Quantcast

Friday, July 25, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 95 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Parks open, workers back in office after shutdown

By David Crary

AP National Writer

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 11:28 a.m. HST, Oct 17, 2013


From the Liberty Bell to Alcatraz, federal landmarks and offices reopened today. Furloughed employees were relieved to get back to work — even if faced with email backlogs — but many worried about another such disruption in a matter of months.

"We'd hate to have to live through this all over again," Richard Marcus, a 29-year employee of the National Archives in Washington, said after the government shutdown finally ended.

Nationwide, from big-city office buildings to wilderness outposts, innumerable federal services and operations shifted back into gear after 16 days.

The U.S. Forest Service started lifting a logging ban on national forests. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services restarted the computerized system used to verify the legal status of workers. Boat trips resumed to Alcatraz, the former federal prison in San Francisco Bay, with 1,600 tickets snapped up by tourists in the first hour of business.

In Alaska, federal officials rushed to get the red king crab fishing season underway. The opening had been delayed because furloughed workers were not around to issue crab-quota permits.

National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis said all 401 national park units — from the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in California to Acadia National Park in Maine — were reopening today.

More than 20,000 National Park Service employees had been among the 800,000 federal workers sent home at the peak of the shutdown

At Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks, employees were busy with reopening chores. They returned just in time to begin closing the parks up again for the winter in a couple of weeks.

At Philadelphia's Independence National Historical Park, one couple's long wait to see the Liberty Bell and other attractions finally drew to a close.

Karen and Richard Dodds of Oklahoma City were on a quest to see every national park in the U.S. They arrived in Philadelphia about three weeks ago in their motor home, visiting Valley Forge just before the shutdown. They stayed on in the area, awaiting a settlement.

"They didn't solve anything by this," Katie Dodds said of the temporary agreement in Congress that funds the government only through Jan. 15 and gives it the borrowing authority it needs only through Feb. 7. "The worst part is they'll do it again in January and February."

Among the many sites reopening in Washington were the Smithsonian Institution's museums and the World War II memorial on the National Mall, which had been the scene of protests over the shutdown.

Smithsonian spokeswoman Linda St. Thomas said the museum complex lost about $2.8 million in revenue during the shutdown.

The National Zoo was set to reopen Friday, though its popular panda cam went live this morning, giving fans a view of a cub wriggling about as its mother, Mei Xiang, tucked her paws under her chin and watched.

Federal workers who were furloughed or worked without pay during the shutdown will get back pay in their next paychecks, which for most employees come Oct. 29.

Labor Secretary Thomas Perez greeted returning workers with a sympathetic email.

"Unfortunately, as President Obama correctly noted, you are occasionally called on to perform your remarkably important work in a climate that too often treats federal employees and contractors as a punching bag," Perez said.

The Defense Department called back about 7,000 furloughed civilians. In an open letter to the workforce, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the department still faces budget uncertainty as Congress struggles to pass a 2014 spending bill and deal with automatic budget cuts. Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale said the department lost at least $600 million worth of productivity during the four days that civilians were furloughed.

The National Institutes of Health warned university scientists not to expect a quick resumption of research dollars.

At the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Md., email servers were slowly grinding back into gear.

Fire protection engineer Dan Madrzykowski had been in the office for about half an hour and about 800 emails had popped into his inbox. And that represented less than a week of the shutdown. Still, Madrzykowski said he was pleased to be back.

"Nothing good was coming from keeping the government closed," he said.

Patrice Roberts, who works for Homeland Security, said she wasn't prepared for the emotional lows of the past 16 days.

"It's just frustrating having that kind of control over your life and just having it taken away from me," said Roberts, who is expecting another shutdown in January. "I'll be better prepared next time."

In Pottsville, Pa., several people waited outside the Social Security office ahead of its 9 a.m. opening. James Ulrich, an unemployed 19-year-old, needed a replacement for his lost Social Security card to apply for jobs. He was told a replacement card would take two weeks to arrive.

"I don't have a really good outlook on the government," he said.

In Cincinnati, Renee Yankey, a government alcohol and tobacco tax specialist, was sleep-deprived after staying up late to watch news of the shutdown-ending deal, but otherwise glad to be back at work with the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.

"I can tell that the alcohol industry missed us," Yankey said. "The first thing I hear is 'I'm so glad I got a person on the phone!'"

In North Little Rock, Ark, Simeon Yates was glad to return to work as an auditor for the Arkansas National Guard.

"It's definitely a relief financially ... knowing that we'll be able to provide for our families again," said Yates, whose wife stays home with their four young children.

"It was hard to explain to the kids," Yates added. "They enjoyed having me home, but when we were just having hot dogs a lot and pancakes ... you know, being small, they didn't necessarily understand that."

Associated Press writers Matthew Barakat in Reston, Va.; Ben Nuckols in Springfield, Va.; Dan Sewell in Cincinnati; Michael Rubinkam in Pottsville, Pa.; Jeannie Nuss in North Little Rock, Ark.; Kathy Matheson in Philadelphia; Rachel D'Oro in Anchorage, Alaska; and Jessica Gresko and Sam Hananel in Washington contributed to this report.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 95 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(95)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
eoe wrote:
Thank you teahadists for your assault on America that cost the economy as much as 24 billion dollars in GDP. All the terrorist groups in the world fantasize about being able to cause that much damage to this country. Great job, patriots!
on October 17,2013 | 05:06AM
false wrote:
We the people paid a lot for this fiasco. Let's not send this bunch back to do more of the same. Congress is a nation to itself and needs to be taken down.
on October 17,2013 | 05:34AM
pcman wrote:
IR false on Congress. Wrong. Actually, the president could have taken the lead and required all federal workers to continue to work like half of the other federal workers did without a budget or continuing resolution. The pres felt he could use the budget crisis to his political advantage to distract everyone from his forcing everyone to accept the illogical health care act. The pres did not need a budget in the last five years to un the government, so why did he need one now? He is a failure as a leader and patriot to push for an increase in the federal debt. His words about Bush, not mine. What a farce. I voted for Obama for his first term but not the second, after hearing all of his lies about intending to change Washington politics. He actually made it worse.
on October 17,2013 | 07:32AM
wondermn1 wrote:
In reality, the Tea Party is actually trying to save America from the spend and tax group headed by the Democrats. Can you understand that we have a liability of over 17 trillion dollars and I believe over 8 trillion has been added on by the Obama administration. The entitlements have grown to a 47 % in our population and the amount that we pay China just on interest alone is mind boggling. WAKE UP AMERICA The Republican's are trying to SAVE the Country so our kids can be free as well. Since Obama has been in office America has become the laughing stock of the world and we may lose more in the next three years, like our credit ratings and our military power just to name a few. We should not be heading down the socialistic road that the Pres and the bleeding heart libs are taking us. So Blame the shutdown where it really was the Democrats and the President not the Republican's or the Tea Party
on October 17,2013 | 10:36AM
kolohepalu wrote:
Save America by cutting benefits so the wealthy can get richer by not paying their taxes. Great patriotic plan. Furthermore, thank the dimwit W and his corporate puppeteers for the economic fallout we're still cleaning up.
on October 17,2013 | 12:41PM
meat wrote:
Still playing the blame game. 5 straight years of INCREASED spending, and still blaming. Wake up and smell the stench kolo.
on October 17,2013 | 04:18PM
kolohepalu wrote:
the stench comes from the right, "meat". We had the dummy for EIGHT years worth of damage.
on October 17,2013 | 08:57PM
nalogirl wrote:
Thank you wondermn1 you said eveything that I would have said, just ignore these childess bullies that can only name call.
on October 17,2013 | 03:04PM
kolohepalu wrote:
No. The president did take the lead- he refused to bend to the temper-tantrum of a small minority on a bill that is already law. The republibaggers sole mission is to oppose Obama- what policy it is and whether it is good for the country is irrelevant to them. It is infantile, it is pathetic, and their little farce cost us billions.
on October 17,2013 | 12:37PM
meat wrote:
The Rep.'s mission is to oppose the outrageous spending. Stimulus, Bank bailout, auto bailout, and yes, Obamacare. So after all that, (which was supposed to have been great for our economy according to the Dem.s), what does our government have to show for it? Weak credit rating, weak economy, weak employment numbers. And don't be fooled by the stock increase either, when the Feds stop buying bonds that all comes crashing down too. Take off the blinders and the ear plugs.
on October 17,2013 | 04:34PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Uh huh. And our economy WAS improving (despite 8 previous years of tax giveaways to the rich courtesy of the Bush administration). So the 80% or so of people in this country that blame the repubs for this fiasco are all wearing ear plugs and blinders, not like all you well-informed folks that watch Fox and listen to Rush. Yeah.
on October 17,2013 | 09:02PM
MKN wrote:
@pcman: Actually you are incorrect. The president did not have that authority. There's a law called the Antideficiency Act of 1870 that prohibits the federal government from working without funds from congress. The punishment for anyone violating this act is an up to 5000 dollar fine and up to 2 years in federal prison. You may want to do some research first before saying stuff like that. LOL!!!
on October 17,2013 | 01:43PM
Bumby wrote:
The American people need to realize that our ever growing debt is the concern. 17 trillion divided by 300,000 million people adds up to a little over $56,000.00 that each American will pay. That is if it was paid now. Add interest to this and all who has borrowed know that the amount that needs to be paid to clear the debt is greater. Ask yourself as a person and as a family unit as well as a business, would you be better off financially if you were not in debt and paying back principal and interest. Everything else is smoke and mirror. Once every American makes our leaders realize this, that will be the day that we can start decreasing the debt and one day be out of debt. How is this debt collected through our taxes.
on October 17,2013 | 08:39AM
environmental_lady wrote:
The huge debt was a result of two hneedless wars instigated by President Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan coupled with tax cuts to the rich. When Clinton left government we had a surpluse. So who created the deficits but the Republicans.
on October 17,2013 | 12:45PM
Bumby wrote:
Let us get beyond the party lines. We the people and its leaders need to get it period. Increasing our debt continuously will be a disaster for the American people and its country. Do we continue on this path or should its people start wising up and say enough is enough. Let's right the way the government spends our money. Let's start spending our hard earn dollars that is given to the government in the form of taxes, wisely and for the benefit of the American people. To much money is going out to countries or people who gets a portion of the interest on the national debt. They make the interest seem tiny. Imagine collecting 10% of 80 billion dollars in the form of interest. By the way do you believe the money that is given to foreign countries are spent for the good of their people?
on October 17,2013 | 01:18PM
meat wrote:
Rep.'s lead both the House and Senate when Bubba left office, keeping him and the spending in check, creating the surplus. Dem.'s took over both House and Senate in '06, the final 2 years of W's term, and the rest is history.
on October 17,2013 | 04:43PM
hanalei395 wrote:
"If at first, you don't succeed, try, try again". .......Orders to Boehner and Republicans by the Tea Party in Jan. 2014 ........ Shutdown Obamacare, or we will shutdown the government.
on October 17,2013 | 05:47AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Yeah, the evil Tea Party (supposedly) chopped off a whole .00015 of the economy (temporarily)---- a real death blow to economic growth (sarc). ----------------Meanwhile, happy liberals are basking in the wonders of Obamacare, a gigantic, economy retarding tax increase (especially on the young and working middle class in the form of skyrocketing insurance costs) and pretending the economic impact of that law has no negative economic impact.
on October 17,2013 | 08:35AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Wow, the evil Tea Party whacked a whole, wait for it--- .0015 of our annual economy [Here's the math: $24 billion (your figure-- never mind that Obama poured at least $90 billion down the "green" energy rat hole) ÷ $16 trillion (for you liberals, a trillion is 1,000 billion)]. --------- So this is the horrible damage the people you so politely call political jihadists have done.-------- Meanwhile, back on planet Obama your team does nothing/refuses to acknowledge/looks the other way/ says there's no problem at all when it comes to our $86 trillion unfunded Federal liability, driven primary by welfare state spending. (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323353204578127374039087636)----- To you great thinkers, chipping the paint on our economy is a big deal, but heading off our guaranteed fiscal disaster in the future just isn't worth thinking about.------------- Wow. Sometimes the human capacity for raging denial of reality is mind boggling.
on October 17,2013 | 09:18AM
TLehel wrote:
Agree. The Obamanoids just don't understand dude. They just blindly follow their leader without question. Getting through to them will take more than cold hard facts. You're just a liberterrorist and a racist to them.
on October 17,2013 | 10:31AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Yup, just another Teahadists quietly building fiscal suicide bombs in the garage while the happy, new-agey progressives stare blankly at numbers they can't comprehend and handle their maxed out credit card by getting another credit card for the next shopping binge. However, you're right about something I didn't realize all this time: turns out that MATH itself is racist. Who knew?
on October 17,2013 | 11:10AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
So you are ok with unnecessarily wasting $24 Billion? Brah you are sick.
on October 17,2013 | 12:52PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Did I say that? No. What I did say was that the supposed economic impact of the government shutdown was peanuts compared to waste by Obama on things like the green jobs initiative and less than peanuts compared to the total unfunded federal liability of $86 trillion.
on October 17,2013 | 04:15PM
meat wrote:
Eh Cheese, how about an 800B dollar Stimulus package that got us NOTHING in return except bankrupt Government funded or more like Obama funded companies. You drinking the Kool-Aid with that cheese?
on October 17,2013 | 04:53PM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Actually, the stimulus package produced significant results as far as economic benefits. The sequestration is reduced the GDP by a considerable amount. Stimulus creates jobs and wealth, cuts take it away. It's that simple.

Macroecomic Advisors has produced a comprehensive estimate of the total effect of bad fiscal policies.

http://pgpf.org/special-reports/the-cost-of-crisis-driven-fiscal-policy

Their conclusion: austerity policies since the start of 2011 have cut GDP growth by about 1 percentage point per year—and the bad news got even worse in the first two quarters of this year as the sequester kicked in. Add in additional economic contraction caused by the budget/debt ceiling crisis, and the total hit to growth in 2013 might clock in at about 1.5 percentage points.


on October 17,2013 | 05:10PM
BluesBreaker wrote:
With regard to the stimulus package, the stimulus bill cost $260 billion and produced about $544 billion in extra GDP. In other words, a multiplier effect of about 2x.
on October 17,2013 | 05:18PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Even the biased Washington Post couldn't match your certainty of the effectiveness of the stimulus: of the nine "best" (chosen by them) studies of the effectiveness of the stimulus, six found it helped, but three found no to negative impact.----- None addressed the long run negative impact of the additional $800 billion in the deficit. CBO did, finding that the increased debt crowded out economic activity amounting to a significant reduction of the stimulus supposed benefit.
on October 17,2013 | 06:55PM
Pacej001 wrote:
The stimulus was a sugar high, fixing nothing. Government spending reduces the private economy as do tax increases, a couple of things most economists also know.-------- And please to spare me the lopsided analysis on the sequester, pretending it to be a Republican idea: It was dreamed up and offered by the Obama administration during the budget negotiations. Further, what economic impact do you think rising health premiums and outrageous deductibles found in Obamacare are doing for the economy? We already saw part time jobs as the vast majority of "jobs created" this year. ------- Obamacare, a huge stealth tax on the young/middle class and the business distortion created by it will be the culprits if we have a decline in economic growth.
on October 17,2013 | 06:41PM
blkdrgn wrote:
24 billion is nothing compared to how much trillion will be added to our 17 trillion deficit when our children grow up.
on October 17,2013 | 11:33AM
environmental_lady wrote:
Bring home the troops and end the war in Afghanistan. That will help cut our deficit faster than anything else. There is so much waste in the military.
on October 17,2013 | 12:46PM
meat wrote:
Military spending is less than the spending we put on public education. And yet, hows that one working out for us?
on October 17,2013 | 04:56PM
lokela wrote:
The children finally shook hands. Now let's get some real adults in there to run this country.
on October 17,2013 | 05:40AM
Malani wrote:
Like your comment lokela. Atleast you give credit to both of them.
on October 17,2013 | 07:09AM
Bdpapa wrote:
Get rid of the Tea Party on one side and the Socialist Democrats on the other. Those 2 fringe groups serve little or no purpose!
on October 17,2013 | 05:46AM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Socialist Democrats??? Where? Maybe Bernie Sanders, but he's an independent. Sadly, all we have today is corporate Democrats. This is as big a joke as calling corporate media "the liberal media". You never see the left on the news programs. Still waiting to see Naom Chomsky on Face the Nation.
on October 17,2013 | 10:45AM
sluggah wrote:
Plenty of blame to go around. What is so bad about wanting to reduce spending and waste in gov't? Basically, that's what the tea party is about. But the "Great Divider" and his minions want to spend the country into prosperity. How much sense does that make? They have some goofy ideas, but their goals are laudable. We need to cut gov't.
on October 17,2013 | 05:57AM
krusha wrote:
There's ways to do it without causing hurt to your own economy. Let's hope they begin the negotiations now instead of waiting to the last minute. The shutdown pretty much accomplished nothing for the republicans and the tea party and damaged their reputations even further. Pretty soon the Tea Party is going to change their name to the Pariah Party.
on October 17,2013 | 06:29AM
hawaiikone wrote:
Sadly, their fundamental message will be ignored, with themselves bearing most of the blame. Convictions, no matter how justified, are difficult to pass along when you try and do it with a club.
on October 17,2013 | 06:47AM
soundofreason wrote:
'There's ways to do it without causing hurt to your own economy." >>> How will reduced spending NOT hurt the economy? Doesn't change the fact that the hurting NEEDS to happen and it just doesn't seem to happen on its own.
on October 17,2013 | 07:22AM
Malani wrote:
sluggah, obamacare was the reason for the shutdowon. Obama wanted the papers to be signed first and talk afterward about making changes to obamacare. Yet, his speech this morning he never touched the subject of obamacare. Its is Obama's style to side skirt any issues he doesn't really have answers for. One big recent example when he wanted to attack Syria and found only on Nation that would help him out. The other Nations wasn't stupid to get involved and never once did obama talk about it since. In other words, no more answers so he side skirt any subject when he knows he don't have the right answers. Your right to say plent blame to go around. Start with obama.
on October 17,2013 | 07:17AM
eoe wrote:
Omabacare has been law for years, MO
on October 17,2013 | 10:32AM
frontman wrote:
Back after a 16 day paid vacation from taxpayers..........................
on October 17,2013 | 06:07AM
Malani wrote:
Hope you got to catch up all your back work at home frontman. lol
on October 17,2013 | 07:19AM
blkdrgn wrote:
No offense but I don't get the back pay. If they knew they were going to back pay why not just let them work?
on October 17,2013 | 11:38AM
MKN wrote:
@blkdrgn: They actually didn't know that they were going to be paid for being off until about a week afterwards when the House passed a resolution allowing all federal employees to receive backpay for the days that they were furloughed. Plus there's a law called the Antideficiency Act of 1870 that prohibits the federal government from working without funds from congress. The punishment for anyone violating this act is an up to 5000 dollar fine and up to 2 years in federal prison. The exception to this was the Pay Our Military Act which allowed half of the furloughed DOD workers to come back to work because their positions directly supported our uniformed military.
on October 17,2013 | 01:53PM
Maipono wrote:
Despite what the liberal press, and the gloating Great Divider, the president, this budget fight is not over. As Senator Rubio said today, this budget deal is just "kicking the can down the road....". If we do nothing, like was done yesterday, we will see a real shutdown of the country because of economic collapse. Tea Party Patriots don't want to see this happen, I'm not sure the Great Divider is concerned about this as he continues to spend like there is no tomorrow.
on October 17,2013 | 06:12AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Definition of "Great Divider" by Maipono .......A Black Guy dividing white people.
on October 17,2013 | 06:21AM
Malani wrote:
Putting words in others people's mouth coming out from yours. The fingers point back hanalei395
on October 17,2013 | 07:20AM
soundofreason wrote:
Would appear those are YOUR words.
on October 17,2013 | 07:22AM
hanalei395 wrote:
"The Great Divider" ...... First used and defined by the racist Tea Party.
on October 17,2013 | 07:40AM
soundofreason wrote:
Don't see how "black" was introduced - other than by you.
on October 17,2013 | 08:17PM
Maipono wrote:
Brada Hanalei, when are people going to get over the fact that you can disagree with Obama and not be racist? Maybe you should rise above that as well.
on October 17,2013 | 08:30AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Maybe not you. But you were using a favorite expression of the racist Tea Party against Obama.
on October 17,2013 | 08:47AM
TLehel wrote:
You say the Tea Party is racist, yet you still provide no proof for such accusations. "The Great Divider" is used because Obama has been using race to divide people. Obama has never been fighting "the race war". He's been trying to make everyone feel like they're racist for the dumbest stuff, like disagreeing with what Obama says. I've never heard the word racist used so much in my entire life. People naturally think that because Obama is a president of color he is trying to squash racism, yet look. Now more than ever are people called racist and made to feel racist for things that aren't even remotely racist. Jeez
on October 17,2013 | 10:42AM
hanalei395 wrote:
FOR ONE .......Tea Party icon, supporter, "Joe the Plumber", says, "America needs a white Republican President".
on October 17,2013 | 11:13AM
TLehel wrote:
Link me.
on October 17,2013 | 11:21AM
EightOEight wrote:
Need more links on Tea Party rascism? I can spend all day looking for more. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2457291/America-needs-white-Republican-president-Joe-Plumber-causes-outrage-racist-post.html http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/palin-and-confederate-flag-rally-tea-party-vandals-piling-barrycades-at-white-house/politics/2013/10/13/76802#.UmByJMu9KK0 http://americablog.com/2013/10/tea-partyers-shout-racist-slurs-white-house-cops-looks-like-something-kenya.html http://mag.newsweek.com/2010/04/25/are-tea-partiers-racist.html
on October 17,2013 | 01:34PM
nalogirl wrote:
So you base that the Tea Party people are racist because of a remark by "Joe the Plumber?" You make no sense.
on October 17,2013 | 03:09PM
TLehel wrote:
@EightOEight You're kidding me, right? Let me break down what's wrong with those 3 articles. First one: You can't use a puppet of a politician like John McCain to speak for the entire Republican party. I mean seriously, this guy is a plumber. Taking his opinion into account is like picking any other person from the general population and asking their opinion. Some people are just bigots, and that guy isn't a politician so your point is invalid. Second one: Once again the media spins everything. A few people carrying confederate flags does not represent everyone's beliefs. Compared to the amount of people there, those "Confederates" were minority. Also, closing these war memorials, which are PRIVATELY FUNDED, was ridiculous to begin with. Keeping the vets out is entirely a ploy by Obama. Third one: NPR, nuff said.
on October 17,2013 | 03:10PM
EightOEight wrote:
Sorry, it's not just one fake plumber. Racists are a large component of the Tea Party, they're not outliers or anomalies. So you can make all the denials you want or dismiss the sources, there's enough out there to convince me. http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/10/the_tea_party_is_racist.html http://www.phillyimc.org/en/university-washington-study-concretely-links-tea-party-members-authoritarianism-racism-homophobia http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?id=8078594 http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/07/tea-party-express-racist-letter http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/14/racist-obama-t-shirts-big-hit-with-tea-party-conventioneers/ http://politicalirony.com/2010/04/27/the-tea-party-is-racist/ http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/07/white_pride_group_urges_tea_pa.php http://www.inquisitr.com/170437/tea-party-obama-family-assassination/ http://chuckcurrie.blogs.com/chuck_currie/2010/07/tea-party-incites-hate-racism-and-sarah-palin-defends-it-all.html http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/the_tea_party_its_worse_than_you_think_20101007
on October 17,2013 | 04:56PM
kolohepalu wrote:
So you missed the african witch doctor caricatures, too, huh? And the confederate flags?
on October 17,2013 | 09:19PM
kolohepalu wrote:
The fact is, most of the people that have a problem with Obama hate him because of his color and/or background- ask your typical teabagger policy questions and they have absolutely no clue- it's all about, "oh, he's muslim, he's from Kenya, he's a communist." They just don't have the guts to be openly prejudiced, so they make up reasons to be against him. Pathetic that this is a good chunk of the american electorate.
on October 17,2013 | 09:18PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Right.
on October 17,2013 | 09:11PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Please you are now quoting Marco Rubio! What a loser. The Tea Party wanted to destroy the nation's credit, 144 Republicans in the house voted to default. Never forget that. Republicans in general and the Tea Party is particular is the party of default.
on October 17,2013 | 12:54PM
firewizard wrote:
our government has become not one for the people and by the people , but one for special interest and personal goals. If we continue on this path, we will follow other governments in history who had also embarked on such paths of self interests in governing. REVOLUTION, CHANGE, GET RID OF THOSE LIVING IN IVORY TOWERS!
on October 17,2013 | 06:22AM
mikethenovice wrote:
President Barack Obama is like a God. Good Obama Democrat.
on October 17,2013 | 06:26AM
frontman wrote:
Puke now or later????
on October 17,2013 | 06:57AM
Malani wrote:
And the Word of God tells us not to bow down to anyone who represent "like a god."
on October 17,2013 | 07:23AM
mikethenovice wrote:
Pretty sad to see GOP Ted Cruz's tears dripping into his ice cream cone last night. Ted go to bed.
on October 17,2013 | 06:27AM
mikethenovice wrote:
Republican Paul Ryan lost in Nov., 2012. He also lost last night again with the rest of the GOP who converted to a Democrat for a day.
on October 17,2013 | 06:29AM
JAFO wrote:
Thank you congress for the paid vacation!
on October 17,2013 | 06:53AM
HD36 wrote:
Why even have a debt ceiling? We've never not raised it. It only draws attention to our insolvency. By going deeper into debt, it signals to foreign creditor that we will never end QE, and will print our way out. The evidence seems to bear this out as the dollar index is getting hammered today as it breaks below 80. Our creditors are taking major steps to prepare replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currecncy. China in particular has just implemented a bilateral trade agreement with Europe to bypass the dollar in trade. Maybe we can forestall the collapse a few years longer if we just permanantly raise the debt ceiling and extend quantitative easing forever.
on October 17,2013 | 07:25AM
soundofreason wrote:
And now, the correction will be compounded. Easier to pay off your credit cards when you've been living off of them for 3 months than it is when you've been living off of them for 6 months. And it is MORE than twice as hard at 6 months due to the interest on top of interest factor. Compounded difficulty. WHY we can't get a balanced budget amendment on is beyond me. We all have to do this as citizens and when we don't.........bankruptcy. Why doesn't our govt? Why do we ALLOW it to be this way?
on October 17,2013 | 07:28AM
HD36 wrote:
One way to look at the national debt is to compare us with a country that has a surplus like Norway. The government of Norway holds foreign reserves and has a budget surplus. In other words their government is holding over $50k for each citizen in assets. In the US each citizen is in debt via the US Government over $100k
on October 17,2013 | 07:51AM
loquaciousone wrote:
Thank you TParty Republicans for the extra two week paid vacation >> Signed: Furloughed Federal Workers.
on October 17,2013 | 07:53AM
HD36 wrote:
You're welcome! The economy couldn't function without all the federal government employees. We need to expand the government, Soviet Union style. All the food at the grocery stores, computers, etc.. we owe it all to government employees. If they hadn't built he highways decades ago, none of this would be possible. Why have 1 private sector employee do the job that 10 federal workers can do? We increase employment by hiring more government employees, and we can tax them from their paycheck that they receive from tax payers. Instead of a bulldozer, we can hire 100 federal workers with shovels.
on October 17,2013 | 09:54AM
TLehel wrote:
Made my day. Sweet, thick sarcasm. Love it.
on October 17,2013 | 10:46AM
seaborn wrote:
From the beginning, the Republicans should have taken money from the over-bloated defense budget, not the peoples' insurance program, and the whole mess would've been avoided.
on October 17,2013 | 08:19AM
aionokea43 wrote:
What a JOKE. Federal workers furloughed got back pay. They were off the job, if they wanted their pay, they should have filed for VACATION. Its the taxpayers who paid for this fiasco with no production. I can now understand the concept of the Boston Tea Party.
on October 17,2013 | 09:07AM
BluesBreaker wrote:
They were locked out. Big difference.
on October 17,2013 | 10:46AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Yep they were just collateral damage in a political conflict, that's why they get their pay.
on October 17,2013 | 02:58PM
nalogirl wrote:
And state workers were just collateral damage for years of furloughs?
on October 17,2013 | 03:11PM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Yep.
on October 17,2013 | 05:20PM
konag43 wrote:
increase park fees so they pay for themselves then you wouldn't have a need for shut downs
on October 17,2013 | 10:22AM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Looking at the mainstream media (MSM) wrap ups today, one might believe that this was a "bipartisan agreement". It was.....in the same way that Lee and Grant reached an agreement at the Appomattox Courthouse in 1865. It was a complete surrender on the part of Republicans. All that was "negotiated" were the terms of that surrender.
on October 17,2013 | 10:47AM
Pacej001 wrote:
You confuse the winning of a battle with the winning of the war, which isn't over. The war will be decided in 2014 and, given the disastrous Obamacare kick off, things could look a good bit different by election time.
on October 17,2013 | 11:13AM
TLehel wrote:
Yeah I think soon enough people will start seeing how "affordable" the ACA is. I wish we could resolve this now, but this short extension will at least give people a little taste of what's coming. Then when February comes around people will understand what needs to be done.
on October 17,2013 | 11:35AM
BluesBreaker wrote:
I love to read the fanciful musings of my right wing friends. Let's take a look at every other country that has provided universal health care. In each case, it was highly controversial when introduced but after a short time was widely liked by the public. Even Margaret Thatcher, the ultimate Tory, wouldn't even consider repealing the laws that set up England's health care system, which is truly a socialist system, unlike Obamacare, which keeps all the private sector components we have now, insurance companies, physicians, private hospitals (which is why it's inferior).
on October 17,2013 | 05:27PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, the thing Obama care doesn't do is control cost, other than by price control and rationing. These last two are plainly known to economists as "losers" because they create scarcity and declining quality. You may have missed the news that a couple of those countries with government centric medical care are experiencing significant problems paying for them, France, definitely, and the UK as well where the quality of care is abysmal. Even our Canadian friends are having their problems.------ So, failure to deliver cost control AND maintain quality and access, will be Obamacare's fatal flaw. This on top of the fatal flaws in our other entitlement programs, will break the country fiscally speaking AND it will still leave tens of million without medical insurance (CBO projection).------------ Now, before you suggest a right-wing, cold hearted indifference to the medical needs of the poor, medical reform is needed, but if we're to have a future, it needs to be market/competition driven so as to drive down cost and maintain or improve quality. We have done this in every other aspect of our culture, it seems, so why not medical care?
on October 17,2013 | 06:33PM
blkdrgn wrote:
Just remember folks that this fiasco is not over. It's just delayed until 2014.
on October 17,2013 | 11:44AM
Publicbraddah wrote:
All foreign terrorist groups have to do is bide their time. We will destroy America from within and they don't have to lift a finger.
on October 17,2013 | 11:45AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
You must hate America. I think our best days are ahead of us. Won't be easy for sure. We continue to be the most innovative country in the world, and our political system even with all its flaws exposed over the past few weeks, is still the envy of many. We will have our squabbles along the way but we will certainly endure. The one thing I do hope you are correct on is the terrorist groups biding their time waiting for us to destroy ourselves. Sorry not going to happen, they can wait all they want and that will be fine with me.
on October 17,2013 | 03:02PM
geo333 wrote:
The Democrats theme song "If it's free . . its me . . . if I have to pay . . . no-way . . . but where the hell is my is my free cell phone and God Bless ACORN!
on October 17,2013 | 07:02PM
EightOEight wrote:
Another Tpublican tool using the free Obama phone story which has been debunked on several fact checking sites. But I get it...Tpublicans don't let facts get in the way of the truth. http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/cellphone.asp
on October 17,2013 | 07:32PM
Anonymous wrote:
I tried to tell you this before. Everyone knows about the obama phone thing by now. However, in the months before the election, no denial was heard from obama headquarters until sept. 29. Even then, the rebuttal left out half the story, namely the 25 million spent by the FCC in early 2012 for subsidizing low income cell phone service. So the whole phone story worked out pretty well for Barry. After all, perception is far more important than fact, and the video of that lady telling all her friends to get a free phone certainly did it's job.
on October 17,2013 | 09:17PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News