress.

"They will not negotiate," Boehner said. "All we are asking for here is a discussion and fairness for the American people on Obamacare."

While Boehner said they had a "nice, polite conversation," the two sides came to no agreement, which means the government will remain partially shut down for the foreseeable future.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House, followed Boehner out of the White House a few minutes later.

"We're through playing little games," Reid said. "My friend John can't take yes for an answer."

Pelosi took a more conciliatory tone, saying the GOP in the House could make changes to the new health care law, but they should do so through the regular order, not by trying to make changes to a law by amending the bill that funds the government.

"We are locked in tight on Obamacare," Reid said.

Shortly before he was due to meet with congressional leaders to try to hammer out a resolution to end the government shutdown, CNBC aired an interview with President Obama in which he said he was "exasperated" by Republicans in Congress.

"I'm exasperated because this is entirely unnecessary." Obama said.

Obama returned to the topic later, saying, "I am exasperated with the idea that unless I say that 20 million people, 'you can't have health insurance,' they will not reopen the government."

Obama also said that he would not negotiate with Republicans over a budget until they reopen the government and agree to raise the debt ceiling.

He said he would not negotiate now because he was not going to allow a faction from one party to "extort concessions."

"If we get into the habit where one party is allowed to extort, ... then any president who comes after me would be unable to govern effectively," Obama said."

October 03, 2013 5:23 AM  
Anonymous Obama is an elitist said...

I don't understand why everyone is still saying we'll run out of money on October 17

if we keep non-essential government functions shut down until then we should have plenty of money

I don't understand why Obama says if Congress doesn't approve an increase in his credit limit, we'll default

when an individual begins to borrow money to pay debt, it's a sign bankruptcy is imminent

truth is, Federal revenues contain more than sufficient funds to make payments on our debts

we just have to prioritize paying debts over discretionary spending

but, that's what we'll have to do

until Obama agrees to give hard-working slobs the same one-year delay in the Obamacare mandate that he gave his big business buddies

October 03, 2013 7:43 AM  
Anonymous harry reid vs sick kids said...

Washington (CNN) – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid fired off over a question about whether the Democratic-controlled Senate would vote to restore funding for children undergoing clinical trials at the National Institutes of Health.

Asked by CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash if the Senate would follow the House's plans to vote for a bill to fund the NIH during the shutdown, Reid blasted the GOP-controlled House and insulted Bash.

"What right do they have to pick and choose which part of government is going to be funded? You talk about reckless and irresponsible, wow," he said.

About 200 new patients come to the NIH Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland every week. Patients are now being told they will have to wait until the government starts up again to begin their trials, according to NIH spokesman John Burklow.

"In fact, six new studies would have started this week that we are deferring," Burklow said. Approximately 30 of the 200 new patients are children, he said, and about 10 of those children are cancer patients.

Pressed further if Reid would move legislation if it meant helping even one child, the Nevada Democrat grew more irate.

"Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting at home. To have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing means you're irresponsible and reckless," he said to Bash.

October 03, 2013 7:50 AM  
Anonymous Obama thinks politics are essential said...

President Barack Obama obviously has a lot on his mind.

His angry Democrats are fighting those angry Republicans over the so-called government shutdown. It's not really a shutdown, even though the rhetoric suggests that the sky is falling and the seas are about to give up the dead. This is the 18th time it's happened since the 1970s, and the republic still stands.

This hasn't calmed our politicians, who are shrieking like hundreds of dying cats under the porch.

But if the president can just carve out a few seconds of quiet time, he should really think about sending out a team to do some hunting.

Some moron hunting.

Morons may be few in number, but they can be extremely dangerous during times of political controversy. All it takes is a few morons in a president's administration to ruin a carefully scripted public relations battle.

Especially that unidentified moron who decided the other day that he or she had a great idea:

Put up a barricade and a few guards at the World War II Memorial in Washington, tell veterans groups that it was closed and pin it on the Republicans.

Unfortunately for the president, the moron has disappeared. Yes, perhaps it's unfair, but the president gets blamed for this, for overplaying his hand.

You don't need a public relations consultant to explain the strategy: Someone reasoned that the veterans would be upset at the closed memorial and the media (which generally support the big-government establishment) would carry the water and put further heat on Obama's political foes.

But it didn't turn out that way.

On Tuesday, Honor Flight groups honoring the veterans showed up at the WWII Memorial. The vets looked at the signs that told them the memorial was closed, and they didn't follow government orders.

They just pushed their way through. Old men in wheelchairs, some using canes, some whip-thin and upright, with their families and their wives, just walked past the "closed" signs.

October 03, 2013 8:03 AM  
Anonymous Obama is not essential said...

No matter which side of this you're on, whether you support the Democrats or the Republicans, you can figure out what came next.

The Republicans seized the advantage, just as the Democrats would have done.

"Some idiot in government sent goons out there to set up barricades so they couldn't see the monument," said Sen. Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican.

He said "idiot," but "moron" will do just as well.

"People had to spend hours setting up barricades where there are never barricades to prevent people from seeing the World War II monument because they're trying to play a charade," Paul said.

By Wednesday, members of another Honor Flight group from Chicago were concerned that the White House would ban them as well. Sen. Mark Kirk, the Illinois Republican and a retired naval intelligence officer, vowed to lead them through. News crews gathered for the story.

"I think it's shameful," said Mary Pettinato, CEO and co-founder of Honor Flight Chicago. "It doesn't matter what side of the aisle you're on, it's shameful and shouldn't happen, that men and women that we should be honoring most have to be able to fight to see the memorial we built for them."

"Thankfully, we were not blockaded," Pettinato told us. "The only blockade we had were the politicians. ... It's just an awesome day."

Pettinato said the 91 veterans enjoyed the WWII Memorial but were told they wouldn't be able to visit the Korean or Vietnam war memorials.

The whole thing is idiotic, or moronic. If you've ever been to Washington and toured the WWII Memorial, or the Vietnam Memorial, you know why.

They're made of stone. They're out in the open. These are our secular holy places, commemorating our fathers and grandfathers who died so Americans can scream like cats about who spends what.

You can see the memorials during the day or at night. I've been to both when there were no guards present, just soldiers or the families of soldiers.

There was no reason to set up even minor blockades this week, except to play the political blame game. And it hurt the president.

Hans von Spakovsky, a legal scholar at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told me Wednesday in an interview on WLS-AM 890 that the president was hurt by the foolish decision.

"That was pure political theater. That memorial is on the mall. It's open 24 hours a day. Even when there are no park police there," von Spakovsky said. "So they had to go through time and money to send people out there to put up barricades to close it."

October 03, 2013 8:04 AM  
Anonymous #%*@&#*@(@ said...

Obama is sooooOOOooooOOOOOOOOOO sleazy!!

October 03, 2013 8:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Roger Hines, a Georgia state legislator and retired high school teacher, had choice words for the Kennesaw State University community in a Sunday newspaper column, calling the promotion of LGBT History Month "a slap in the face" to local citizens.

Hines said the school's acceptance of tax dollars and celebration of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community is "an affront to the entire state."

"No one who has lived in Georgia for six months could be in doubt about the state's predominant culture," Hines wrote. "We aren’t Washington state, and Atlanta isn’t San Francisco either, or not yet."

In September, The Marietta Daily Journal included a rundown of KSU events celebrating gay history month, including a theatrical production of coming out tales and participation in the Atlanta Pride Parade.

Hines took issue with the "month-long party," and ridiculed the university's acronym of choice: GLBTIQ. Hines said that the transgender community "argues that God made a mistake" and that "Q" -- standing for queer -- "is the most disturbing."

Hines chastised universities for accepting state funds, then supporting the gay community.

"It is the way of academia. They ply state legislators for funds and then foster such things as gay politics that neither state legislators nor their constituents approve of," Hines said. "This should cease."

October 03, 2013 9:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obamacare: Day 1

--More than 10 MILLION unique visits to the exchange websites

--4.7 million visitors to Healthcare.gov alone

--As many as 16,000 hits PER SECOND in California

--7.5 million web visits to New York's exchange

--Nearly 2,000 calls to Connecticut's exchange

--2,179 new accounts created in Nevada

--More than 1,200 applications completed in Kentucky

--Obamacare is signed, sealed, and delivering

And we can all see from Anon's rightwing crap above how GOTPers are spinning anything they can think of to try to stop Americans without insurance from affording and obtaining it.

October 03, 2013 9:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


costs up $7450. Yep we are already seeing that.

And 30 million still uninsured 2 Trillion later...

October 03, 2013 10:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh yeah, he's what I like to see. Excellent judgment, great leadership, world-class journalism: House Republicans probe DC monument closures amid slimdown

October 03, 2013 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Obama shut downs America said...

no one knows what the "millions" of hits are

few are signing up though

House Republicans have passed funding for several agencies

the Senate could pass and Obama could sign funding for NIH, VA, DC government and the National Parks today

they don't want to because if they can just pass one big funding resolution, they can keep adding the wasteful government crap

passing an agency at a time puts focus on what agencies and departments are really necessary or desirable

theoretically, we could pass funding for everything except Obamacare so the government non-essentials could keep going while the Obamacare funding is negotiated

Obama has unilaterally exempted big business from Obamacare requirements for a year so, at a minimum, the funds to enforce should be cut

Barry apparently wants us to believe barricading monuments is an essential function of government

he may be violating the law by engaging in this wasteful political stunt since funding has not been approved for it

of course, the latest hypocrisy from Obama is running trying to scare everyone that is Congress doesn't let him borrow more money, the US will default on its debts

unreported by the media, however, is that the House of Representatives has passed the McClintock-Toomey Act which directs that tax revenues will go first to pay off US debts

since tax revenue will always be enough for this, enacting this law will ensure the US never defaults

surprise, the Senate shot the bill down and Obama said he would veto it

they could re-open the government by agreeing to delay the individual mandate one year and eliminate any worry about default by signing McCintock-Toomey

they couldn't care less about their constituents

October 03, 2013 11:25 AM  
Anonymous let govt take over our health - that'll fix things alright!! said...

TTFers are so sad and gullible, believing any fantasy that confirms their socialist vision

just this morning, one of them blathered on:

"--As many as 16,000 hits PER SECOND in California

--Obamacare is signed, sealed, and delivering

And we can all see from Anon's rightwing crap above how GOTPers are spinning anything they can think of to try to stop Americans without insurance from affording and obtaining it."

then, later in the morning we learn that California's numbers were a lie:

"California's health insurance exchange vastly overstated the number of online hits it received Tuesday during the rollout of Obamacare.

State officials said the Covered California website got 645,000 hits during the first day of enrollment, far fewer than the 5 million it reported Tuesday.

The state exchange had cited the 5 million figure as a sign of strong consumer interest and a major reason people had so much difficulty using its $313-million online enrollment system.

Dana Howard, a spokesman for Covered California, said the error was the result of internal miscommunication.

"Someone misspoke and thought it was indeed 5 million hits. That was incorrect," he said."

this Obamacare is going to be great

they either lied or can't count right

and that was just the first day of incompetence!!

October 03, 2013 1:38 PM  

Obama, in Rockville this morning:

"there's only one reason why the government is shut down now"

he's right

it's because he said he would veto all of the budgets passed by the House of Representatives so his Senate buddies used that as an excuse to not even vote on them

meanwhile, the House even funded NIH so very sick children can get the treatment they need and Obama can't even bring himself to sign that


so he can play political games

October 03, 2013 1:45 PM  

Obamacare is the law of the land.

It was upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court

The GOTP needs to stop their "waaah we don't like Obamacare, a constitutional law of the land" temper tantrum and do their jobs.

Since April of this year, the House GOTP has refused to sit in conference with Senate budget negotiators.

Now the GOTP bullies have stolen the nation's lunch-and-then-some money and want to bully uninsured Americans into going without AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE for another year.

Members of the House GOTP don't give one hoot about sick children at NIH, or infants who need the WIC program to eat, or disadvantaged kids who need HeadStart, etc., as evidenced by their unyielding desire to kill the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT BY SHUTTING DOWN THE ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!

GOTP Governors who have refused to expand Medicare but have large populations of citizens without access to health care in their states confirm the GOTP does not care about sick children.

All the spin in the world does not change these facts. Everybody sees what the GOTP is doing and that's why recent polls overwhelmingly find this shutdown is the fault of the GOTP.

October 03, 2013 2:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this morning, a GOP Congressman was assaulted outside the Capitol

now, the Capitol is in lockdown because shots have been fired at it

if Obama's hype is now inciting violence, he needs to resign

but before he leaves he can sign the budget passed by the House, and tear down the barricades to our national monuments,

October 03, 2013 2:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it was a women, and she was trying to ram the barricades outside the white house. she had a child in the car and was from out of town, the car is leased.

what if it was one of the kids with cancer's moms that were denied care yesterday - it fits... because of mister harry reid "why would I want to do that ?"

she was ramming the white house gates.... pretty clear who she was mad at. and having a kid with cancer that you couldn't get treated would make anyone pretty angry.

October 03, 2013 3:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The capitol is no longer under lockdown.

A woman rammed a gate at the White House and has been killed by Capitol Hill Police after her car crashed into a barricade at the Capitol.

A child was rescued from the back seat of the woman shooter's car, and the woman driver was killed.

Three people have been injured.

Press briefing by the Capitol Police will be in a few minutes.

October 03, 2013 3:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, and in a couple of weeks the real fighting starts. Stay tuned.

October 03, 2013 3:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boehner Tells Republicans He Won’t Let the Nation Default

"WASHINGTON — With a budget deal still elusive and a deadline approaching on raising the debt ceiling, Speaker John A. Boehner has told colleagues that he is determined to prevent a federal default and is willing to pass a measure through a combination of Republican and Democratic votes, according to multiple House Republicans.

One lawmaker, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Mr. Boehner had indicated he would be willing to violate the so-called Hastert Rule if necessary to pass a debt-limit increase. The informal rule refers to a policy of not bringing to the floor any measure that does not have a majority of Republican votes.

A spokesman for Mr. Boehner pushed back on the idea that the speaker would try to pass a debt-limit increase mainly with Democratic votes, but acknowledged that the speaker understood the need to head off a default.

“The speaker always, always prefers to pass legislation with a strong Republican majority,” said Michael Steel, a spokesman for Mr. Boehner.

“The speaker has always been clear that a default would be disastrous for our economy,” Mr. Steel said. “He’s also been clear that a ‘clean’ debt hike cannot pass the House. That’s why the president and Senate Democrats should drop their ‘no negotiations’ stance, and work with us on a plan to raise the debt limit in a responsible way, with spending cuts and reforms to get our economy moving again and create jobs.”

It is conceivable that Mr. Boehner could pass a debt-limit increase with a slim majority of Republican votes, and Democrats making up the difference, as he has in the past on budget measures. In meetings with Republican lawmakers, the speaker appeared to be offering reassurances to members worried about the government shutdown that he would not allow a default to take place.

Other Republicans also said Thursday that they got the sense that Mr. Boehner would do whatever was necessary to ensure that the country did not default on its debt.

Representative Michael G. Fitzpatrick, Republican of Pennsylvania, who was one of just 22 House Republicans this year who helped Mr. Boehner pass three crucial bills — to avert a fiscal showdown, to provide relief for the victims of Hurricane Sandy, and to pass the Violence Against Women Act — with a majority of Democratic support, said he expected that he may be asked to do so again.

“Hurricane Sandy, the fiscal cliff, all of the big votes require reasonable Republicans and Democrats to come together in order to pass it and get it to the president’s desk,” he said. “This will be no different.”

And, Mr. Fitzpatrick added, “I’ve been there in the past, and I’m prepared to be there again.”..."

October 03, 2013 4:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"this morning, a GOP Congressman was assaulted outside the Capitol"

"WASHINGTON (AP) — A stranger screamed at and grabbed U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy, who has been a vocal advocate for delaying the rollout of the federal health care law, as he walked to the Capitol to vote on legislation, his office said Thursday. He wasn't harmed.

The Wisconsin Republican's office said in an email that he reported the incident to police as required by U.S. House security procedures but asked for no further action and has no comment on what happened...."

October 03, 2013 6:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

we don't need a debt limit increase, we just need to pass the bill that tax revenues will go first to pay the debt interest.

just call harry and tell him to bring up that house passed bill in the senate.

October 03, 2013 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Less than two days after the government shut down, 17 Republicans have come forward as of Wednesday afternoon to say they're ready to pass a bill to fund the government with no strings attached"

That was earlier today.

Now we can add:

Rep. Bill Young (R-Fla.): Young told Tampa Bay Times reporter Alex Leary that he's ready to vote for a clean funding bill. "The politics should be over," he said. "It's time to legislate." [Alex Leary Tweet, 10/2/13]

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.): The congressman told Miami Herald reporter Marc Caputo that he would vote for a clean funding bill, provided it has the same funding levels contained in the Senate-passed bill. [The Miami Herald, 10/2/13]

Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.): "I would take a clean (continuing resolution)." [Observer-Dispatch, 10/2/13]

Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.): A Davis constituent tells The Huffington Post that a Davis aide told him Wednesday, "Congressman Davis is prepared to vote 'yes' on a clean CR." Asked for comment, Davis spokesman Andrew Flach told HuffPost that Davis isn't "going to speculate" on what bills may come up in the House and "will continue to vote for proposals brought to the floor that will fund the federal government." [10/2/2013]

Rep. Tim Griffin (R-Ark.): Asked on Twitter if he would support a clean funding bill if it came up for a vote, Griffin tweeted, "sure. Ive already said i would support." [Official Twitter, 10/2/13].

October 03, 2013 10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

GOP Congressman shames Park Ranger for not allowing tourists to visit memorial he voted to shutdown

October 04, 2013 9:02 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

There's an empty space in the Republican Party where compassionate conservatism used to be, and an opportunity for a presidential prospect to step into the breach.

The disappearance of that trademark George W. Bush brand from Washington has never been more apparent. The Republican House has gone from stalling immigration reform and cutting food stamps to precipitating a government shutdown by demanding the repeal of the health law that is the cornerstone of President Obama's legacy. The shutdown is threatening nutrition programs, cancer treatment, salaries, jobs, and much more.

It's one bad hand among several the GOP has dealt itself.

"We're not finished committing suicide here," said Republican strategist John Weaver, a veteran of the McCain and Huntsman campaigns. "We also have the opportunity to kill immigration reform, and the odds are that we will do that, just to make sure we're the angry-white-man party." He says the party may need a George McGovern-sized defeat with a candidate like Ted Cruz before it chooses another path.

Mark McKinnon, a former Bush strategist, is hoping for a more immediate course correction. "Now that the country has seen what compassionless conservatives have wrought," he says, "perhaps the GOP will start to regain a hunger for compassionate conservatives."

Republicans are doing nothing so far to cut into Obama's advantage on issues like who people trust more to help families and handle health care, and who they blame more for Washington gridlock. Gallup historical data suggest the GOP won't suffer long-term damage as a result of the shutdown, but the context for this one is different: It is happening in a dragging economy, it is coming amid other unpopular stands, and it could be followed – or accompanied – by a debt-ceiling disaster.

October 04, 2013 1:37 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Dick Armey, the former House Republican leader, sees defeat looming on both the PR and policy fronts. "I don't know that I have ever seen Republicans gain one inch of ground towards their stated objective by precipitating a government shutdown," he said.

In fact, by linking Obamacare to funding the government, Republicans may have inadvertently raised public awareness of the law and boosted traffic on the new insurance marketplaces. Now they are pointing out glitches due in part to high volume – undercutting their customary insistence that Americans don't want the law. "We shouldn't be advertising the fact that the website was oversubscribed. That's not exactly a strong talking point for our side," John Feehery, a former House GOP leadership aide, says with a wry laugh.

Alarmist conservative rhetoric on Obamacare (socialist, dangerous, an existential economic threat, and a failure before it starts) is another potential land mine. What are the chances that, as people experience the law firsthand, they'll look at that rhetoric and wonder what the heck Republicans were talking about? "At least 50-50. Probably higher," says Ron Haskins, a social policy expert at the Brookings Institution and a former senior GOP aide on Capitol Hill. He says he's been worried about the direction of his party for months. "Everyday I wake up and it's something new," he says.

There are plenty of Republicans outside Congress who could serve as counterweights to the harsh image fueled by developments on Capitol Hill, and even a few inside. But elder statesmen like John McCain and Bob Dole aren't being heeded, and reactions by people eying the White House have ranged from oblique to MIA.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, running for reelection this year and a leading 2016 prospect, usually goes the route of "everyone's to blame." But he did release a campaign ad this week – " Bipartisan" – that could be read as a rebuke of House and Senate conservatives who would rather get nowhere than settle for less than 100 percent. "I say what I believe. But I also know that my job is to get things done for the people of the state," Christie says in the ad. Then, after citing tax cuts, spending cuts, improving education, and reforms of tenure, pensions and benefits, he concludes: "Everything we've done has been a bipartisan accomplishment. See, I think as long as you stick to your principles, compromise isn't a dirty word."

October 04, 2013 1:38 PM  
Anonymous adressing a voice coming from under a slimy rock said...

from the land of lazy living, a hypocritical voice calls out:

"There's an empty space in the Republican Party where compassionate conservatism used to be,"

you simply have to be kidding

here's a remark from a White official today:

"Said a senior administration official: "We are winning...It doesn't really matter to us" how long the shutdown lasts "because what matters is the end result.""

kind of like when the Republican House passed a bill compassionately restoring funding to NIH so children with cancer could resume treatment

Obama could have signed the bill without surrendering any of his agenda, and even have said he was doing for the kids

but more important to him is his ideology

how about Louisiana where poor black children had a tuition voucher program representing their best chance to escape poverty and Eric Holder has sued to stop it?

the truth is leftist politicians, from Lenin to Mao to Obama are renowned for their lack of compassion

do you know that studies have consistently found that the U.S. contributes more to charity than any country and that Republican donate vastly more than Democrats in America?

it's obvious that the reason Democrats favor government control of individuals is not compassion

life in Canada must be boring

October 04, 2013 3:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FOX poll out today:

57% favor delaying Obamacare a year

so, if Obama will just agree with the American voter, the non-essential parts of government can re-open Monday

it's a win-win!!

October 04, 2013 3:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"FOX poll out today:

57% favor delaying Obamacare a year"

CBS poll shows shutdown more unpopular than ObamaCare

"On day three of the partial government shutdown, a new CBS News poll reveals that a large majority of Americans disapprove of the shutdown and more are blaming Republicans than President Obama and the Democrats for it.

Fully 72 percent of Americans disapprove of shutting down the federal government over differences on the Affordable Care Act; just 25 percent approve of this action. Republicans are divided: 48 percent approve, while 49 percent disapprove. Most tea party supporters approve of the government shutdown – 57 percent of them do. Disapproval of the shutdown is high among Democrats and independents. This CBS News poll was conducted after the partial government shutdown began on October 1.

Views of the Affordable Care Act are related to views of the shutdown. Those who like the health care law also overwhelmingly disapprove of shutting down the government. There is more support for the shutdown among Americans who don’t like the 2010 health care law. Thirty-eight percent of them approve of the shutdown but even more, 59 percent, disapprove."

October 04, 2013 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Harry and Barry are the grimmer twins said...

the House is working on more opportunities for Obama to show compassion:

"House Republicans on Thursday lined up 11 bills to fund targeted programs. They were: nutrition programs for low-income women and their children; a program to secure nuclear weapons and non-proliferation; food and drug safety; intelligence gathering; border patrols; American Indian and Alaska Native health and education programs; weather monitoring; Head Start school programs for the poor and other aid for schools that rely heavily on federal assistance.

With a major storm approaching the Gulf coast, disaster assistance was also slated for temporary renewal under the House measures.

The Democratic-controlled Senate says it will reject the measures and Obama has said he would veto them."

October 04, 2013 4:11 PM  

In his Friday column for the New York Times, award-winning economist Paul Krugman celebrates the unveiling of the Obamacare exchanges, writing that health reform looks as if it’s “here to stay” and that, as a result, Republicans’ “worst fears will indeed be realized.”

“It’s long been clear that the great fear of the Republican Party was not that health reform would fail, but that it would succeed,” Krugman writes before dismissing the program’s early “glitches” as the byproduct of greater demand than expected. “[T]he glitches of October won’t matter in the long run,” he writes. “But why are they actually encouraging? Because they appear, for the most part, to be the result of the sheer volume of traffic, which has been much heavier than expected.”

Krugman continues:

Of course, it’s important that people who want to sign up can actually do so. But the computer problems can and will be fixed. So, by March 31, when enrollment for 2014 closes, we can be reasonably sure that millions of Americans who were previously uninsured will have coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare will have become a reality, something people depend on, rather than some fuzzy notion Republicans could demonize. And it will be very hard to take that coverage away.

October 04, 2013 4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


no, you idolize them

Harry and Barry could guarantee that America will never default on its debts by approving and signing McClintock-Toomey

but they won't because they are holding the nation's credit rating hostage, threatening to destroy it if they don't get their way

treatments to children with cancer could resume tonight if they would approve and sign the House bill to fund NIH

but they won't because they are holding the sick children hostage, threatening to destroy the children's hopes if they don't get their way

American citizens could once again visit our nation's memorials if Barry would simply take down the barricades

but they won't because they are holding the economy the memorials, threatening to close them if they don't get their way

and, in France, Obama has put up a wall at the cemetery in Normandy, holding hostage families who took a once in a lifetime trip there to see their loved ones graves

Mr Obama, tear down that wall!!

October 04, 2013 5:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

GOP Donors Revolt Against Republican-Led Government Shutdown

On a Monday last month, Rep. Greg Walden, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, met with some top GOP donors for lunch at Le Cirque on Lexington Avenue in Manhattan. The donors, a youngish collection of financial industry types and lawyers, had some questions for Walden, a mild-mannered lawmaker from eastern Oregon known for speaking his mind.

Why, they asked, did the GOP seem so in the thrall of its most extremist wing? The donors, banker types who occupy the upper reaches of Wall Street’s towers, couldn’t understand why the Republican Party—their party—seemed close to threatening the nation with a government shutdown, never mind a default if the debt ceiling isn’t raised later this month.

“Listen,” Walden said, according to several people present. “We have to do this because of the Tea Party. If we don’t, these guys are going to get primaried and they are going to lose their primary.”...

“We are finding a marvelous way to grab defeat from the jaws of victory,” said Fred Zeidman, a Houston-based businessman who was a major donor to both of George W. Bush’s presidential campaigns. “The way we are handling this has been a mistake from the beginning. I think we misread where the country was.”...

“The Tea Party is not looking at the big picture,” he said. “In the long run it will have deleterious effects on the whole party when we could have taken the high road. There is so much going on right now with Obamacare, and no one is saying a word about it.”

“I am not writing a check to anyone,” he added. “That is not working for the American people.”

Bobbie Kilberg, a Republican fundraiser who has worked for four Republican presidents, echoed Zeidman. She has hosted fundraisers for ideological warriors such as Reps. Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor, and is hosting Arkansas Senate candidate Tom Cotton later this year, but she said she will not give to the NRCC.

“When you have a small segment who dictate to the rest of the party, the result is what we have seen in the last two days,” she said. “People need to stand up and not be afraid of the Tea Party.”

“This may be a turning point,” she predicted. “People may say, ‘Enough already.’”...

“I have been in politics for 45 years,” said Georgette Mosbacher, a cosmetics CEO in New York whom The Washington Post once called “the eccentric grande dame of GOP fundraising.” “Every time something does not work, it has to be blamed on an entity ‘out there.’ Well, I am sorry, but the Tea Party isn’t that powerful, and anybody who stopped to think about it long enough would know that.”

But there is still a sense among the donor class that some countervailing force is needed to push back against the furthest edges of the party, regardless of what it is called.

“I have raised a lot of money, but I am not raising any more for House candidates,” said Munr Kazmir, a New Jersey-based businessman and major donor to George W. Bush. “I am angry. I am embarrassed to be a Republican sometimes, I tell you.”

October 04, 2013 5:43 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The Art of War: Everyone saw this one coming — that the House Republicans would march into battle waving their “No Obamacare Ever” banners and meet fierce resistance from the White House. What stuns many Republicans is that the war was launched with no backup plan, no strategy, no sense of “then what?”

Two weeks before the government shutdown, the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page warned of the folly of the Republican House threatening “to crash their Zeros into the aircraft carrier of Obamacare.” As the Journal editorial writers, whom no one would accuse of excessive sympathy for Obama, put it, “Kamikaze missions rarely turn out well, least of all for the pilots.”

Searching for the Good News: House Speaker John Boehner may never have planned it like this, but the inadvertent effect of the government shutdown could be to reacquaint the GOP refuseniks with something resembling political reality. The logic, which I heard from prominent GOP strategists, is that since the Republican House felt compelled to go over the cliff on a budgetary issue, it is far safer to do it on funding the government than on raising the debt ceiling when the government runs out of borrowing power on Oct. 17.

Yes, the government shutdown is embarrassing. (The latest cover of the British newsmagazine the Economist has the headline, “No way to run a country.”) But the nation can endure a temporary halt in many government functions, even vital ones like cancer research. In contrast, not raising the federal debt ceiling would send the U.S. government into default — and, beyond the international humiliation, that would mean higher borrowing costs for the Treasury for decades to come.

Sooner or later, the most noncompromising faction of the House Republicans will begin to realize that winning a majority of Fox News viewers is different from winning a majority of the nation’s voters. By supporting this outburst of conservative intensity on the government shutdown, Boehner may have given himself room to work with the Democrats to make sure than the debt ceiling is raised in time.'

Misunderstanding the GOP Revolution: The standard interpretation of the 2010 Republican takeover of the House was that frustration with Obama over the economy and health care brought in a wave of exceptionally conservative tea party legislators. But the mistake was to focus on the right-wing ideology of these new House Republicans rather than to highlight their outsider disdain for legislating.

October 04, 2013 5:50 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

It is easy to hold very conservative views on the budget and taxation without disdaining all compromise on all matters at all times. The crux of Boehner’s problem with the right flank of House Republicans is their collective failure to understand that (cue the Rolling Stones) you can’t always get what you want.

Primary Colors: Many House Republicans understand that a government shutdown and a possible default on the national debt is bad for business, bad for jobs and bad for profits. But these main-street Republicans also live in mortal terror that any flicker of compromise will prompt a full-funded tea party challenge in the 2014 primaries.

But what if a few tea party zealots faced 2014 primary opposition from GOP centrists? That is a topic, according to GOP insiders, that is being quietly discussed in Washington among Republican Super PACs and other major funders.

The first signs of this trend have already emerged. According to the Detroit News, two House Republicans from Michigan, Reps. Justin Amash and Kerry Bentivolio, have drawn potentially well-funded 2014 primary foes from the business community. Amash, in particular, is a libertarian firebrand — and his opponent, Brian Ellis, enters the race with enthusiastic backing from the Grand Rapids financial community.

There is, of course, no guarantee that the Michigan challengers will be able to prevail in low-turnout primaries than often reward ideological intensity over prudent moderation. But just the existence of these candidates suggests that there may suddenly be political cross-pressures on the just-say-no wing of House Republicans.

The Limits of Self-Interest: Few novelists are as popular among the tea party crowd as Ayn Rand, that passionate apostle of enlightened selfishness. But there is a downside to applying her free-market principles (everyone acting in their own self-interest creates a robust economy) to congressional politics.

October 04, 2013 5:51 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

A House member from a safe GOP district can easily decide that his or her political future depends on not stirring up charges that they are Republicans in Name Only, a moral failing that brings with it the dread acronym RINO. But if too many Republicans follow that me-first credo, the GOP’s image is marred with swing voters.

And that is what is happening nationally right now as the topic has shifted from the glitches with the rollout of Obamacare (a potentially fruitful GOP issue) to the extremism of the government shutdown (not the Republican Party’s finest moment).

Why Can’t They Run the Government Like a Business?
That’s long been a favorite political trope, especially for Republicans. But the truth is that no business would put up with anything like the current scorched-earth battle between the CEO (Barack Obama) and a rump faction of the board of directors (the Republican House).

And the shutdown is only the latest example of the never-in-the-private-sector constrains on the federal government. Imagine a business that is unable to carry out long-term planning; that has been forced to arbitrarily slash every spending category regardless of priority; and that, even if it resumes operations this month, may have to endure another irrational shutdown before the end of the year.

The problem is not with the federal workforce or with the idea of a public sector operating outside the profit motive. Rather, the impasse between the president and Congress has created impossible working conditions with no end in sight.

So the next time a veteran’s pension check arrives in the right bank account, a doctor’s bill gets paid by Medicare or an FBI agent cracks a case, pause for a moment to reflect on what has just occurred. Things still work in government even if political blood feuds make it impossible for it to be run like a business.

In the great 1939 Ernst Lubitsch comedy “Ninotchka,” Greta Garbo plays a Soviet commissar visiting Paris. Discussing the purges, Garbo says, “There are going to be fewer but better Russians.”Unless John Boehner and Company manage to take the House back from the brink in the coming days, it may be necessary to update Garbo’s line to fit the GOP quest for ideology purity: “There are going to be fewer but better Republicans.”

October 04, 2013 5:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Why Can’t They Run the Government Like a Business?
That’s long been a favorite political trope, especially for Republicans. But the truth is that no business would put up with anything like the current scorched-earth battle between the CEO (Barack Obama) and a rump faction of the board of directors (the Republican House)."

we cannot keep spending like this Priya, the entire thing will implode. Cynthia even admits this.

And if it implodes because we can't get our spending under control, it will be FAR FAR worse than what we are experiencing now.

Dropped off a copy of the increase in benefits at Van Hollens office this afternoon (and at the Washington Post) Lady at Van HOllens had no good answer for the "well you said it was going to go down 2500 and it is up 1700" - considering 4000 to 5700. and they cancelled the plan I was on...

no good answers. tried to imply that it was just going to go down for some people.

What I found AMAZING was they had the Ben Franklin if you sacrifice liberty for safety and comfort quote up on their wall.... in VAN HOLLEN's office.

I was shocked. They are doing everything they can to work against that tenant.

October 04, 2013 7:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

increased COST in benefits, that is.

October 04, 2013 7:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's despicable. It's despicable. It makes me want to throw up. I mean they're shutting down our government because of health care when these Congressmen and Senators, the Democrips and Rebloodlicans, as I call them, and please excuse me, Crips and Bloods, for using your name in vain, these Democrips and Rebloodlicans, they get four choices of insurance to choose from. We get none. We want one and they're going to shut the government down and tell us they're doing it for the good of the people? Shut the government down? Jeopardize national security? All of this stuff, for political like this? They should all be voted out of office immediately."

Jesse Ventura

October 04, 2013 8:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why can't we run the government like a business?

Government must work in sunshine to be open to the electorate, but business doesn't.

Government is a monopoly, a sole provider of it's services, unless you want every county or town to have its own.

Business aims to turn a profit, but not everything that is profitable is of social value and not everything of social value is profitable.

Reality TV, pornography, fashion, sports, and gambling are all of questionable social value, but each is quite profitable and exists in the private sector. Meanwhile, few would argue that the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, police department, fire department, libraries, parks, and public schools are of no social value, and yet they could not exist if they were required to be profitable.

Compensation for government workers is much lower than in the private sector so they must be motivated by something other than earning big bonuses.

Economist Steven Horwitz put it this way:

"The institution of profit and loss (in the private sector) rewards those who are good economic calculators and efficient resource users, and punishes those who are not. Those who survive develop further the skills the system rewards.

Move those same people to the public sector and they lose the private property that connects their fate directly to the economic consequences of their decision making. They also lose the prices and profit signals that inform them about which sorts of action might be the most efficient. No matter how smart or skilled they were in the private sector, thrown into the public sector, businesspeople are denied the incentives and information that made their success possible."

George W. Bush was the first President to hold an MBA.

October 04, 2013 8:46 PM  
Anonymous has anyone noticed that Obama is a loser? said...

this is how things are going to roll in the next couple of weeks:

the House will continue pass funding authority an agency at a time

you may notice how Obama keeps focusing on the debt limit

he thinks the Repubs will look irresponsible if they don't extend the credit limit

Repubs will turn the tables by approving the debt limit increase for two weeks at a time and sticking with the shutdown until Obama starts signing the partial funding bills

until he gives in, there will be little need to borrow more anyway

the American people will eventually side with the Repubs, who will be seen as responsible for approving the debt limit as passing funding for important but non-essential

eventually, Repubs will approve every department and agency except the additional IRS agents to enforce the individual mandate

Repubs will approve increased borrowing when necessary but keep it on a short leash

and pressure will build on Obama to allow the non-essential but desirable functions of government to resume, which the House of Representatives have approved him doing

America wins!!

October 04, 2013 11:56 PM  
Anonymous sally in the alley said...

that's a good plan!!

October 05, 2013 12:26 AM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

that's right!


October 05, 2013 12:29 AM  
Anonymous vodka shots all around said...

here's a fun story:

"Russia does not want its children falling into the hands of gay parents -- so much so that the country has opted to ban all Swedish parents from adopting.

Moscow halted all adoptions to the Scandinavian country this week. The prohibition is part of a recent court decision that disallows any foreign country that recognizes same-sex unions, or affords adoption rights to gay couples, from taking in a Russian child.

Russia will now seek legal agreements with each of these countries to ensure that only heterosexual couples are allowed to adopt. Negotiations between Russia and Sweden began Thursday.

The gay adoption ban, signed into law by President Vladimir Putin in July, aims to guarantee a "harmonious and full upbringing for children in adoptive families," the Kremlin said in statement released at the time.

Last month, a Russian lawmaker proposed a law that would deny gay parents in Russia custody of their children. The draft bill follows Russia's highly publicized ban on gay propaganda that may affect athletes and spectators during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi."

October 05, 2013 8:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, so you support both the Tea Party, who want to shut down government, and the Russians, who want government in everybody's home with the authority to take children away from their biological parents if their parents happen to be gay.

"In April, the National Organization for Marriage alluded to the existence of an International Organization for Marriage, which sounded like an umbrella group for organizations around the globe opposed to marriage equality, such as the efforts NOM supported in France. It has yet to be publicly unveiled, but according to a new report from Right Wing Watch, NOM’s Brian Brown joined some of the French activists in bringing those anti-gay views to Russia....

Russia is now considering a bill that would deny parents custody of their own biological children if they identify as gay or lesbian. According to the bill’s sponsor, Duma Deputy Alexei Zhuravlev, those children would be better off in an orphanage. Both bills have been heavily influenced by Mark Regnerus’ flawed study that attempts to draw negative conclusions about same-sex parenting. Regnerus has even distanced himself from the new legislation, arguing that homosexuality isn’t so bad that it merits taking children away from their biological parents.

Brown was not the only American who helped influence Russia’s anti-gay laws. Jack Hanick, who describes himself as a founding employee of Fox News, called on Russia to “stand up for traditional values.” He even believes that Russia’s theocratic tendencies could be a good model for the United States, calling it a “positive thing” that Russia does not have the same separation of church and state.

Brown’s international anti-gay advocacy mirrors that of Scott Lively, who has boasted his anti-gay influence around the world. Armed with his book about how homosexuality was responsible for the rise of the Nazi party, Lively helped plant the seeds for Uganda’s “Kill The Gays” bill, and calls Russia’s ban on “gay propaganda” “one of the proudest achievements of my career.”

The International Organization for Marriage is still not an official entity, but NOM’s international advocacy is clearly underway."

You should be careful what you say. You wouldn't want people to get any ideas about your love of Russians and your joy at shutting down the US government.

"Budem zdorovy" < clink >

October 05, 2013 9:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"George W. Bush was the first President to hold an MBA."

And we all know what a great job that MBA did managing our economy, don't we?

He led us right up to the precipice of our second great depression and then disappeared from public with his tail between his legs and left his mess for another Democrat to clean up.

"we cannot keep spending like this Priya, the entire thing will implode. Cynthia even admits this.

I see facts do not concern you. We are not "spending like this," we are reducing our federal budge deficit faster than the CBO expected.

As usual when there's a Democrat in the White House.

"The federal budget deficit will shrink this year to $642 billion, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office now estimates. Just three months ago, the CBO was forecasting a deficit of $845 billion for the 2013 fiscal year, which ends in September.

“Relative to the size of the economy, the deficit this year ... will be less than half as large as the shortfall in 2009,” the CBO said in releasing its new estimate Tuesday. The deficit peaked at 10.1 percent of gross domestic product then, but it's on track for 4 percent of GDP this year."

We are on track and moving in the right direction no matter how many times you panic and SCREAM like the sky is falling. No it isn't. Obama's leadership is helping us recover from the pit of deficit and debt Bush, the MBA President, left us in. If Congress wasn't still trying to ensure Obama's only a one term President even after he's won his second term by obstructing his policies at every turn, we'd be a lot farther out of the hole Bush dug by now.

October 05, 2013 9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...You can do your best to make it look like government doesn’t work when you stop it from working. You can do your best to make government look paralyzed when you paralyze it. You can do your best to make government look incompetent through your incompetence, and ineffective through your ineffectiveness. But sooner or later the government will reopen. Because this is a democracy, and this democracy has already rejected your views. We have already chosen to do these things together. Because we all know that we are stronger when we come together.

When this government reopens, when our markets are safe again, when our scientists can return to their research, when our small businesses can borrow, when our veterans can be respected for their service, when our flu shots resume and our Head Start programs get back to teaching our kids, we will have rejected your views once again.

We are not a country of anarchists. We are not a country of pessimists and ideologues whose motto is ‘I’ve got mine, the rest of you are on your own.’ We are not a country that tolerates dangerous drugs, unsafe meat, dirty air or toxic mortgages. We are not that nation. We have never been that nation. And we will never be that nation.

Today a political minority in the House that condemns government and begged for the shutdown has had its day. But like all the reckless and extremist factions that have come before it, their day will pass and our democracy will return to the important work that we have already chosen to do together."

Thank you for telling it like it is, Senator Warren.

October 05, 2013 10:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama reduced the deficit slight have he soared it to over trillion for his first four years 2009-2012.

He inherited a 500 billion deficit from bush, and by the time he finished out that year it was a trillion. after campaigning that 10 trillion was reckless and irresponsible he has increased it to 17 trillion in 5 years (bush did 4 trillion in 8 years. Both are bad, but Obama's is unconscionable.

Obama is still regularly turning in higher deficits than anyone in history and that is with revenues at an all time high.

October 05, 2013 10:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


October 05, 2013 10:35 AM  
Anonymous you bet your sweet bippy! said...

"Wow, so you support both the Tea Party, who want to shut down government,"

actually, they want the government to live within its means

to say I support the Tea Party is a generalization although most of their positions are preferable to the status quo in Washington

"and the Russians, who want government in everybody's home with the authority to take children away from their biological parents if their parents happen to be gay"

well, I do support Russian efforts to protect children from gay propaganda

we actually protect children from lewdness here in America, which I also support

"You should be careful what you say."

that's true

Obama might tell the IRS to get me

"You wouldn't want people to get any ideas about your love of Russians"

like most Americans, I appreciate many things about Russia: their music, their ballet, their literature, their vast natural wildernesses, their vodka and caviar

they have a history of messed up government and bad food but when they do something right, it should be acknowledged

protecting children from exposure to sexual deviance is right

"and your joy at shutting down the US government"

I hate to break it to you but the essential parts of the US government are up and running

most of the non-essential parts will soon be approved by the House of Representation which brings me to a state of rapture

if only Barry and Harry could bring themselves to end the shutdown

"And we all know what a great job that MBA did managing our economy, don't we?"

actually, Bush did a great job

despite horrific attacks on our country from terrorists and nature, through most of Bush's two terms, America had low inflation, unemployment, taxes and deficits

"He led us right up to the precipice of our second great depression"

that all started when Dems took over Congress in 2006 and the very gay Barney Frank got started making mischief

"and then disappeared from public with his tail between his legs and left his mess for another Democrat to clean up."

actually, he left office only when the Constitution required him to do so

Obama has run trillion dollar deficits and has done little to deter unemployment that remains high despite the fact that a record number of Americans have quit the work force

"We are not "spending like this,""

yes, we are

"we are reducing our federal budge deficit faster than the CBO expected"

big deal

that's just because it had gotten so out of control

this great projection you're crowing about is still higher than all but Bush's last year

"We are on track and moving in the right direction"

a subjective statement but polls show most Americans disagree

"no matter how many times you panic and SCREAM like the sky is falling. No it isn't. Obama's leadership is helping us recover from the pit of deficit and debt"

you might want to explain that because most observers believe Obama lacks any leadership skills whatsoever

"If Congress wasn't still trying to ensure Obama's only a one term President even after he's won his second term by obstructing his policies at every turn, we'd be a lot farther out of the hole Bush dug by now."

actually, the only reason the deficit is shrinking is because Republicans forced Obama to negotiate reductions in spending during "crises" just like the one we're having now

we would have never had the sequester if Republicans hadn't used the debt limit leverage

unfortunately, the only way we've been able to get Obama off his arse and to the negotiating table is how it's being done now

October 05, 2013 10:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 05, 2013 10:55 AM  
Anonymous a trickle, not a wave said...

Health insurers and individuals began reporting a trickle of enrollments in the new online marketplaces created by the health-care law, as federal and state officials scrambled to try to fix technical problems that have prevented many consumers from buying coverage.

The White House has declined to release any national statistics on sign-ups, saying complete information was not yet available.

“We don’t have that data,” White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters Thursday.

Several insurers said that they are recciving at least sporadic enrollment reports from the Department of Health and Human Services, which is running the insurance marketplace for 34 states that have declined to set up their own exchanges.

Cigna, which is selling plans on five state marketplaces, began getting enrollments Wednesday night.

“Most of day one and two we didn’t see enrollments,” Cigna spokesman Joe Mondy said. “But we’ve been able to start getting enrollments as of last night.”

Mondy confirmed that Cigna has received enrollments in Florida, one of the states where the federal government is running the marketplaces. Since the online portals opened, they have been plagued by error messages that have prevented some people from signing up for the Affordable Care Act’s insurance options.

Other insurers reported similar results Thursday. Many hesitated to offer specifics, however, because they had yet to verify the information they were receiving from the federal government.

After two days without any word on sign-ups, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana received some reassuring news Wednesday night: Seven people had signed up for its plan on the marketplace that day.

“The first day and second we received no submissions,” spokesman John Maginnis said. “This being day three, we were notified through the healthcare.gov website that we had seven. So that’s very good news. It’s a small number, but it told us the functionality is performing as its supposed to.”

Some problems persisted. Maryland said Thursday that, because of overnight maintenance, only general information will be available online from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. daily for the rest of the month. Consumers will not be able to create accounts or shop for plans during that time.

Washington state and California have also taken their sites down for maintenance in the overnight hours, and Washington officials said they would continue to do so as needed.

As a result of the Web site issues, one Maryland insurer, Evergreen Health, pushed back its appointments with potential enrollees until next week. Peter Beilenson, Evergreen’s chief executive, said the co-op had made appointments with 100 people who wanted to sign up for coverage on Friday. “We called them all today and and we’re going to delay that until the following week,” he said.

Elsewhere, shoppers still report difficulties signing up for coverage. Michael Hoffman, a 31-year-old attorney in Florida, estimates that he has attempted to shop on the marketplace about seven or eight times since Tuesday.

Each time, he has run into different error messages and given up on the process.

“I was pretty frustrated,” Hoffman said. “It’s disappointing when you have higher expectations.”

Hoffman now plans to stop shopping until next month, when he expects the site to work better. Coverage purchased on the marketplace does not start until January 1.

“There’s not much urgency to it,” he said. “The novelty has worn off in trying to sign up.”

October 05, 2013 11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"actually, Bush did a great job'

Keep deluding yourself about that for all the good it will do you.

"The dedication of the George W. Bush library gives loyalists of the former president a chance to highlight what they see as the positive legacy of his eight years in office.

But even among supporters there is a sense he'll never be given historical vindication.

Former White House press secretary Ari Fleisher told NBC News: "I'm increasingly doubtful, just because I think the lens of history is not changing. A lot of us used to say President Bush will look good and he'll be vindicated in the public eye. But realistically speaking, I don't see a lot of the people who write history all of a sudden changing their mind about George W. Bush."

As Jill Lawrence points out, the polling of historians seems to back this up.

Nearly 60 percent of the historians and political scientists in a 2006 Siena College survey rated Bush's presidency a failure and two-thirds said he did not have a realistic chance of improving his standing.

A 2010 Siena ranking of presidential scholars rated Bush as one of the nation's five worst presidents. A similar 2009 C-SPAN ranking put Bush in the bottom eight.

It is certainly possible that years of reflection and a reinterpretation of his presidency could end up putting Bush in a more positive light, but there's no avoiding the reality that his decision to go to war in Iraq and policies of fiscal recklessness led to huge problems for the country. These are problems the country may still be reeling from as historians give Bush their second look.

Although Bush himself is giving a series of interviews for the first time in years for the opening of his presidential library, it's clear he has no real interest in visiting the past either.

"I really don't miss Washington," Bush said, according to Politico, adding, "So while we've got friends in Washington I'm not all that friendly to Washington."

October 05, 2013 11:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"but there's no avoiding the reality that his decision to go to war in Iraq and policies of fiscal recklessness led to huge problems for the country"

if you'll look back, you'll see I was referring to his economic policies

the "reality" you speak of is an illusion; Bush's economic record was good and his policies successful

when he came into office, America was headed into a recession because the government was taking in vastly more revenue than it spent, dragging the economy down

his tax cuts headed that off

low inflation, interest rates, unemployment, deficits

you couldn't ask more

you could fairly question the Iraq situation, however

I think he probably had no choice to go to war

remember, most Democrats approved

but he should have limited the mission to removing Saddam

his decision to wipe out the whole government of Iraq was clearly wrong

having created some problems, however, he did clean up nicely in the last couple of years and left us with an advantage that Obama squandered

the main person to blame, however, was his father

we should have never become involved when Saddam invaded Kuwait and, having done that, should never have allowed Saddam to stay in power

this is where historians will eventually come to

October 05, 2013 11:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"this is where historians will eventually come to"

Thanks for yet another of your questionable predictions, Great President Huckabee-Predictor-Anon.

Each one of your predictions about the future has been worth precisely what they cost -- absolutely nothing.

October 05, 2013 1:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

kind of like when Obama said unemployment will never go over 8% and that the American people would love Obamacare

Obama's second term will always have an asterisk because it's now clear that he harass his opponents using the IRS and, given the closeness of the election, it's plausible that was a factor

October 05, 2013 3:06 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Lying Republicans like to try and mislead the public by referring to a poll that says 54% of Americans oppose Obamacare. But 16% of those polled oppose it because it doesn't go far enough, they oppose it because they want MORE Obamacare features, not less. So in reality only 38% of Americans want to get rid of the features of Obamacare.

An NBC poll showed 72% of Americans opposed the Republicans shutting down the government in order to stop Obamacare.

So don't believe the Republicans and bad anonymouses - the vast majority of Americans want either Obamacare or a stronger version of Obamacare.

The Republicans are going to pay for shutting down the government.

October 05, 2013 3:10 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Highlighting the lack of Republican ethics is the fact that Obamacare was originally a Republican idea.

Republicans don't oppose Obamacare because they think its a bad idea, they oppose it solely because the Democrats support it. Before the Democrats started supporting this Republican plan Republicans were fully behind it.

If Democrats started running ads saying "Republicans are great, vote for them" the Republicans would run counter ads saying "No, we're terrible, don't vote for us.".

Republicans: Insanely thinking the way to power is to blindly and unconditionally oppose Obama regardless of how much it harms the American public.

October 05, 2013 3:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You should stop spinning because now you are making yourself look stupid when I suspect you're only dizzy when you flat out lie like this:

"Obama said unemployment will never go over 8%"

Find us a quote of Obama saying such a thing. You won't find it because he never said it.

You are confusing Obama with a report written by Dr. Christina Romer, and Dr. Jared Bernstein published in 2009. Here are some facts about that report, which you can check out for yourself using the link to the report provided.


"...The report contains a chart on page 4 predicting unemployment rates in subsequent years.

The chart shows that without a recovery plan totaling about $775 billion, the U.S. unemployment rate was expected to peak at 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, it shows unemployment was projected to top out at just under 8 percent towards the end of 2009.

We now know that the unemployment rate cleared 8 percent in February 2009 and stayed above that level ever since. It peaked at 10 percent in October 2009 and was down to 8.3 percent in January 2012, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But contrary to [Anonymous'] claim, the Romer-Bernstein report did not make promises about the unemployment rate. It made qualified projections.

Page 2 of the report states, "It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error. There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."

Obama, in a radio address 10 days before his inauguration, said, "The report confirms that our plan (that the stimulus) will likely save or create 3 million to 4 million jobs."

Obama, in his speech, never mentioned the 8 percent figure. He did not use the word "promise," nor refer to the graph on page 4. He said the report contained "projections of how many jobs (the stimulus) will create."

The Congressional Budget Office, one month after the Romer-Bernstein report was released, estimated unemployment would level off at 8.5 percent with the stimulus and 9 percent without it. Those CBO numbers, too, turned out to be overly optimistic.

The Obama administration has acknowledged the Romer-Bernstein report underestimated the severity of the recession. "The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy," Vice-President Joe Biden told ABC in July 2009."

October 05, 2013 3:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More spin: "the closeness of the election"

Obama beat Romney 51.1% - 47.2% or 3.9 percentage points

Obama beat Romney 65,915,796 votes to 60,933,500 or 4,982,296 votes

Here are stats on a "close election":

Bush "beat" Gore 47.9% to 48.4%

Yes, that's right.

A higher percentage of voters voted for Gore than voted Bush.

Bush "beat" Gore 50,456,002 votes to 50,999,897

And yes, that's right too.

Bush got 543,895 fewer votes than Gore did.

*That* my friend, was a close election.

It's time for you to take a nap or something so you can dream up some more BS to have corrected for you.

Compared to the 2000 election, the 2012 election was a blow out!

October 05, 2013 4:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone wondering why the Right Wing Tea Party Republicans are in a frenzy, one need only see what is happening now that the reality of the Affordable Care Act is emerging. The lies they told are coming back to bite them.

They are attempting to discourage young American citizens from going to the exchanges by telling them Obamacare will either be too expensive or an intrusion from the government. Good things are happening however. Inasmuch as the Right Wing is being outright destructive with the nation’s economy in the attempt to derail Obamacare, empirical and factual data is proven to be a hindrance to their obstructionist tactics.

The State Health Bureaucracy in Texas is actually promoting Obamacare. That is a feat in its own right. On October 1st, the Obamacare health exchange servers were overwhelmed because of the inordinately large number of people accessing it.

The coup de grace however is the stories that are now coming out of Republicans going onto the exchanges and realizing that they had been lied to. This was the case with Republican Butch Matthews, a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas. ThinkProgress reports that:

"Butch Matthews is a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas who used to wake up every morning at 4 A.M. to deliver canned beverages to retailers before retiring in 2010. A lifelong Republican, he was heavily skeptical of the Affordable Care Act when it first passed. “I did not think that Obamacare was going to be a good plan, I did not think that it was going to help me at all,” he told ThinkProgress over the phone.

But after doing a little research, Matthews eventually realized how much the law could help him. And on Tuesday, his local Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) provider confirmed that he would be able to buy a far better plan than his current policy while saving at least $13,000 per year through Arkansas’ Obamacare marketplace. "

Turns out pre-Obamacare, Matthews was paying $1069.per month with a $10,000 deductible. Matthews’ doctor visits went from a co-pay of $150 to $8. Matthews has a simple message to all Americans. He says,

"I would tell them to learn more about it before they start talking bad about it,” he noted. “Be more informed, get more information, take your time and study and not just go by just what you hear on one side or the other. Actually check the facts on it. "

October 05, 2013 4:41 PM  
Anonymous historians will give Barry an astersik just like the other Barry said...

"Compared to the 2000 election, the 2012 election was a blow out!"

the 2000 election was the closest in history, so anything would look like a comparative blowout

every count came up with a different winner and there's really no way to authoritatively declare the "true" winner

if we're not speaking in relative terms, however, a true blow-out was 1972 when moderate republican Richard Nixon beat socialist George McGovern by a margin of more than 23 percent

Nixon tampered with the election by harassing his opponents

no one gives his election an asterisk though because he clearly would have won anyway

not so with Obama

the last election was close and if Tea Party groups hadn't have had to focus on countering the attacks from the IRS, it could be plausibly argued that the result may have differed

worse, Nixon's administration crimes were prosecuted, deterring future corruption

Obama is getting a pass, encouraging it

and, as you admit in the midst of the long winded ranting above, Obama miscalculated how bad unemployment would become on his watch and predicted that Obamacare would bring down costs, allow people to keep their current plan if they want to, insure almost all uninsured Americans and would be loved by Americans

none of this was correct

October 05, 2013 5:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Dropped off a copy of the increase [COST] in benefits at Van Hollens office this afternoon (and at the Washington Post) Lady at Van HOllens had no good answer for the "well you said it was going to go down 2500 and it is up 1700" - considering 4000 to 5700. and they cancelled the plan I was on..."

I find these claims to be unbelievable here in Maryland. My numbers clearly show our family will save nearly $4,000 a year and have even better prescription coverage than we do now.

Butch Matthews will save even more money than my family will and he also reports "he would be able to buy a far better plan than his current policy while saving" all that dough, THIRTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS PER YEAR.

Who "cancelled the plan" you were on, your employer or your insurance company? Has your employer changed the amount they will pay toward your plan in 2014?

""well you said it was going to go down 2500 and it is up 1700""

Who said your insurance would "go down $2500?" Nobody has said such a thing to me!

In fact, Americans have long been told that rates will go up or down depending on your income, age, family size, and location.

Over at Healthcare.gov, it clearly says on the Getting Lower Costs on Coverage page:

"--Will I qualify for lower out-of-pocket costs?
--When you get coverage through the Marketplace, you **may** (emphasis added) be able to get lower costs on deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance. This will **depend on our income.** (emphasis added)...

--How can I get lower costs on Marketplace coverage?
--When you use the Health Insurance Marketplace you **may** (emphasis added) be able to get lower costs on premiums or out-of-pocket costs, or get free or low-cost coverage...

--Will I qualify for lower costs on monthly premiums?
--When you get health insurance coverage in the Marketplace, you **may** (emphasis added) be able to get lower costs on your premiums. This **depends on your income and family size.** (emphasis added)"

Doesn't your family earn $250K a year??

Our family income is estimated to be $70K this year and for the size, we earn a bit over 400% of the poverty level so do not qualify for any subsidy.

October 05, 2013 5:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama never "promised" unemployment would "not go above 8%" as you wrongly claimed.

Obama's advisors got their projected unemployment numbers no more wrong than the CBO did.

Your candidate, John McCain, called the US economy "fundamentally sound" on same day Lehrman Brothers declared bankrupt.

Obviously, no one knew how badly Bush screwed things up until it played out in front of our eyes.

Go nap some more, you're still spinning like a top.

October 05, 2013 5:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anyone who has insurance through their employer is seeing their insurance go way up, including us.
$1700 rise in our portion.


Raytheon Benefits Letter

For Raytheon, the combination of ACA-mandated plan changes, current and new ACA related taxes and fees, as well as increasing cost trends and experience rates will mean 49 million in additional medical plan related costs - and that is just for 2104.

every deductible increased by 50%, one of the insurance plans has been cancelled - they one we were one - Choice as opposed to Choice Plus.

AND OBAMA said insurance plans would go down by 2500.00 a family of 4....

you really need to read something other than MSNBC.

October 05, 2013 5:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

here's the clip

October 05, 2013 5:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great clip and here's a clickable link so all Vigilance readers can see and hear it for themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_o65vMUk5so

I heard a whole lot of qualifiers in there but never once did I hear the word "promise."

DId you not hear the qualifiers and imagine the word "promise" was in there somehow??

Those qualifiers included "We will reduce premiums UP TO $2500…by AS MUCH AS $2500 per family per year….by UP TO $2500…reduce costs AN AVERAGE of $2500….by UP TO $2500….by UP TO $2500….about $2500 FOR THE TYPICAL FAMILY….."

And I see by the dates that many of these clips were on Obama's first presidential campaign trail, well before the actual Patient Care and Affordable Care Act was even written.

A family income of $250K is NOT what anyone would call a "typical" family's income because it places that family well above the $186K family income lower limit of the upper 5% of 2011 US family income.

Your cost increase when averaged with my and Mr. Matthew's cost decreases show that indeed, the "average" family **may** do a lot better than just saving $2500.

October 05, 2013 6:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so I just got back from the gym with my girlfriend who works at NIH - who yes is furloughed.

She is divorced from an NIH (also PHD) who stopped working when the kids were little, started beating her and the kids, drinking too heavily and has never worked since ... or contributed to their children.

But this shithead is getting free health insurance

her daughter is at villa nova - she has struggled all her life to put those kids through good schools with absolutely NO assistance from him.

His parents gave the daughter 20K because otherwise my friend would have not have been able to send her there....

and he called the daughter up and berated her for "stealing his money".

Yep. here we go. the hard working get to pay for the lazy in the US. Socialism here we come.

October 05, 2013 8:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah right.

Your friend, her kids, and her husband's problems are all because of Obamacare.

< eye roll >

Have you ever considered counting your blessings instead of singing the blues all the time, Little Miss FivePerCenter?

October 05, 2013 8:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

do you tnink someone that has behaved the way her ex-husband has deserves free health insurance ?

Yes or no ?

she was pretty pissed off about the whole thing.

and yes, her ex-husband and the behavior of my own brother make me very very grateful for my husband.

October 05, 2013 8:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not up to me to decide what he deserves.

It seems to me his wife could have brought charges against him for assault, battery, and domestic abuse if what you report is true.

Perhaps some skilled health care professionals could help him get better because from your little report, he sounds depressed, angry, and appears to suffer from alcoholism.

I think it would be great if he got better, sought and was granted forgiveness from his wife and children, rejoined his family, and spent the rest of his days making up for all the wrongs in the past.

October 05, 2013 9:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judd Legum, editor-in-chief of Think Progress, provided the perfect illustration of what it means to Republicans when they demand "compromise" from Democrats:

"Can I burn down your house?


Just the second floor?




Let's talk about what I can burn down.



October 05, 2013 9:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

are you defending this behavior ?



October 05, 2013 11:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oops, corrected link.

- including 30 children -

October 06, 2013 8:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

do you want to talk about NIH ?
Okay let's talk about NIH.

During the stimulus bill this same friend told me that she could NOT believe how they were being made to waste money, that they typically planned projects years in advance, and that they were being told to spend money so quickly that they couldn't do that.

NIH programs take years to plan and staff and get the right people in place to run the studies.

but they were being paid overtime to spend money. which they ended up spending on extra computers and things they really didn't needs - and probably a lot of that money was going to go overseas since those components were made overseas.

the sequester hurt at lot of programs because it ended up that the cuts instead of being taken over an entire year were taken in the last quarter of the fiscal year, and though there were overall about 2% across the board, since crammed in such a sort period were actually 8-10% for that fiscal year.

apparently Obama's stimulus spending jump got permanently put in the budget, which would explain why the budget deficit for so many years continued at over a trillion

Also, there have been multiple studies that show that there are numerous duplicate depts of govt and having sold to the military... yes, it can be cut. enormous waste.... even things that could be developed and used cross service they rarely do because of the competition between the services. it's incredibly stupid.

the whole govt should go back to 2008 spending levels - the first year before Obama took office (the outrageous 2009 1.6 trillion deficit or so was a 500 billion or so deficit before Obama got in)...
and to Bush's defense - he's spending really got out of control when the dems took the house and the senate. though he should have vetoed and vetoed and vetoed.

and I would agree with major SS overhauls ... though you should still be entitled to exactly back what you put in regardless of the income level - funny that is the way mine works right now though many people actually get interest on their ss or MORE back then what they put in, if we live to the mean age, we get back exactly what we put in no interest. so this bs about them paying out more than they collected is ridiculous. they are paying out more than they collected because they are giving other people far more then they put in because they project from the start to give them far more than they put in. which is yet another form of welfare. that said, I am not opposed to raising the age a year and leaving it as it is if that fixes the problem and the projected problem with ss.

and I have a proposal I need to finish for work today because the Swedish company I work for starts work about midnight our time and I need to have it in before that.

have a great day.

October 06, 2013 10:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

one last comment before I sign off for the day.

I would suggest you go read the constitution.

the house of congress which reports to the people and controls the purse strings was given those two powers in the constitution for a reason... to reign in an out of control government when it stopped spending the people's money wisely.

over history, this has happened again and again where that house has shut the govt down in order to FORCE negotiations when two parties cannot come to agreement by any other means.... the republicans have been trying to tweak obamacare for a while and the president won't listen.

they are now just suggesting a one year delay in the individual mandate and a NO crony exemptions. ie it applies to all. (exemptions which were illegal for the president to grant in the first place since he has no power to change existing law - that's congress job). It doesn't derail it, it just makes it universal, fair, and doesn't force on people when it clearly isn't ready. and the exchanges stay open. anyone who wants to sign up still can....It is a VERY reasonable offer.

to use your analogy, that the FD dept coming by your house and saying - hey, we notice you have dead brush piling up around your house, we would like to start a controlled fire and clear it...

October 06, 2013 11:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, actually I don't want to discuss NIH but nice sidestep to avoid addressing a single point about your party's shutdown of the government I raised.

Enjoy keeping your head in the sand as I point out a few more of your mistaken beliefs.

" the budget deficit for so many years continued at over a trillion"

"many years" = "three years"

Which is not too shabby considering the condition Bush left our economy in, careening off the cliff toward his Great Recession.

Here are some facts for you: Federal Deficit in Billions of Dollars by Year:

2008 $459
2009 $1,415
2010 $1,293
2011 $1,296
2012 $1,087
2013 $642

"...the deficit is shrinking dramatically. Last year it dropped by $200 billion, and this year, thanks to a recovering economy, lower spending from the sequester, and the increased taxes in the fiscal cliff deal, it's projected to fall another $450 billion.

..."You don't hear Republicans lulz-ing at Obama for failing to 'cut the deficit in half in my first four years,' because he basically did this, albeit in four and a half." That's true. It's also true that contrary to Republican orthodoxy, it turns out that raising taxes on the rich does bring in higher revenues and therefore reduces the deficit...."

"house has shut the govt down in order to FORCE negotiations"

Negotiations they refused to join for months despite being invited repeatedly by Senator Patty Murray.

You should get your head out of the sand long enough to read Murray Continues Calling for Republicans to Choose a Bipartisan Budget Conference Over Brinkmanship - May 16 2013 - Murray asks to move to conference with the House for eighth time, blocked by Senator Mike Lee, UT

And while you've got your head out of the sand, you should read As red ink recedes, pressure fades for budget deal too. so you can learn that:

"...Republicans face a listless summer, with little appetite for compromise but no leverage to shape an agreement. Without that leverage, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday, there is no point in opening formal budget negotiations between the House and the Senate...

....“The debt limit is the backstop,” Ryan said before taking the stage at a debt summit organized by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation in Washington. “I’d like to go through regular order and get something done sooner rather than later. But we need to get a down payment on the debt. We need entitlement reform. We’re very serious about tax reform because we think that’s critical to economic growth and job creation. Those are the things we want to talk about.”..."

Just another quick reminder, because sometimes this stuff gets lost in the fog.

Q: Why do we need a 6-week Continuing Resolution to keep the government running?

A: Because Congress hasn't passed a budget for the new year, which begins October 1st.

Q: And why is that?

A: There's no mystery. Both the House and Senate passed budget resolutions months ago, but Paul Ryan and the rest of the GOP have refused to open talks with the Senate to negotiate a final budget number.

Q: Why is that?

A: They've been crystal clear about this. They wanted more leverage for their demands, and they figured the only way to get it was to threaten a government shutdown.

October 06, 2013 12:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"many years" = "four years"

Still not too shabby considering the mess Bush left in his wake.

October 06, 2013 12:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

okay breaking my promise not to be back on today

You don't seem to understand something.

the 2009 spending belongs to OBAMA.
the govt fiscal year runs from October 1st through September 30th.

the last budget we passed was the last year bush was in office. It was passed the summer before in 2008 as is the regular order... it projected a 500 billion dollar deficit for the period from 10/1/2008 to 9/30/2009.

Obama took office in January of 2009 after the 2008 elections in November. He proceeded to pass an omnibus spending bill of close to 600 billion some ? and the stimulus which was 800 billion some... ie, 1.4 trillion in additional spending. Yes bush passed TARP before he left office (which I didn't agree with) but TARP was a loan program and my understanding is a lot of it has been paid back.

so Obama has not cut the deficit in half. It is still higher than any full year that Bush was responsible for.

thanks for posting the numbers though. they illustrate my point entirely. If we went back to 2008 numbers we would be fine.

and the reason that the republicans have refused to come to conference is that the democrats are setting as a precondition that the republicans agree to raise taxes, when govt revenues are HIGHER than they have ever been. If we went back to the 2008 spending I am pretty sure we would be in a balance budget situation, maybe even adding in the medicare and ss increases.... I don't know and I don't have time to go look it up.

October 06, 2013 12:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh and we haven't had a budget since Obama took office, and since the house has been under republican control they have passed one every year and the senate has refused to take it up.

the senate finally passed one when the republicans passed a bill that said if they didn't pass one they wouldn't get paid.

so yes, we have been operating under one CR after another for the past 5 years and NO BUDGET.

October 06, 2013 1:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

poor Barry

thought forcing a shutdown would cause Americans to rally around him

polling through yesterday shows that not only has approval rating not gone up, it has declined slightly since the shutdown started

btw, the Post reports this morning that only 250K of over 2 million government workers are on furlough

if Obama signed the NIH, VA and National Parks funding bills passed by the House, most of the 250K would go back

before long, the shutdown will basically apply to the Education Dept, EPA and IRS

no one will cry any tears if those never get funded

October 06, 2013 11:17 PM  
Anonymous SRS doesn't cure transgender disorder said...

A 44-year-old man in Belgium chose to end his life via euthanasia on Monday after a series of failed gender reassignment surgeries. “I was the girl no one wanted,” Nathan Verhelst told the Flemish newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws, mere hours before his death.

Verhelst, who was born female, told the paper’s reporters he grew up in an unloving family, feeling like a boy trapped in a girl’s body. He finally started hormone therapy in 2009 and underwent several reassignment surgeries in 2012. While doctors did not publicly share the specifics of the surgeries, Verhelst told Het Laatste Nieuws that after the procedures, he felt like a monster. “I was ready to celebrate my new birth. But when I looked in the mirror, I was disgusted with myself,” he told the newspaper. “My new breasts did not match my expectations and my penis had symptoms of rejection.”

Verhelst applied for euthanasia several months ago and finally died on Monday in a Brussels hospital. His request was approved based on a 2002 law that makes Belgium one of only three countries in the world that have legalized euthanasia, along with Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

Non-terminally ill patients, like Verhelst, account for less than 10 percent of euthanasia cases.

While extremely rare, the Belgian physician does welcome the option for these cases. “Psychological suffering is often underestimated,” she said.

October 07, 2013 11:18 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Gay marriage being legal in Massachusetts still doesn’t seem to be destroying too many people’s lives. 85% of voters in the state say it’s either had a positive or no impact on their lives, with only 15% saying it’s been a negative. Even among Republicans 66% say it hasn’t negatively affected them. Voters in the state support gay marriage being legal by a greater than 2:1 margin, 60/29.

And remember how it was supposed to destroy straight marriages? Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country. And people are still getting married and loving their kids. “The family” hasn’t fallen apart or been destroyed in the least. Incest and polygamy have not been legalized. Dogs and cats are still not living together. No plagues of locusts have been reported. Gee, it’s almost like the Christian right was completely full of sh*t or something. Who woulda guessed?

October 07, 2013 11:59 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The most comprehensive study of post-SRS outcomes is “Sex Reassignment. Thirty Years of International Follow-up Studies” by Friedemann Pf’fflin and Astrid Junge (1992 in German, English translation 1998). Pf’fflin and Junge used data from over 70 studies, in total considering the outcomes of over 2000 patients from 13 countries. They found that outcomes - measured in terms of “subjective satisfaction; mental stability; socioeconomic functioning; and partnership and sexual experience” - of SRS are generally positive. Overall, 71% of male-to-female (MTF) and 90% of female-to-male (FTM) operations had positive results. When they limited their sample only to more recent patients (who benefited from improvements in techniques and procedures over the decades), the results were positive for 87% of MTFs and 97% for FTMs.

That study is now over 20 years old and two more recent studies have shown 100% satisfaction rates:


Jamil Rehman, Simcha Lazer, Alexandru E. Benet, Leah C. Schaefer and Arnold Melman

Abstract From 1980 to July 1997 sixty-one male-to-femalegender transformation surgeries were performed at our university center by one author (A.M.). Data werecollected from patients who had surgery up to 1994 (n = 47) to obtain a minimum follow-up of 3years; 28 patients were contacted. A mail questionnaire was supplemented by personal interviews with 11 patients and telephone interviews with remaining patients to obtain and clarify additional information. Physical and functional results of surgery were judged to be good, with few patients requiring additional corrective surgery. General satisfaction was expressed over the quality of cosmetic (normal appearing genitalia) and functional (ability to perceive orgasm)results. Follow-up showed satisfied who believed they had normal appearing genitalia and the ability to experience orgasm. Most patients were ableto return to their jobs and live a more satisfactory social and personal life. One significant outcome was the importance of proper preparation of patients for surgery and especially the need for additional postoperative psychotherapy. None of the patients regretted having had surgery. However, somewere, to a degree, disappointed because of difficulties experienced postoperatively in adjusting satisfactorily as women both in their relationships with men and in living their lives generally as women. Findings of this study make a strong case for making a change in the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care to include aperiod of postoperative psychotherapy.

October 07, 2013 1:00 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...


Anne A. Lawrence

Abstract This study examined factors associated with satisfaction or regret following sex reassignment surgery (SRS) in 232 male-to-female transsexuals operated on between 1994 and 2000 by one surgeon using a consistent technique. Participants, all of whom were at least 1-year postoperative, completed a written questionnaire concerning their experiences and attitudes. Participants reported overwhelmingly that they were happy with their SRS results and that SRS had greatly improved the quality of their lives. None reported outright regret and only a few expressed even occasional regret. Dissatisfaction was most strongly associated with unsatisfactory physical and functional results of surgery. Most indicators of transsexual typology, such as age at surgery, previous marriage or parenthood, and sexual orientation, were not significantly associated with subjective outcomes. Compliance with minimum eligibility requirements for SRS specified by the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association was not associated with more favorable subjective outcomes. The physical results of SRS may be more important than preoperative factors such as transsexual typology or compliance with established treatment regimens in predicting postoperative satisfaction or regret.


Abstract The dearth of information regarding orgasm in postoperative transsexuals prompted the authors to study its prevalence. The sample consisted of 14 male-to-female (M—F) and 9 female-to-male (F—M) postoperative transsexuals. The relationship of orgasm to sexual and general satisfaction was explored via a specially designed questionnaire. Orgastic capacity declined in the M—F group and increased in the (F—M) group. Despite the decrease in orgasm in the M—F group, satisfaction with sex and general satisfaction with the results of surgery were high in both groups. General satisfaction of 86% replicates other studies. Frequency of sex increased by 75% in the M—F group and by 100% in the F—M group. A phalloplasty does not appear to be a critical factor in orgasm or in sexual satisfaction. The general conclusion is reached that it is possible to change one's body image and sexual identity and be sexually satisfied despite inadequate sexual functioning.

October 07, 2013 1:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And remember how it was supposed to destroy straight marriages?"

no, I don't remember that

could you provide a quote with someone saying that?

unless you're completely full of shit or something

what changing the definition of marriage to include people who like to roll around naked with others of their own gender does is cheapen the idea of marriage

suddenly, there is no word that means "marriage" anymore

this will hinder those who try to preference true families

eventually, society will eliminate the preferences that go to support families headed by a partnership representing all genders rather than monotone same sex deviants trying artificial means to mimic true families

societies that embrace homosexuality inevitability decline

it's a morale game changer in ways which are not always evident until it's too late


ever since Montgomery enacted the gay curriculum, MCPS schools have been declining academically to where now more than half of the students fail their math final

MCPS was considered among the country's top tier schools before the gay curriculum

another example:

this summer, the Supreme Court ruled the Federal govt can't preference normal marriage if some states have created their own version

at the same time, Russia moved to protect its children from homosexual propaganda

ever since, the President of this barren, faded former superpower has been running rings around the President of the most powerful nation in the world and making us look like fools

October 07, 2013 1:05 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Mr. "every sentance is a paragraph because I failed English" (Bad anonymous) is back watching my occaisional comments like a hawk. He doesn't like to comment much when he's on vacation having fun, he prefers to make most of his comments when he's at work so he can minimize how much time he spends on the work he's actually paid to do.

Its obvious he's desperate for my attention and like the child he is he doesn't care if the attention is positive or negative. As long as I notice him he doesn't care how badly I spank him.

The patient obviously suffers sex-related insecurities so severe that his waking energy is devoted to overcompensating for them.

Sorry bad anonymous, Unlike you I'm too busy enjoying my wonderful life to devote much time to your war on LGBTs which we've already won.

October 07, 2013 1:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the reason that the republicans have refused to come to conference is that the democrats are setting as a precondition that the republicans agree to raise taxes"

Where do you come up with these statements?

Go re-read Sen. Murray's call for conference. There were no "preconditions" set.

A google search for "2013 budget negotiations, Dems set tax increase precondition" does not much.

A NYTimes editorial suggested, "To reduce the deficit in a weak economy, new taxes on high-income Americans are a matter of necessity and fairness; they are also a necessary precondition to what in time will have to be tax increases on the middle class," back in Feb. 2013.

Back in March, reader sent a letter to the editor to a midwest paper that asked, "How do you compromise with the Democrats when you set as a precondition you won’t even consider the Democrats’ demands?"

Just this week, the Hill.com reported Reid offers to talk tax reform if GOP ends shutdown (Video)

Show us some documentation of your claim "democrats are setting as a precondition that the republicans agree to raise taxes" or admit your are mistaken.

October 07, 2013 1:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 07, 2013 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow Anon.

Get a grip and clean up your language.

October 07, 2013 2:25 PM  
Anonymous ruby red said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 07, 2013 2:26 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Anon, I will not ban you at this point. If you want to straighten out your pronouns and clean up your language you may continue to spew your ugliness here, until I decide I have had enough.


October 07, 2013 2:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yesterday John Boehner told George Stephanopoulos:

“It’s time for us to sit down and have a conversation. That’s what the American people expect. That’s what I’ve offered for the last ten days. Let’s sit down and have a conversation. You know, we’ve had conversations before. Why can’t we have one here?”

Back in April, 2013, the Hill.com reported:

"Senate Republicans on Tuesday prevented Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) from setting up a budget conference.

Reid sought the Senate's unanimous consent to form a budget conference committee aimed at reconciling the wildly different House and Senate budget resolutions, but Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) objected.

Toomey said he was objecting on behalf of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee who had a conflict and could not be present.

“It seems House Republicans don’t want to be seen even discussing the possibility of compromise with the Democrats for fear of a Tea Party revolt,” Reid said.

He noted that Republicans have called for “regular order” for years.

"A strange thing happened: House Republicans did a complete 180 — they flipped. They're no longer interested in regular order even though they preached that for years," Reid said. "

And Sen. Murray has been asking for a budget conference for months!

But the GOTP refused to sit down to negotiate a budget with Democrats until 10 days ago when we were facing a shut down and a default, just like Paul Ryan wanted:

"...Republicans face a listless summer, with little appetite for compromise but no leverage to shape an agreement. Without that leverage, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday, there is no point in opening formal budget negotiations between the House and the Senate...

....“The debt limit is the backstop,” Ryan said before taking the stage at a debt summit organized by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation in Washington. “I’d like to go through regular order and get something done sooner rather than later. But we need to get a down payment on the debt. We need entitlement reform. We’re very serious about tax reform because we think that’s critical to economic growth and job creation. Those are the things we want to talk about.”..."

October 07, 2013 2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

come off it, Jim

here's the origin of the language

you know it's not generally my choice of vocabulary

I'm just fighting fire with fire:

"Gee, it’s almost like the Christian right was completely full of sh*t or something."

don't know what pronouns you refer to but it's a fluid concept in TTFland

October 07, 2013 3:07 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Anon, I personally am comfortable with a gender continuum, as well as a sexual orientation continuum. It doesn't bother me, in fact I think it's kind of fun when people challenge rigid preconceptions. But it is not my decision whether to refer to someone as male, female, or some other term like genderqueer or whatever. If someone says they are female and I have no reason to doubt them, then cool, they are female: "she," "her." If someone says they are male, same thing, I respect them enough to believe them.

I have never heard anyone from TTF talk about gender fluidity, or the idea that a person can flow back and forth between the poles of gender. We do seem to be in agreement that some people are assigned the wrong sex at birth, and we support those who are strong enough to resist the social pressures and assert themselves as they really are. You have no license to use the unwanted pronoun in addressing someone here and I won't put up with it.

As for the word "shit," it has its place, especially when I use it. I discourage that sort of language here but I understand if someone boils over occasionally. Your use of it was gratuitous and unnecessary, and dragged the discussion to an even lower level than you had brought it already.


October 07, 2013 3:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

your obsession with pronouns is bizarre but calculated

"You have no license to use the unwanted pronoun in addressing someone here and I won't put up with it."

about the only rule you have here

didn't know you had to apply for a license

after all, people refer to one another in all kinds of unwanted ways here but only gender pronouns seem to be a problem


not because they are any more offensive than the epithets tossed around here by others but because you want to establish your world view as the basis for conversation

"As for the word "shit," it has its place, especially when I use it. I discourage that sort of language here but I understand if someone boils over occasionally. Your use of it was gratuitous and unnecessary, and dragged the discussion to an even lower level than you had brought it already."

I wasn't boiling over nor was my use gratuitous

I dispassionately used a phrase that was dragged into the discussion by one of your minions

that individual used it to refer to others and I turned it around on them

how could they use such an unwanted term to refer to others?

using unwanted terms to refer to someone is a high crime against humanity and other living things


October 07, 2013 4:03 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous is the only one on TTF who claims gender identity and sexual orientation are fluid. He's desperate to promote the fallacious ideas that people choose their orientation or sense of male or femaleness, can easily change back and forth, should in order to please bigots like him, and so don't deserve the equal right to marry the partner of their choosing or be part of the gender they identify with.

Most anti-gay bigots resent people who happily accept who they are because the bigot feels its unfair that LGBTs are comfortable with themselves while the bigot thinks he needs to repress his feelings.

October 07, 2013 4:05 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I never referred to anyone as "sh*t", I referred to the absurd hyperbole of the christian right as "sh*t".

October 07, 2013 4:08 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

October 07, 2013 4:09 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

In bad anonymous's delusion world having a temper tantrum = dispassionate.

Anyway, I've had enough of this, I'm going out to cruise in one of the classic cars my husband bought for me.


October 07, 2013 4:15 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Anon, the rules are very simple. As I wrote in April:

Blogger JimK said...
Anon, there is really only one rule on this blog: don't piss me off.

I have given you some clues about what is likely to piss me off, but it also depends on my mood, among other things.


APRIL 07, 2013 7:14 PM

That's really all there is to it.


October 07, 2013 4:18 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Isn't this just me?

Its purple and blue inside too, giggle!

October 07, 2013 4:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Priya -- did your husband build this car from scratch? what's the story here? (I peeked at your Photobucket folder.)

October 07, 2013 5:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Bad anonymous is the only one on TTF who claims gender identity and sexual orientation are fluid"

actually, Jim mentioned he was comfortable with gender fluidity

this is why many accuse transgenders of sexism, lazy Priya

"He's desperate to promote the fallacious ideas that people choose their orientation or sense of male or femaleness, can easily change back and forth,"

I'm not desperate, I'm confident that my views are correct

I never said deviant preferences are "easily" overcome

all sins are difficult to overcome once one ventures down into their valley

"should in order to please bigots like him, and so don't deserve the equal right to marry the partner of their choosing or be part of the gender they identify with."

marriage is an institution that involves both genders

it's a key element of why marriage is a stabilizing factor is society

"Most anti-gay bigots resent people who happily accept who they are because the bigot feels its unfair that LGBTs are comfortable with themselves while the bigot thinks he needs to repress his feelings."

gee, and all this time I thought I felt sorry for gays, at least ones that aren't nasty and lazy

I guess I should have gone to the palm reader sooner

"I never referred to anyone as "sh*t", I referred to the absurd hyperbole of the christian right as "sh*t""

you said Christians were full of sh*t

I said the same about you

Jim gets pissed off when homosexuals have to take what they dish out

"Priya Lynn said...
This comment has been removed by the author."

what a shock

has second thoughts about everything

"Anyway, I've had enough of this, I'm going out to cruise in one of the classic cars my husband bought for me."

gee, how many did he get you?

you're going to have to stop resenting Theresa's net income

"Anon, there is really only one rule on this blog: don't piss me off."

yeah, but you were being specific about what pissed you off so we were having a dispassionate discussion about why you are so full of emotional contradictions

"I have given you some clues about what is likely to piss me off, but it also depends on my mood, among other things."

yeah, that, and your biases

"Priya Lynn said...
Isn't this just me?

Its purple and blue inside too, giggle!"

actually, I kind of like it

nice to see you're enjoying life for once instead of lazily resenting everyone else's lot in life and dwelling on your hatred

October 07, 2013 5:45 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Good anonymous, my husband restored it for me and I helped intermittently as I was able.

Bad anonymous, Jim never said he was "comfortable with gender fluidity", he said "I personally am comfortable with a gender continuum, as well as a sexual orientation continuum". Gender and sexual orientation fluidity aren't the same thing as a gender or sexual orientation continuum. Your attempt to conflate the two just emphasizes how desperate you are to deceive people.

One may feel their gender is male,female, or somewhere in between just as one may be attracted to men, women, or both to some degree. That is the continuum. People cannot change where they are on the continuum. If a person is gay or bisexual that person can never stop being gay or bisexual despite your desperate claims to the contrary.

A gay person can never become heterosexual and a heterosexual can never become gay - there is no sexual orientation fluidity. You are the only one on TTF who's ever made the fallacious claim that sexual orientation and gender identity are fluid. You were lying when you claimed "it's a fluid concept in TTFland", you were just trying to excuse your own bad behavior by projecting your worst traits on others.

Now as you contemplate your lost war on LGBT people try not to have another temper tantrum. Or as you put it: Try not to be "dispassionate", LOL!

October 07, 2013 6:50 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Interesting how bad anonymous thinks including people in marriage who like to roll around naked with their own gender cheapens marriage but including people in marriage who like to roll around naked with the opposite gender doesn't cheapen marriage.

A rational person knows both situations are the same.

It shows you how desperate bad anonymous is when he makes the hilarious claim that children in Montgomery County can't do math because they've been taught gay people exist.

Ohh, Bad anonymous, is there any B.S. that's too far fetched for you?

Obviously not.

October 07, 2013 6:57 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

"Interesting how bad anonymous thinks including people in marriage who like to roll around naked with their own gender cheapens marriage but including people in marriage who like to roll around naked with the opposite gender doesn't cheapen marriage"

isn't that interesting?

it's because hetersex among married couple deepens a relationship that strengthens society

homosex, on the other hand, is intrinsically a hedonistic mimicry or heterosexuality, and degrades society

you really shouldn't be all that offended since you claim to not be homosexual

"A rational person knows both situations are the same."

you mean a person ignorant of biology, psychology and theology

"It shows you how desperate bad anonymous is when he makes the hilarious claim that children in Montgomery County can't do math because they've been taught gay people exist."

it's not that people with homosexual preferences exist

they could find that out by reading the Bible

but they are taught much more than that, and those things are not based on scientific analysis

when political and social conformity becomes more important than scientific objectivity, the new hierarchy begins to corrupt an entire academic community

that's how things go down

October 07, 2013 8:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"ever since Montgomery enacted the gay curriculum, MCPS schools have been declining academically to where now more than half of the students fail their math final"

You do not understand the scientific method.

A correlation does not prove cause and effect.

October 07, 2013 9:01 PM  
Anonymous obama must negotiate his terms of surrender said...

The government shutdown isn't winning anyone in Washington points with the public, according to new polls.

A Washington Post/ABC poll released Monday found that the public's ratings for the president and both parties in Congress remain negative.

A Pew Research poll also released Monday found that 38 percent of Americans blame Republicans more for the shutdown, while 30 percent blame Obama, and 19 percent blame both sides.

A third poll by CNN/ORC found that majorities of Americans are angry at everyone involved with the shutdown: Sixty-three percent say they're angry at Republicans, 57 percent say they're angry at Democrats, and 53 percent say they're angry at Obama.

The ongoing shutdown has done nothing to improve the parties' opinions of each other. According to the ABC/Post poll, just 10 percent of Republicans approve of either Obama's or Democrats' approach toward the negotiation. Only 8 percent of Democrats approve of the Republicans in Congress, the poll found.

October 07, 2013 9:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You do not understand the scientific method.

A correlation does not prove cause and effect."

well, to begin with, teaching methods are in another realm than empirical science

but, further, this correlation has a hypothetical cause and effect, as discussed above

October 07, 2013 9:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to tell you, I am still shocked that the other anon hasn't posted a reply about the spending numbers he or she posted....

and I was saddened, though not really surprised, that this person honestly attributed the 2009 deficit to Bush even though this person clearly follows politics closely.

It is a sad state of affairs when the media can so badly misrepresent the truth that a lib would try to throw around that the Senate passed a budget and gee isn't it awful that we are operating on a CR. This person apparently did not realize we have been operating on CRs for the past five years... Isn't that the first time in history we have gone without a federal budget for so long ?


October 07, 2013 10:08 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

"ever since Montgomery enacted the gay curriculum, MCPS schools have been declining academically to where now more than half of the students fail their math final"

Bad anonymous, you're just emphasizing your own lack of integrity and rational arguments by making such silly claims. You obviously don't even believe such things yourself, you're just so desperate you'll grasp at any outlandish idea to promote discrimination, hatred, and violence against gays and lesbians.

You don't feel sorry for gays, that's just a pitiful facade to try and hide your painfully obvious desire to harm innocent people. If you felt sorry for gays you wouldn't be trying to deny them the right to marry, you wouldn't be trying to stop them from being included in anti-discrimination laws that protect christians, you wouldn't be fomenting hatred and violence by trying to portray them as sick and destructive to society.

No, you feel sorry for yourself because you see happy gays and lesbians all around you who don't feel any desire to suppress who they are and you resent them because you're sacrificing your happiness to try to squelch your own same sex desires.

Gayness brings people together to support and care for each other, its makes a couple happier and more productive thus benefitting them and all of society. Society is made up of individuals and anytime an individual is oppressed it harms society as a whole.

Gayness degrades society in the exact same way heterosexuality degrades society and your lame attempts to deny that fact aren't convincing yourself let alone us.

Theology is irrelevant, your god is imaginary. We both know it is you who is in denial of biology, psychology, and science, instead letting your theology induced self-loathing override logic and facts.

Every major medical and mental health organization agrees that gayness is a normal, natural, and healthy variant of human sexuality for a minority of the population.

You can try and put a brave face on your bigoty and assert with quivering chin, watery eyes, and nervous heart that you are confident you are right but we both know every day it becomes more and more obvious to you that gayness is moral because it harms no one, gays deserve equal rights, your bigotry can't be justified, you're increasingly alone in your bigotry and rationality is forcing a long overdue and inevitable march towards justice for all.

October 07, 2013 10:23 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Theresa said "and I was saddened, though not really surprised, that this person honestly attributed the 2009 deficit to Bush even though this person clearly follows politics closely.".

Theresa I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're ignorant instead of just being dishonest. The fact is that Bush IS responsible for the 2009 deficit.

The cost of Bush's new policies from 2002-20009 was 5.07 trillion while the cost of Obamas new policies is 1.44 trillion.

What’s also important, but not evident, on this chart is that Obama’s major expenses were temporary — the stimulus is over now — while Bush’s were, effectively, recurring. The Bush tax cuts didn’t just lower revenue for 10 years. It’s clear now that they lowered it indefinitely, which means this chart is understating their true cost. Similarly, the Medicare drug benefit is costing money on perpetuity, not just for two or three years. And Boehner, Ryan and others voted for these laws and, in some cases, helped to craft and pass them.

October 07, 2013 10:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am just looking at the CBO annual numbers.

Your article is from the Washington Post, about as unbiased as Heritage.

Look at it, it has a number on there for 2008 stimulus spending attributed to Bush. Really ?

I have seen these articles that try to take the various policies and attribute them to one president or another with all their associated costs. However, it is interesting to note that your article quotes the Medicare prescription drug costs at 180 billion over a 7 year period which would imply 25 billion a year. In the noise when the yearly spending is 3.x trillion these days. those numbers get trickly, but there is 1000 billions in a trillion, which mean 25/~3200 billion or .7%.

the best site I have found for looking at the number is http://www.usgovernmentspending.com

it actually links back to the CBO numbers with some justification.

The total federal expenditures for the 2013 budget were 3.68.

722 (ss) + 510 (medicare) or 1.232
152 (ss disability) + 339 Medicaid + 422 welfare or 913 welfare in it's various forms

856 military
223 interest on the debt

which means :
25% welfare
23% military
33% ss and medicare
11% interest on the debt
92% of the spending.

Obama just took 700 billion from medicare to give to the extended medicare expansion. Welfare in its various forms is higher than it ever has been... he changed welfare to work and extended food stamps to able bodied singles without responsibility for children.

thus my hairdresser tells me stories of how her construction manager boyfriend gets offers of "hey man, you have any jobs but it will have to be under the table" while driving through DC. And my girlfriend shit head of an ex-husband does the same thing. Because you no longer have to work for a living here, the govt is buying votes.

Tell me, do you think it is okay that the Senate didn't pass a budget for 4 years ?

October 07, 2013 11:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also, the govt tax revenues are close to 2.7 some trillion, so the national debt interest is only some 8% or so. the incoming tax revenues cover it 10x over. So if anyone decides that the US is going to default, it will be our OMB office and the treasury secretary, who report to none other than POTUS the tyrant.

these claims of default are BS. the guy should be impeached for suggesting it.

October 07, 2013 11:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a 67 tbird that is a complete wreck sitting in our driveway. I have been reluctant to give it to goodwill because I want someone to restore it as opposed to scraping it.

If your life partner has a friend who wants it, he is welcome to it.
Promise is that he will restore it, not trash it, and not paint it purple.

October 08, 2013 1:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poll: GOP disapproval rating hits 70 percent over shutdown

October 08, 2013 7:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The annual numbers on the deficit I posted are accurate. You are the one doing fuzzy math, confounding debt with deficit.

The high numbers when Obama came into office were due to many Bush blunders that left us careening off the cliff. Your inability to comprehend this fact is your problem, not mine.

And if the "best site" you have "found for looking at the number" leads you to conclude "these claims of default are BS," nobody can help you because you have gone beyond the fringe. Now you are a debt ceiling truther.

Unlike salaried employees, the federal government's tax receipts do not come in at regular weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly intervals. BusinessInsider reports: "It's not true that on all days the Treasury has more money coming in than it has to pay out. As Goldman Sachs points out, the receipts/payments schedule is lumpy. The US might be able to prioritize for a few days, but come November the US would have to pay way more than was coming in that day."

Click that link and examine the chart for yourself.

And then think about this:

Paul Ryan, whose "goal all along was to get a budget agreement with the debt limit," has steadfastly refused regular order of sitting in conference over this year's House and Senate budgets. He said he did so because he wanted to wait for what he called "the backstop" of the debt limit being reached to gain leverage for the GOTP in his negotiations. Why would he do that if your fellow AynRand fan thought "these claims of default are BS?"

"we have been operating under one CR after another for the past 5 years and NO BUDGET."

Where have you been since this spring?? This year, both the House and the Senate passed budget bills and regular order would have had them in conference, negotiating to seek a budget that might pass in both chambers. Until about 10 days ago, when they felt they had all the hostages secure (though wiling to give up on funding for NIH and some few others), no one in the GOTP House was willing to come to negotiate, photo ops excepted. The GOTP lost the 2012 Presidential election, in which Obamacare was one of the most salient issues in that election, and are now desperately seeking leverage to try to force their way against the will of the electorate.

You should get more sleep, Theresa. You obviously need it.

October 08, 2013 8:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Beautiful restoration job, Priya! Your car is a beauty!!

As for T's T-bird, well....

"Consume more than you need
This is a dream
Make you pauper
Or make you queen.
I won't die lonely
I'll have it all prearranged
A grave that's deep and wide enough
For me and all my mountains o' things"

October 08, 2013 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Montgomery County Public Schools remains one of the leading academic systems in the country. I suspect that the recent test scores in math are an artifact of a changed measure. Virginia schools have experienced the same effect.


October 08, 2013 10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the high numbers when Obama came into office can be directly attributed to the stimulus bill he passed and the omnibus spending bill he passed.

the budget and spending that bush passed before he left showed a 500 billion deficit, not 1.4 trillion.

seriously, how do you not recognize that ?


October 08, 2013 11:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And which of these of Bush's Blunders do you imagine Bush paid for IN FULL by the end of 2008?

Bush Tax Cuts of 2001

Bush Tax Cuts of 2003

Both of these tax cuts were passed by budget reconciliation, which was a perfectly acceptable method for Congress to enact legislation with you GOTPers when Bush used it to cut taxes, twice.

Unfunded Medicare Prescription Drug Plan

While at the same time, were spending billions on two wars in the middle east, one of which was unnecessary.

For you to pretend that these laws were not still on the books driving the deficit higher in 2009 and beyond is preposterous.

You really need to get some more rest, Theresa.

October 08, 2013 2:34 PM  
Anonymous Heads up if you plan to use 495 on Friday, 10/11/13 said...

Right-wing truckers plan Beltway blockade until Benghazi Obamacare something

October 08, 2013 2:54 PM  
Anonymous someone here has been making lazy lies!! said...

I, for one, believe all Americans should prorate their taxes and not pay for the days the government was shutdown

as for this canard that Bush tax cuts caused the deficit Obama has been wracking up, the truth is budgets should be based on revenue

anyone could balance a budget with unlimited revenue

but let's go with the idiotic idea for a minute anyway and see if there is any stretch of the imagination which might validate it

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented in Bill Clinton's first four years?

8 percent

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented in George Bush's first four years?

8 percent

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented in George Bush's last four years?

8 percent

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented during George Bush's entire term?

8 percent

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented in George Bush's last full year in office?

8 percent

do you know what the average percentage of the GDP personal income tax represented in Barack Obama's first four years?

6.9 percent

same level of taxation

much higher deficit

much higher unemployment

do you know what the difference between 8 percent and 6.9 percent is?

1.1 percent

do you know how 1.1 percent of our GDP is?

the number of reasons Barack Obama should be impeached

October 08, 2013 4:48 PM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 08, 2013 5:18 PM  
Anonymous take back America said...

“the validity of the public debt of the United States...shall not be questioned.”

from the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

this amendment means just what it says

it was created to assure creditors to lend us money to finance the Civil War

President Obama has taken an oath to defend the Constitution

so why does he threaten to default on our debts if the Congress won't approve him borrowing more money from China?

tax revenues are more than adequate to pay our debt

they would have to decline by 90% to even be close

if Obama doesn't honor the debt of our country, he is in violation of the Constitution and will be impeached

In addition to the Head Start resolution, the House of Representatives, in the last week, has voted to fund "cleanly", without condition, the following:

the Washington, D.C., government; national parks; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the National Institutes of Health; the National Guard and reservists; the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and the Food and Drug Administration

how can Barack Obama allow this to continue?

one word that he will sign these funding bills, at levels he had previously approved, and Harry Reid will push them through the Senate without delay

the country is suffering because of Obama's gargantuan ego

remember, the Earth began to heal when he was nominated

he can't get used to the idea that he is not a deity

but, Barry, women and children are suffering

be a man and step up to the plate

October 08, 2013 6:40 PM  
Anonymous Cornelius Rosierre said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 08, 2013 8:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay other anon.
Let's talk about those figures shall we ?


Bush tax cuts (all of them, and they cut most significantly the lowest brackets) 1.6 T over 10 year, 1600 billion for 10 year, 160 billion a year.

Now what ?

The Medicare prescription benefit is only 25 billion a year, it's in the noise.


The total federal expenditures for the 2013 budget were 3.68 T or 3680 billion.

722 (ss) + 510 (medicare) or 1.232
152 (ss disability) + 339 Medicaid + 422 welfare or 913 welfare in it's various forms

856 military
223 interest on the debt

which means :
25% welfare
23% military
33% ss and medicare
11% interest on the debt
92% of the spending.

Okay, so let's ignore the 8% that is education, NIH, etc, and focus on the rest. Let's see if we can do what Congress refuses too...come to an agreement on how to balance the budget.

Deficit was 680 billion. I will give you 200 billion off the military (eliminate cost plus contracts, prohibit retired military from accepting any job that involves selling or lobbying the federal government, enforce cross service reuse, I am sure I can think of some more). Increase from 20 to 25 years or if it is
25 now make it 30 with an exception clearly for injury in combat. Keep the current benefits they get for their kids such as in-state tuition at any school in the country (or maybe it's free - it's a nice perk).

Kill congress retirement plan. Period. I want term limits of 12 years and I don't want politics to be a career. You can keep it for the president and the vp, for the rest, no way. they can live off ss like the rest of us. politics should not be a career on the federal level. questionable whether you keep the govt pension plans now that those jobs pay better then the private sector in the Obama economy and the benefits are much better. Keep Tricare in retirement for military, kill it for all other functions of govt. that's probably another 50 billion easy.

You give me 200 billion off welfare or ss disability. go reevaluate every single person on ss disability and decide if they can work. I have run into plenty of people over my lifetime that I have no business being on this. well it is their business. and I know some people that are on it (like one of my previous bosses that had a stoke at 58) that need it because well he simply can't even talk anymore.

reinforce welfare to work and kill welfare for able bodied single individuals, force mothers on assistance with kids to take birth control (hey you guys are all for this) and get a monthly b/c shot with her welfare check. You want it free - I'll make it mandatory. eliminate EIC for illegal aliens, roundly enforce e-verify on ALL employers and even contracted work with a hefty fine if they don't comply.

Give Medicare the ability to negotiate for drug coverage as a group, only cover generics unless the drug is within the 5 year period where the patent applies, do tort reform to bring the costs down.....

we are 600 billion in the hole. what would you do to balance it ?

or are you going to argue like our President that we can spend ourselves into oblivion and it doesn't matter.

assume the numbers above are correct (pretty sure they are)... how would you balance the budget ?

October 08, 2013 8:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Theresa, you are a hardass!!


Seriously, some of your ideas conflict with my libertarian ideals but, still, I think you demonstrate that it can obviously be done.

We may soon be able to actually decide, as a democratic society, which non-essential government components we want.

Polls show our elitist President and aristocratic legislature are very unpopular.

Let's do a complete turnover.

October 08, 2013 9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Oh brother, Theresa.

Try using some real an unspun numbers, like those from the CBO instead of an outfit with ties to conservative groups.

"...The Tax Foundation's philosophy on taxes closely mirrors that of President Bush and his important congressional ally, Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., Ways and Means chairman since 2001. In that time Thomas played a critical role in helping push the tax changes that the Bush administration wanted: cuts to the federal estate tax in 2001 and the reductions in taxes on capital gains and dividends two years later.

Thomas' staff was the number one recipient of Tax Foundation-sponsored trips, both in terms of dollars spent - more than $50,000 - and number of trips - six. The congressional staffs of Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas; Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa; Rep. William Jefferson, D-La.; and Rep. Amory Houghton, R-N.Y., round out the top five congressional office recipients of trips sponsored by the Tax Foundation.

A past chairman of Ways and Means has since moved into a leadership role at the Tax Foundation. Former Rep. Bill Archer served as Ways and Means head from 1995 to 2001 and is a registered lobbyist for PricewaterhouseCoopers.

The foundation stated on its 2004 and 2005 federal tax returns that it has not “attempted to influence national, state, or local legislation, including any attempt to influence public opinion on a legislative matter or referendum.”

House and Senate ethics rules forbid registered lobbyists from directly paying for congressional trips; however, it is not uncommon for lobbyists to sit on boards of Washington nonprofits.

As recently as last year, one of the Tax Foundation's directors was registered as a lobbyist for Koch Industries, and another lobbied for Exxon Mobil Corp. in 2004, according to the Senate's Office of Public Records.

Koch Industries has been a prominent advocate of repealing the estate tax, said a report earlier this year by the government watchdog group Public Citizen and United for a Fair Economy, a liberal think tank. The Tax Foundation also supports repeal of the estate tax."...

October 08, 2013 10:23 PM  
Anonymous Grandma Boehner said...

Mr. Obama has a great talent for saying harsh things in a moderate way. Yesterday, he compared Republicans to arsonists, immature people, extortionists and I think zombies out for your blood. Normally when you insult someone your tone gets a little hot, but the president insults people in cool, mild tones, as if he’s only trying to describe them accurately.

Imagine him as a child:

Grandmother: “Do your homework now.”

Obama: “Well, I understand your position and I can’t say it’s fully without merit, but I don’t suppose it’s the worst thing that someone works hard in school all day and then attempts to take a short breather.”

Grandmother: “Barry, it’s 9 o’clock. Do your homework.”

Obama: “I’m sure I’ll get to that, and I understand your frustration at being the chief breadwinner in our family, and I’m sure you’re tired, as grandpa is from whatever he does. And believe me, I understand your need to establish some kind of authority and impose order in an atypical family containing a grandson approaching his teen years. And I don’t doubt you’re feeling some conscious or unconscious anxiety that you may have contributed in some degree to this situation, though I want you to understand I don’t blame you, or indeed anyone.”

Grandmother: “Barry, keep that up and I’ll come at you with the broom. Get that TV off, now!”

Obama: “I understand why someone might resort to such threats and feel the lure of violence, especially the powerless, who cling to their brooms.”

Imagine it ending with her grabbing the broom, his yelping “OK, OK!” and running, with his books, to his room.

October 09, 2013 7:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon, the House tried forty-something times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and the Senate never agreed -- the President was not going to the bill anyway, so it was an essentially masturbatory exercise by House Republicans. The ACA has been passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court, and House wants to try to repeal it by adding wording to the budget bill, which is, again, still not going to pass in the Senate or receive the President's signature.

There is nothing you can say that makes the shutdown Obama's fault.

October 09, 2013 9:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is perfectly appropriate to use a budgetary method to repeal make changes to an law that was passed illegally through budgetary methods and again, Obama has illegally made changes to ...

the last offer the republicans had on the table was not to defund or change it but to delay the individual mandate for a year (consistent with the delay of the business mandate) and to repeal the special exemptions. the president does not have a power to change a passed law as he has done with obamacare.

finally, find a site that has a number for the bush tax cuts that you agree with if you don't like the one I found.

I doubt that any site would say they are worth 680 billion a year, so again, what would you cut ? how would you balance our budget ?

close to a trillion in ss/medicare, close to a trillion in defense, close to a trillion in welfare... spending at 3.6 or so and we bring in 2.8 or so.
what would you cut ?

the budget numbers I quoted are from the CBO, they are accurate.

October 09, 2013 9:38 AM  
Anonymous how low can you go? said...

actually, it is Obama's fault because he refused to negotiate

this has happened 17 times in the last couple of decades, including while Obama was President and there were always negotiations before

funding is always separate from enactment

as an alternative to negotiation, the House made several attempts to make changes to appease the President

the final offer was simply to delay the individual mandate for a year, as Obama had already illegally done with the requirements for Big Business

even liberal Jon Stewart berated Kathy Sibelius over this matter this week

if Obama had agreed, the government would be open now

and it wouldn't be much to give up, if the American voter actually supported Obamacare, which they don't and never have

the problem Obama has with this minor change is that it would push implementation back another year and make it possible for repeal to happen when the Repubs take the Senate in 2014

as for legitimacy, Obamacare was pushed through using trick maneuvers after the American people made it clear they opposed it

the votes were on straight party line, not one Republican voted for it

a major entitlement has never been passed without bipartisan support

further, it was not a major issue in the Presidential election because the Repub nominee had no standing to debate it and Obama's second term will always have an asterisk because he illegally tampered with the election by using the IRS to harass his opponents

it's perfectly plausible that he might not have won otherwise

so the Repubs are doing more than masturbating

putting off Obamacare a year could make its repeal possible and this game is not played out yet

it amy be a Hail Mary but the stakes are high, one-sixth of the economy and climbing, and the risk is worth it

Obama's polls continue to slip

who knows how low it will be next fall

October 09, 2013 9:49 AM  
Anonymous Americans will flip the government said...

Americans are holding Republicans responsible for the partial government shutdown but public esteem is sinking for all players in the impasse, President Barack Obama among them, according to a new poll. It's a struggle with no heroes.

The Associated Press-GfK survey, out Wednesday, affirms expectations by many in Washington — Republicans among them — that the GOP may end up taking the biggest hit in public opinion from the fiscal paralysis. But the situation is fluid nine days into the shutdown and there's plenty of disdain to go around.

Overall, 62 percent mainly blamed Republicans for the shutdown. About half said Obama or the Democrats.

Asked if she blamed Obama, House Republicans, Senate Democrats or the tea party for the shutdown, Martha Blair, 71, of Kerrville, Texas, said, yes, you bet. All of them.

"Somebody needs to jerk those guys together to get a solution, instead of just saying 'no,'" said Blair, an independent. "It's just so frustrating." It's also costly: She's paid to fly with a group to four national parks in Arizona and California next month and says she can't get her money back or reschedule if the parks remain closed.

Most Americans disapprove of the way Obama is handling his job, the poll suggests, with 53 percent unhappy with his performance and 37 percent approving of it. Congress is scraping rock bottom, with a ghastly approval rating of 5 percent.

Indeed, anyone making headlines in the dispute has earned poor marks for his or her trouble, whether it's Democrat Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, or Republican John Boehner, the House speaker, both with a favorability rating of 18 percent.

October 09, 2013 10:54 AM  

actually, it is Obama's fault because he refused to negotiate

There you go again, spinning lies for your GOTP handlers.

Try to comprehend these actual simple facts.

-- The House passed a budget in the spring

-- A month later, the Senate passed their own budget and the Senate requested a conference to negotiate the two budgets into one that might pass in both chambers.

-- GOTPer Paul Ryan refused to send any House members to conference because he wanted to wait for leverage of the debt ceiling as a backstop.

The National Journal reports: 19 Times Democrats Tried to Negotiate With Republicans: The GOP's biggest talking point of the shutdown is only true if you ignore everything that happened before last week.

"...1. 4/23 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked.

2. 5/6 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.

3. 5/7 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.

4. 5/8 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.

5. 5/9 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.

6. 5/14 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.

7. 5/15 Senator Wyden asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.

8. 5/16 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.

9. 5/21 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Paul blocked.

10. 5/22 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.

11. 5/23 Senator McCaskill asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.

12. 6/4 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.

13. 6/12 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.

14. 6/19 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Toomey blocked.

15. 6/26 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.

16. 7/11 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.

17. 7/17 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Mike Lee blocked.

18. 8/1 Senator Durbin requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.

19. 10/2 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked."...

..."We will not go to conference with a gun to our head," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on the floor—considering that they had been rebuffed almost 20 times beforer [sic] and that Republicans had shown no interest until it was already clear the government was closing. Last week, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor tweeted a picture of a faux conference committee, which included zero Democrats, saying, "We sit ready to negotiate with the Senate."

Perhaps we could have avoided a shutdown if they had been ready to negotiate before the government ran out of money."

October 09, 2013 11:51 AM  
Anonymous Harry Reid is a disgrace said...

the government has plenty of money, they haven't run out

why won't the Senate negotiate now?

there's no gun to their head

non-essential government has already shut down

it's over

moreover, the House will fund any part of the government already accepted by both sides

there's no gun to anyone's head

for programs likes WICS and NIH cancer treatment, where there might be some suffering involved from the shutdown, the House has approved funding

unless the Senate disagrees, why don't they pass the bill and end the suffering?

is anything more important to them than their political games?

right now there are infants who need formula and whose mothers can't afford it

should they go Harry Reid's office and get some?

truth is, passing one big funding bill was always a bad idea and should go to the ash heap of history

it's just a way for corrupt politicians, most of whom are Democrats, to push through pork without the voter noticing

this piecemeal approach that we've stumbled into should be the new SOP

that way voters can decide what is a proper function of government... and what is a waste

hopefully, the Department of Education never gets funded

October 09, 2013 12:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this piecemeal approach that we've stumbled into should be the new SOP

If so, the Founding Fathers will all roll over in their graves and we won't be a Democracy anymore.

October 09, 2013 12:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For three years, Congress and the White House have been building to this moment. Not the debt limit or Obamacare specifically, but this clarifying moment of Washington dysfunction. President Obama has led us here by continually thwarting the will of Congress and dismissing its role in our constitutional republic. This must end.

The president not only has refused to negotiate on issues of debt and spending but also has mocked the very idea of engaging with Congress. President Obama has repeatedly made clear that he feels it is beneath the office of the presidency to work in a bipartisan way with the legislative branch.

The Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse and the power to borrow. The president was given the power to veto measures, including those related to spending and borrowing. These separate powers created checks and balances but also forced the executive and legislative branches to work together.

As James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 48, “It is equally evident, that none of [the branches of the federal government] ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in the administration of their respective powers.”

In the 224 years of our nation’s history, one party has controlled the House, Senate and White House for 130 years. President Obama enjoyed two of those years, and it’s no surprise he wishes that were still the case. Yet while 28 of 44 U.S. presidents have found a way to lead in divided government, this president has not.

In 2006, then-Sen. Obama said: “Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

Seven years later, and after the nation’s debt had doubled , President Obama refuses to even sit at the same table as Republicans and work to solve the “debt problem” he correctly identified as a senator. That is a much larger failure of leadership.

This has, unfortunately, been the case since 2011. President Obama has often chosen to unilaterally circumvent the law under the guise of executive authority. Most recently, that was demonstrated in July with his delay of Obamacare mandates for corporations, but it has been a hallmark of this presidency.

Courts have held that President Obama violated the Constitution with certain “recess” appointments, ignoring the required consent of Congress. He has abused executive-branch “rule making” rather than working with Congress to pass laws. He has ignored the letter of the law when it comes to religious liberty and work requirements for welfare.

President Obama has used executive orders to unilaterally change U.S. immigration laws. His administration has used waivers to change laws such as No Child Left Behind to compel states to adopt new policies.

In some of these instances, the president attempted to garner statutory authority, failed to do so and then acted in defiance of that. In other instances, he never bothered to find consensus and ignored Congress from the outset, usually contending that he simply had no choice. This is no way to govern, and it cripples the system of checks and balances that our Founding Fathers envisioned.

October 09, 2013 12:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Working in divided government is not new. As recently as 1995, President Bill Clinton worked overtime with House Speaker Newt Gingrich to reach bipartisan compromise over the debt ceiling and to end a government shutdown.

Neither Clinton nor congressional Republicans got everything they wanted from those negotiations. They found consensus, and that consensus moved the country forward; they managed to balance the budget because they worked together.

Just two years ago, President Obama and House Republicans came to an agreement to raise the debt ceiling and implement much-needed reductions in spending. It wasn’t a perfect agreement, but it, too, moved the nation forward. For the first time since the Korean War, the United States will have two consecutive years of reduced nominal spending.

After that agreement, the American people reelected a divided government. They expect us to work together just as just as it was done in 2011, 1996, 1995 and years before — and they will not accept one party simply refusing to negotiate. Mr. President, let’s sit down and talk. Let’s reach consensus and end the “my way or the highway” attitude once and for all.

October 09, 2013 12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If so, the Founding Fathers will all roll over in their graves and we won't be a Democracy anymore."

if we know precisely what is being voted on, we won't be a democracy anymore?

this is about the stupidest comment a TTFer has ever made

for the amusement of the public, could you explain your thinking here?



October 09, 2013 12:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Screw Cantor, who has shown no interest in negotiating until the government shut down.

October 09, 2013 1:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

my, aren't we getting testy?

the shutdown of non-essential government doesn't prevent Dems from negotiating in any way

they just want the shut down to continue because they think it gives them hope for 2014

October 09, 2013 1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


give me all the funding I want and let me borrow as much as I want and agree that we need to raise taxes again

then, we can negotiate

which will be great because, then, you won't have any leverage

October 09, 2013 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

has anyone noticed that Dems, like Obama, keep using gun metaphors?

"hey, I'm not negotiating with a gun at my head"

remember a couple of years ago when they said Repubs were dangerous nuts when they did that?

October 09, 2013 1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

give me all the funding I want and let me borrow as much as I want and agree that we need to raise taxes again

then, we can negotiate

We an all see you have no quotation marks around your fabrication.


October 09, 2013 1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that's their pre-conditions, you ignorant fool

October 09, 2013 1:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There you go repeating again "The GOP's biggest talking point of the shutdown is only true if you ignore everything that happened before last week."

The Dems have been trying to open negotiations since the spring while the GOTP couldn't be bothered.

Everybody knows that but you.

Who's the fool?

October 09, 2013 1:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"One way to understand the dysfunction within the Republican Party is to think of it as a hostage scheme that spun out of control. The plan, originally formulated by Paul Ryan and other party leaders, involved a more aggressive reprise of the 2011 negotiations, where Republicans would use the threat of default, along with sequestration, to force President Obama to accept unfavorable budget terms. The plan was hijacked by Ted Cruz and transformed into a scheme using a less effective hostage threat (shutting down the government rather than defaulting) but tethered to the much more grandiose ransom of repealing Obamacare. As the Cruz scheme disintegrates around the Republicans, the original leaders are attempting to reassert control and revert to the original plan.

The subtext of op-eds today by Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan is a promise to ratchet down their ransom terms. Neither op-ed mentions any demands related to Obamacare. Ryan proposes to trade higher short-term discretionary government spending for permanent cuts to tax rates and retirement programs. “We can work together,” he writes. “We can do some good.”

The policy demands in Ryan’s op-ed are sufficiently vague that, if viewed as an opening bid, they would not completely preclude some kind of deal if he actually wants to bargain. The trouble is that Ryan’s entire history strongly suggests he does not want to deal. Every major attempt to create bipartisan budget negotiations has been quashed by Ryan. He voted against the Bowles-Simpson proposal, kiboshed a 2011 agreement between John Boehner and President Obama, then single-handedly blew up a bipartisan Senate budget deal...

...The single most implausible element of the House leadership’s "let’s negotiate" gambit is the premise that a bipartisan budget deal would satisfy the Republican base. Any bipartisan deal, even one heavily slanted to the Republican side, would enrage conservatives. Even the tiniest concession — easing sequestration, closing a couple of token tax loopholes — would be received on the right as a betrayal. Loss aversion is a strong human emotion, and especially strong among movement conservatives. Concessions given away will dwarf any winnings in their mind. Boehner, Ryan, and Cantor have spent months regaling conservatives with promises of rich ransoms to come. Coming back with an actual negotiated settlement would enrage the right.

The most enjoyable outcome would be to watch all of them — Boehner, Ryan, Cantor — be eaten alive by the wolves they’ve nurtured. But of course, the threat of this outcome is the very thing that may encourage them to allow an economic crisis — a man forced to choose between saving his job and saving his country is dangerous, especially if that man is John Boehner.

But the current Republican line does suggest a way out: if Republicans “win” a promise to negotiate the budget, with the debt ceiling not being subject to the outcome of the negotiations. That this has actually been Obama’s goal all along, and the thing Republicans have been trying to avoid, does not mean Republicans can’t talk themselves into it. The negotiation would probably end in a stalemate, or possibly a few small changes, but by the time it was finished the crisis would be over and conservative activists would have moved on to other issues — a new Obama scandal, maybe.

The insistent talking point that Obama won’t negotiate is a preposterous form of propaganda. But it has been taken up by a number of eager conservative pundits who seem to actually believe it. What if conservatives can be made to believe their own talking point — to believe that forcing Obama to negotiate the budget is the party’s actual goal here? Conservative self-delusion got us into this crisis. It could also get us out."


October 09, 2013 2:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Repubs are going to raise the debt limit for a short period and will hold on government funding until Obama negotiates

might be a while before the museums open

October 09, 2013 2:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Dear Congressman Kingston:

Thank you for your courageous stand against Obamacare and in support of the government shutdown.  Your bold act of statesmanship has given me an idea that I hope you will agree with.

Like you, I'm sure, I am profoundly disappointed that the Atlanta Braves lost the NLDS last night.  And to the Dodgers - a bunch of California liberals!

This outrage cannot be allow to stand.  But the system has failed us.  We tried to resolve this issued through traditional means:  In last night's game alone, we must have sent batters to the plate at least 40 times.  But just because we couldn't score enough runs, the Dodgers refuse to relinquish the title - and worse, they won't even discuss it.

LA's stubborn refusal to even talk to us about reversing the results of this series is unsportsmanlike and un-American.  There there is an answer:  If the Dodgers won't listen to the cries of average Americans like you and me, then Congress should outlaw Major League Baseball until the Dodgers cave.

I understand this solution may sound unconventional.  But we can no longer afford to play baseball as usual.  This issue is too important.  Americans - by which I mean Braves fans like me -- overwhelmingly oppose a Dodgers win.  Allowing them to impose their left-coast values on our post-season play is ruining American.  And my fantasy team.

I know that some in the greater fan community and in the sportscasting elite may say that shutting down all of baseball is too drastic a step.  That if this kinds of hostage-taking is allowed to succeed, baseball as we know it will cease to function - that next time it will be the Dodgers demanding the pennant.  That before long we'll see the Mets shutting down the league unless they get a Super Bowl ring, or the Diamondbacks halting play unless they win the Stanley Cup.  But you and I know that's just a bunch of California double-speak.

Just because the Dodgers had more hits, scored more runs, and won more games doesn't make them right.  You can help them see that.  And if that means the country will be deprived of its national pastime, - well, the Dodgers will only have themselves to blame.

Help us avoid the Dodgers' cynical shut down of Major League Baseball.  Bring the National League pennant home to Atlanta today.

Go Braves!  


Paul J. Kaplan"

October 09, 2013 2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

here's a fun story:

"Gulf nations may soon conduct tests to "detect" gays traveling to those nations in order to deny them entry.

“Health centers conduct the routine medical check to assess the health of the expatriates when they come into the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] countries,” Yousuf Mindkar, the director of public health at the Kuwait Ministry of Health, told local newspaper Al Rai, per Gulf News. “However, we will take stricter measures that will help us detect gays who will be then barred from entering Kuwait or any of the GCC member states."

The GCC is an alliance made up of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman, formed to sustain unity among the six nations based on their similar cultural identities and religious beliefs. They are set to discuss the proposal on Nov. 11, according to the Gulf News.

Homosexuality is punishable by law in these nations. Penalties range from jail time to death.

Gay rights activists initially spoke out but told Gay Star News they are interested because the means of "gay testing" may include anal probes, which have been conducted by authorities in Lebanon to determine criminal suspects' sexual behaviors.

Still, Peter Tatchell, British activist and director of the Peter Tatchell Foundation, is now demanding a boycott of the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.

"There is no known medical test to detect homosexuality. I wonder what quackery the Kuwaiti authorities plan to invent in their vain attempt to identify gay men. It simply won’t work," he told PinkNews of the Kuwait health minister's proposal. “They want to subject their employees to such barbaric, medieval humiliations."

This news comes on the heels of ongoing issues surrounding the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics and Russia's anti-gay law banning "homosexual propaganda." Penalties include fines or jail time or both.

October 09, 2013 2:53 PM  
Anonymous much ado has been about no thing said...

Moody's says Obama is lying and they won't lower the nation's credit rating if Congress doesn't approve debt increase:

"One of the nation’s top credit-rating agencies says that the U.S. Treasury Department is likely to continue paying interest on the government’s debt even if Congress fails to lift the limit on borrowing next week, preserving the nation’s sterling AAA credit rating.

In a memo being circulated on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Moody’s Investors Service offers “answers to frequently asked questions” about the government shutdown, now in its second week, and the federal debt limit. President Obama has said that, unless Congress acts to raise the $16.7 trillion limit by next Thursday, the nation will be at risk of default.

Not so, Moody’s says in the memo dated Oct. 7.

” We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact,” the memo says. “The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues; it does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. There is no direct connection between the debt limit (actually the exhaustion of the Treasury’s extraordinary measures to raise funds) and a default.

The memo offers a starkly different view of the consequences of congressional inaction on the debt limit than is claimed by the White House. During a press conference at the White House Tuesday, Obama said missing the Oct. 17 deadline would invite “economic chaos.”

The Moody’s memo goes on to argue that the situation is actually much less serious than in 2011, when the nation last faced a pitched battle over the debt limit.

“The budget deficit was considerably larger in 2011 than it is currently, so the magnitude of the necessary spending cuts needed after 17 October is lower now than it was then,” the memo says."

October 09, 2013 3:34 PM  
Anonymous lies and the dirty lying Barry who tells them said...


Barack Obama has been lying all this time!

Can't take no more, man

Can't take no more, man

Sick and tired of your dirty lies and shams

Can't take it no more, man

You know you lied about the budget sent

You know you lied about closing monuments

You know you lied about debt of the government

Stop talking about borrowing more

You keep-a-beating that old dead horse

You know you lied about why we shutdown

Can't take no more, man

October 09, 2013 4:52 PM  
Anonymous ease on down the road said...

WASHINGTON — President Obama is bringing Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate separately to the White House before week’s end to try to resolve the continuing impasse over funding the government and raising the nation’s borrowing ceiling.

On Wednesday afternoon, it is the turn of the House Democratic minority, for what some Democrats characterized as a likely pep rally in the East Room for Mr. Obama’s hard-line position. Democrats are united behind the president’s stance of not negotiating with Republicans about anything until House Republican leaders agree to fund all Obama's programs for the government, and increase the debt limit so the Treasury can keep borrowing money for non-essentials.

Mr. Obama has invited the Senate’s Democratic majority and its Republican minority as well as, of course, the House Republicans, a White House official said. Times and dates were being worked out.

October 09, 2013 5:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

” We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact,” the [Moody] memo says

Well hip hip hooray for Moody's "beliefs" but the facts don't support them.

"U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew gave a much less calm depiction of the scenario in an interview with NBC's Savannah Guthrie.

Reiterating his previous statement that by October 17, the Treasury will have only $30 billion left in the coffers, he warned that U.S. politicians were playing with fire.

"$30 billion is a dangerously low level of cash. And we're on the verge of going into a place we've never been, not having cash to pay our bills," he said.

Lew said the U.S. Government actually hit the debt ceiling limit in May, forcing him to use "extraordinary measures" to create additional headroom. He said the capacity to use these measures had now expired and said he had "nothing else in the drawer."

"So the reality is that if we run out of cash to pay our bills, there is no option that permits us to pay all of our bills on time," he added."

Double-dip in recession anyone?

Thank the GOTP.

October 09, 2013 6:12 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home