Quantcast
  

Thursday, April 24, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 430 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Government shutdown: No progress on ending stalemate

By Andrew Taylor

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 10:15 p.m. HST, Oct 01, 2013


WASHINGTON >> The political stare-down on Capitol Hill shows no signs of easing, leaving federal government functions -- from informational websites, to national parks, to processing veterans' claims -- in limbo from coast to coast. Lawmakers in both parties ominously suggested the partial shutdown might last for weeks.

A funding cutoff for much of the government began Tuesday as a Republican effort to kill or delay the nation's health care law stalled action on a short-term, traditionally routine spending bill. Republicans pivoted to a strategy to try to reopen the government piecemeal but were unable to immediately advance the idea in the House.

Lew says final debt tools are being used

WASHINGTON >> Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew says that he has now begun using all the extraordinary measures at his disposal to avoid hitting the debt ceiling.

In a letter to congressional leaders late Tuesday, Lew said that he started to use the final three bookkeeping tools available to provide borrowing room for paying the nation’s bills. Lew said that there are no other “legal and prudent” options for extending the borrowing authority.

Lew said that his assessment of the date he will run out of maneuvering room had not changed from last week. Lew told Congress on Sept. 25 that the extraordinary measures would be exhausted no later than Oct. 17 and at that time the government would have about $30 billion in cash on hand.

———

Martin Crutsinger, Associated Press

National parks like Yellowstone and Alcatraz Island were shuttered, government websites went dark and hundreds of thousands of nonessential workers reported for a half-day to fill out time cards, hand in their government cellphones and laptops, and change voicemail messages to gird for a deepening shutdown.

The Defense Department said it wasn't clear that service academies would be able to participate in sports, putting Saturday's Army vs. Boston College and Air Force vs. Navy football games on hold, with a decision to be made Thursday.

Even as many government agencies closed their doors, health insurance exchanges that are at the core of President Barack Obama's health care law were up and running, taking applications for coverage that would start Jan. 1.

"Shutting down our government doesn't accomplish their stated goal," Obama said of his Republican opponents at a Rose Garden event hailing implementation of the law. "The Affordable Care Act is a law that passed the House; it passed the Senate. The Supreme Court ruled it constitutional. It was a central issue in last year's election. It is settled, and it is here to stay. And because of its funding sources, it's not impacted by a government shutdown."

GOP leaders faulted the Senate for killing a House request to open official negotiations on the temporary spending bill. Senate Democrats led by Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada insist that Republicans give in and pass their simple, straightforward temporary funding bill, known as a continuing resolution.

"None of us want to be in a shutdown. And we're here to say to the Senate Democrats, 'Come and talk to us,"' House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said as GOP lawmakers designated to negotiate the shutdown legislation met among themselves before cameras and reporters. "At each and every turn, the Senate Democrats refused to even discuss these proposals."

Late Tuesday, House Republicans sought passage of legislation aimed at reopening small slices of the government. The bills covered the national parks, the Veterans Affairs Department and city services in Washington, D.C., such as garbage collection funded with local tax revenues.

The move presented Democrats with politically challenging votes but they rejected the idea, saying it was unfair to pick winners and losers as federal employees worked without a guarantee of getting paid and the effects of the partial shutdown rippled through the country and the economy. The White House promised a veto.

Since the measures were brought before the House under expedited procedures requiring a two-thirds vote to pass, House Democrats scuttled them, despite an impassioned plea by Democratic D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, who recalled that in the last shutdown 17 years ago she prevailed on House Speaker Newt Gingrich to win an exemption to keep the D.C. government running.

"I must support this piecemeal approach," Norton said. "What would you do if your local budget was here?"

But other Democrats said Republicans shouldn't be permitted to choose which agencies should open and which remain shut.

"This piecemeal approach will only prolong a shutdown," Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., said.

Republicans said there could be more votes Wednesday, perhaps to allow the National Institutes of Health to continue pediatric cancer research. The NIH's famed hospital of last resort wasn't admitting new patients because of the shutdown. Dr. Francis Collins, agency director, estimated that each week the shutdown lasts would force the facility to turn away about 200 patients, 30 of them children, who want to enroll in studies of experimental treatments. Patients already at the hospital are permitted to stay.

Republicans also said the House may vote anew on the three measures that failed Tuesday, this time under normal rules requiring a simple majority to pass.

Republicans hoped such votes would create pressure on Democrats to drop their insistence that they won't negotiate on the spending bill or an even more important subsequent measure, required in a couple of weeks or so, to increase the government's borrowing limit.

There were suggestions from leaders in both parties that the shutdown could last for weeks and grow to encompass the measure to increase the debt limit. "This is now all together," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said.

"It's untenable not to negotiate," House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said. "I've always believed it was the debt limit that would be the forcing action."

While GOP leaders seemed determined to press on, some Republicans conceded they might bear the brunt of any public anger over the shutdown  -- and seemed resigned to an eventual surrender in their latest bruising struggle with Obama.

Democrats have "all the leverage and we've got none," Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said.

Rep. Scott Rigell of Virginia said it was time to pass legislation reopening the government without any health care impediments.

"The shutdown is hurting my district -- including the military and the hardworking men and women who have been furloughed due to the defense sequester," he said.

But that was far from the majority view among House Republicans, where tea party-aligned lawmakers prevailed more than a week ago on a reluctant leadership to link federal funding legislation to the health care law. In fact, some conservatives fretted the GOP had already given in too much.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 430 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(430)
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.
serious wrote:
As I recall from previous government shutdowns, the federal workers are reimbursed by our politicians for their lost wages so the only results of a shutdown are free vacations for government workers and inconveniences for the working class.
on September 30,2013 | 04:12AM
Charliegrunt wrote:
The shutdown will include IOUs for military pay and veterans' benefits. Like the military interviewed on CNN said, "How do you tell the electric company that you will send them an IOU?" Many of the military who will receive IOUs are in Afghanistan. Many of the veterans receiving benefits are for wounds and injuries received while serving. I have four Purple Hearts, and 100% disability and combat related special compensation. What happened to our contract with the government? Can the active military walk off the job until they get paid? Of course not. A contract is suppose to be an agreement between two parties. Why is the government allowed to renege on their part, while the military and veterans are not allowed to renege on theirs. ALL MILITARY AND VETERANS INSIST THAT BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS, RECEIVE IOUs JUST LIKE YOU DO, AND THAT THEY VOTE THE SAME FOR THE PRESIDENT, INCLUDING HIS VACATIONS. IF NOT, VOTE AGAINST THEM IN THE NEXT ELECTION.
on September 30,2013 | 09:01AM
sailfish1 wrote:
Come on! Are military people so irresponsible that they don't have enough savings to pay their electric bill? People have always been told to have savings to carry them for at least 6 months.
on September 30,2013 | 11:23AM
DiverDave wrote:
Correct sailfish, Charlie is just fear mongering. "The sky is going to fall, the sky is going to fall".
on September 30,2013 | 12:00PM
OldDiver wrote:
Once against the Tea Party rears it's irrational head. Only the insane are able to justify their irresponsible behavior.
on October 1,2013 | 06:20AM
jayz43 wrote:
We can thank our inept Dear Leader, always leading from his behind: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/carolplattliebau/2013/40/30/obama-i-shouldnt-have-to-offer-anything-n1713775?utm_source=facebook
on October 1,2013 | 06:57AM
false wrote:
There are enough Democrat and Republican votes in the House to reopen the government. Republican Speaker John Andrew Boehner is stopping an up or down vote to please the thirty or so Tea Party Republicans. That is called insane.
on October 1,2013 | 12:01PM
meat wrote:
The House, held by Republicans, offered 4 compromises to the Senate, held by Democrats, only to have Harry Reid REJECT all 4. Whose not compromising?
on October 1,2013 | 05:37PM
hanalei395 wrote:
The losers (Republicans) want to "compromise" with the winner (Obama) and pretend they are also "winners".
on October 1,2013 | 07:57PM
AhiPoke wrote:
A true leader, not a divider, would be able to reach reasonable compromise. Remember, this is a man wanting to negotiate with our enemies but he won't speak to republicans?
on October 1,2013 | 07:34AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
I am not a fan of Obama but I believe the fault on this one lies on the Republicans. They are trying to set precedent by holding the budget hostage in order to undo what was already voted on and passed in the Senate and House and passed Supreme Court. In this case, the President did the right thing in not allowing this to set precedence. If we allow this precedence it will encourage future challenges to measures that have already been voted upon and cause a shutdown every time.
on October 1,2013 | 10:08AM
false wrote:
There is NO reasoning with the INSANE.
on October 1,2013 | 10:12AM
Kahu Matu wrote:
Obama is unwilling to negotiate until push comes to shove, but even then he won't negotiate. He is so arrogant that he is just going to VETO anything that doesn't fit with his ideologies. Wish the Senate was Republican to actually get the President to work with government instead of opposing and dividing. Just have to wait until the next election when the mainland will help to balance our government, because we don't get it in our Democratically controlled state.
on October 1,2013 | 11:01AM
bsdetection wrote:
A compromise is possible when both sides have something to give up. "We'll let you have your baby back after we cut off one of its legs" isn't a compromise. Tea party hostage takers don't have anything to give, but they want the President to give up a law that was passed by both houses of Congress, signed into law, ruled Constitutional by the Supreme Court, and endorsed again by voters who re-elected the President in a crushing defeat to Romney's call for repeal of the ACA. This is nothing more than an attempt by the Constitution-waving Tea Partiers to overthrow the democratic process; instead of waving their copies of the Constitution in the air, they should read it.
on October 1,2013 | 05:45PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
To put it in simplistic, layman terms, the Republican dominated House drafted a bill to specifically defund Obamacare--while the Democrat dominated Senate's bill was written to strip the House of the provision to defund Obamacare. Both House and Senate called each others bluff and engaged in a high stakes game of chicken. No one flinched as the clock struck twelve--so the result is the train-wreck in front of us. The only way this could have been avoided is if President Obama does a 180 and goes against the wishes of the majority--which he will not do--and defund Obamacare. This blame shifting is misplaced in my humble opinion.
on October 1,2013 | 06:26PM
Malani wrote:
Yeah, just like the insane who almost put us through a war with Syria.
on October 1,2013 | 07:44AM
beachbum11 wrote:
Look at Your leader that you have before pointing fingers. Your views alway seem so one side. Brain washed or brain de
on October 1,2013 | 07:58AM
aomohoa wrote:
Ridiculous comment. Both sides are acting like children.
on October 1,2013 | 08:51AM
aomohoa wrote:
As usual you have raised your "irrational head" OldDiver. LOL
on October 1,2013 | 09:11AM
false wrote:
It called POLITICS. LOL
on October 1,2013 | 10:12AM
false wrote:
You got ever so right Driver. What are our Hawaii Republican's saying, not that it matters.
on October 1,2013 | 10:11AM
meat wrote:
Democrats caused the shutdown, that's what we're saying. The house, held by Republicans, offered 4 compromises to the Senate, only to have Harry Reid REJECT all 4. Whose not compromising?
on October 1,2013 | 05:47PM
kgolfinghawaii wrote:
Actually only the insane think we need a government this big.
on October 1,2013 | 01:31PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Obama said he will balance the budget. Did these words ever cross his lips these last few days or weeks? Does he even have a budget?
on October 1,2013 | 04:20PM
lynnh wrote:
Excuse me, but have you even bothered to understand what was in the last bill the was voted down by the democratic senate??? If you bothered to actually do some listening and reading, the Bill put forward by the house said "that the house would agree to fund Obama care "if" and only if they agreed to throw out the exempt status of congress and large business (who supported Obama's campaign got a exemption from Obama himself), and have to follow the same law that every other American is subjected to." "YOUR" democrats REFUSED to give up their exempt status! If this doesn't open your eyes, then nothing every will. IT PROVES that your democrats in Washington care NOTHING about anyone but THEMSELVES! It PROVES that they don't believe they should have to follow the same laws as everyone else. It PROVES that they themselves don't want to have to rely on Obama Care for their health services. It PROVES that they will do anything and say anything to keep themselves in control of YOUR life. Wake the ^%$# up! Go do some reading before you open your uneducated mouth. The Bill is right online for all to read! It shows exactly who shut down the government and why. So tired of your stupidity!
on October 1,2013 | 06:28PM
frontman wrote:
If your not a socialist, it's pretty clear they are fighting for a Americans that won't bow down to obama
on October 1,2013 | 06:40PM
64hoo wrote:
don't blame the tea party, everyones at fault from the senate to the congress all parties, quit thinking and blaming somebody else because that makes you a liberal with a mental disorder
on October 1,2013 | 07:09PM
pcman wrote:
IRT sailfish on military. Everyone in the federal government who works today will get paid. Even the ones who are furloughed should have been ordered by the President as the leader of the executive branch to work with a promise that they will be paid. No branch of Congress cut the pay of the feds. Obama did not lead when he should have gotten Congress to compromise. His solution was the shutdown instead of compromising. Put the blame where the shutdown belongs. The Congress does not lead. The President does.
on October 1,2013 | 07:02AM
Leinanij wrote:
Compromise? What do you mean by that? How is he supposed to change the fact that Congress voted on Obamacare and passed it? Republicans don't know the meaning of the word compromise.
on October 1,2013 | 12:52PM
mischal wrote:
Seriously? I think the GOP offer of delaying the personal mandate for the American people for a year, just as he (Obama) has given exemptions to his buddies, is only fair. How can these Democrats continue to give themselves exemptions, a 72% subsidy for their health care paid for by the taxpayer, and deny a year`s delay for the rest of us. Reid won`t even consider a compromise! How self serving can the Democrats be?! Have you seen the list of companies dropping employees? Out of 900,000 jobs created this year, only 25,000 are full time! Check out the huge deductibles. If a poor person can`t afford decent health insurance, it`s rough to pay off a $5,000 deductible. The ACA is a disaster and it has just begun. Remember the GOP was not invited to those closed door sessions when this bill was drawn up. All credit goes to the Dems for that!
on October 1,2013 | 05:26PM
meat wrote:
The House, held by Republicans ,offered 4 compromises to the Senate, held by Democrats, only to have Harry Reid REJECT all 4. Whose not compromising?
on October 1,2013 | 05:33PM
localguy wrote:
sailfish1 - You are completely missing the point. Congress is considered "Essential Government Personnel" so their pay continues in full. They have no, zero, concern for those with mortgages, healthcare, or other monthly bills to pay. Why should they be paid for willfully failing to do their job, a once a year budget? And of course you have 8 months pay in savings as recommended by Suze Orman so you can survive right? I thought not. Rookie posters......
on September 30,2013 | 01:09PM
Malani wrote:
We only know what we read or hear from the news. There is so much more we don't hear or for that matter understand all that happening in Congress. This president expects everything he says should move in his directions and when he is stopped its the Republicans fault. Everthing needs balance.
on October 1,2013 | 08:06AM
aomohoa wrote:
Our president is a socialist and and wants to be a dictator too. LOL
on October 1,2013 | 08:54AM
Kahu Matu wrote:
He holds and will use the power of Veto to get his ideological demands met. Yes, he is a dictator holding the government hostage.
on October 1,2013 | 11:02AM
carolm wrote:
I agree. He doesn't know how to compromise as a good leader should. It's his way or no way. Until this day, there is no budget.
on October 1,2013 | 12:01PM
mokebla wrote:
Braddah, you can't teach or change stip*d!
on October 1,2013 | 08:15AM
Hawaiians wrote:
Sailfish you are so missing the point.
on September 30,2013 | 02:04PM
pcman wrote:
IRT Hawaiians on the point. Sailfish is right on. It's the Pres who does not get the point. He can direct the feds to work because pay was not being debated or cut. The Pres does not realize that Obamacare is the cause of the shutdown. What a dolt. If he had led a compromise on the Obamacare, the feds would have been at work.
on October 1,2013 | 07:08AM
aomohoa wrote:
But Obamacare is all he has. LOL He is a terrible President and a major disappointment, even to many of my friends who thought he was the new hope of the nation. What a failure..
on October 1,2013 | 08:58AM
2disgusted2 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on October 1,2013 | 07:44AM
aomohoa wrote:
I bet if you look at what you spend you waste money like most people who say they live paycheck to paycheck. Like the ones that are so poor, but stop at Starbucks every single day.
on October 1,2013 | 09:00AM
mokebla wrote:
Really saifish, did you serve your country? I did, can barely make it and they don't get food stamps.
on October 1,2013 | 08:13AM
aomohoa wrote:
People live in the moment now a days. They don't save they live on credit. These are the Millennium people. It's all about me.
on October 1,2013 | 08:50AM
1coconut wrote:
Gee sailfish what rock have you been hiding under. Try living on the monthly earnings of the military members and you would not post such crazy posts. Try cut off the wages of any working class family in Hawaii and see if they have enough money to last 6 months. You are out of touch with reality.
on October 1,2013 | 10:47AM
Anonymous wrote:
Go see a recruiter and show us how to live on the salary of lower ranking enlisted.
on October 1,2013 | 02:51PM
localguy wrote:
Don't get mad, get even. Write these baboozes and don't make it sweet. Tell them exactly what you feel, call them out for accepting their pay while taking ours. God help them if they ever come back home, they will not do well.
on September 30,2013 | 01:06PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
The GOP frays, dissolve,fall apart,melt,erode,weaken,fall down,limp,etc.etc.
on September 30,2013 | 02:54PM
frontman wrote:
I know this is a bias left wing rag but for once tell the truth................. Democrats are shutting down the government not the Republicans.
on September 30,2013 | 04:35PM
grantos wrote:
pass the kool-aid
on September 30,2013 | 06:45PM
IEBuzzin wrote:
And Romney won the election. Lolo.
on September 30,2013 | 06:51PM
lee1957 wrote:
The shutdown is truly a bipartisan effort.
on September 30,2013 | 06:53PM
pcman wrote:
IRT lee on bipartisan. This is true. The shut down is also a lack of leadership by the president. No part of Congress can lead. That is a lie, as usual.
on October 1,2013 | 07:12AM
aomohoa wrote:
All of them are acting like a bunch of children. That is why the Congress approval rate is 10%. All of them are a bunch of losers!
on October 1,2013 | 09:02AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Wow ... which world do you occupy? It's not this one.
on September 30,2013 | 09:03PM
soundofreason wrote:
They've already agreed to fund the govt. Just not Obamacare. Mainly because it's not the Obamacare we were all told it was. Remember O'bamacare? The program where nobody's rates were going to go up? The one with the 4,600 deductible? The one with 40% co pay? The one that would NOT cause employers to cut workers hours? The one where the president recently admitted that it DID cause some taxes to go up? Americans were SOLD one package and asked to fund something else. But look who I'm talking to - residents of a city who voted for a 3 billion dollar rail and do nothing as costs START to skyrocket with the FIVE billion dollar being built.
on October 1,2013 | 06:19AM
jayz43 wrote:
But can we still keep our present health plan?! What about our doctor?! What does "PERIOD" at the end of a statement really mean?
on October 1,2013 | 07:03AM
Anonymous wrote:
Call the Health exchange and find out for yourself, instead of relying on all the disinformation floating around about 'Obamacare!'
on October 1,2013 | 03:59PM
Malani wrote:
soundofreason, think back how the American public was fooled believing they were all going to be covered with medical insurance to no hardship to their wallets. Thats what happens when only half truths are given.
on October 1,2013 | 08:18AM
Anonymous wrote:
Malani: If you had actually read up on the ACA legislation, you would know that it was not designed to cover 'everyone' with health insurance, but to help those who 'DID NOT' have any health insurance at all! Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on what the ACA actually does, by talking to someone from the Health exchange; it's what I am doing, to keep myself informed about 'Obamacare' and what it can do for me, when it comes to healthcare coverage..........
on October 1,2013 | 04:04PM
Leinanij wrote:
And we have rail for the same reasons. Has it stopped? You think you may sound like reason but in essence you are lying down on the rail tracks waiting for it to run right over you.
on October 1,2013 | 12:55PM
Malani wrote:
I agree with you frontman.
on October 1,2013 | 08:07AM
aomohoa wrote:
Thank you for your common sense. We have a lot of radicals here. LOL
on October 1,2013 | 09:03AM
Anonymous wrote:
Who holds the speaker's chair in the House of Representatives? Oh that's right John Boehner, a republican, who has decided to 'hold the federal government' hostage to his party's incendiary ideology to try and stop/defund the 'Affordable Care Act/Obamacare' before it became fully operational! I ask 'what are they scared of?' The success or failure of the 'affordable care act' will be up to the American people who are not covered by healthcare, but the GoP continued to push the 'fear mongering button' and spew disinformation to derail the ACA legislation that was signed into LAW! Another election cycle is nearing and the American people will be voting their displeasure for those who they have perceived to have done them wrong in Congress!
on October 1,2013 | 03:55PM
mischal wrote:
In the meantime, people are losing their jobs or put on part time status. Companies are already saying they will have to pass those costs onto the consumer. How do they hold on until another election? With half the country living off govt. sudsidies, good chance the same fiscally irresponsible fools will be reelected. And, to add insult to injury, this administration has exempted itself, Congress, and all his buddies from the program!! I guess the rest of us are supposed to just suck it up.
on October 1,2013 | 05:38PM
jayz43 wrote:
I agree with you Anonymous, too much disinformation So, does it mean I CAN keep my health plan and CAN keep my doctor?! And if I'm paying $1,800 MORE for my health insurance, do I get a rebate check for the $2,500 Obama said I should save on Obamacare?
on October 2,2013 | 01:01AM
meat wrote:
The House, held by Republicans, offered 4 compromises to the Senate, held by Democrats, only to have Harry Reid REJECT all 4. And thats the truth.
on October 1,2013 | 05:55PM
UHFAN1984 wrote:
Charlie they will still get paid as always and make us the pawns in their game if this was real life they would all be fired for failer to perform they duty. wait we can vote them out of office but the uneducated voters keep putting them back in. and by the way check out the 27 amendment says congress can't recieve a pay cut.
on September 30,2013 | 07:58PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
The article says the military will not be affected however I agree that congress and the executive branch should not get paid either if federal workers don't get paid.
on September 30,2013 | 09:01PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
My understanding is that special legislation was passed for active duty military to continue receiving pay. Income support and benefits for veterans who are already receiving them should continue as well. Because of the shutdown, the processing of new claims and requests for changes/amendments to current benefit recipients has stopped which is unfortunate.
on October 1,2013 | 08:48AM
Ronin006 wrote:
You are wrong, Charliegrunt. The military will continue to receive their pay. No IOUs. The house and senate approved a separate spending bill to fund the military.
on October 1,2013 | 10:51AM
niimi wrote:
Didn't the Republicans just offer the exception of funding the entire military? The Democrats declined that one.
on October 1,2013 | 04:58PM
serious wrote:
I got my pay today--military retired--10/2.
on October 2,2013 | 04:37AM
hanamauka wrote:
What are the local (Hawaii) elected GOP doing to influence the national GOP agenda? Let's hear from them. Thank you.
on September 30,2013 | 12:19PM
localguy wrote:
That sound of silence is what they are doing. Absolutely nothing. What they always do, nothing.
on September 30,2013 | 01:10PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Waait a minute. I saw Mazie standing before a camera on the news today. That's doing something, right, in a proof-of-life sort of way.
on September 30,2013 | 04:48PM
soundofreason wrote:
lol
on October 1,2013 | 06:20AM
false wrote:
And Brian was still trying to find his way to the toilet.
on October 1,2013 | 03:36PM
soundofreason wrote:
They say one should do what one does best. So, yeah......nothing.
on October 1,2013 | 06:20AM
Malani wrote:
And the ones that only open their mouths caused American to go broke.
on October 1,2013 | 08:22AM
serious wrote:
You got to be kidding---where is there a elected Republican in Hawaii??? But, at least the GOP in WA has some views, the Democrats all vote as Reid tells them.
on September 30,2013 | 01:11PM
poidragon wrote:
Sorry there, Serious, but the GoP do the same thing with even less of 'use of common sense' as they tow the party line, while the American people are left holding the bag and suffering from Congressional irrationality!
on September 30,2013 | 02:09PM
Pacej001 wrote:
That would be "toe" the party line. Meanwhile, I guess the democrats being absolutely unified by the shambling wreckage of Obamacare could also be called "towing" the party line.
on September 30,2013 | 04:49PM
jayz43 wrote:
You mean all of our democrat representatives voted for this Obamacare disaster?!
on October 1,2013 | 07:07AM
Malani wrote:
Every democrate did. lol
on October 1,2013 | 08:25AM
mischal wrote:
And still support it, ignoring the devastating fallout. In the end, Obama Care will be more crushing to our economy than any short lived govt. shutdown.
on October 1,2013 | 05:48PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
hahahahahahahaha
on September 30,2013 | 09:03PM
beachbum11 wrote:
There is no local GOP. Only demorats
on October 1,2013 | 08:04AM
Leinanij wrote:
Sure there is. We get POG, the backwards GOP.
on October 1,2013 | 12:56PM
manapua19 wrote:
Thats where youre wrong. People who are declared essential workers still must report to work during a shutdown. When a budget is finally passed, those workers will be paid retroactively for the hours they put in. The rest of the govt workers who are classified as non essential will be on furlough status and not be paid at all. So no it is not a free paid vacation.
on September 30,2013 | 12:29PM
serious wrote:
In all due respect---look at history, they will be paid retroactive--they always have.
on September 30,2013 | 01:12PM
localguy wrote:
manapua19 - No, that is where you are wrong. Essential workers are still paid. If they are not paid they cannot come to work. If they did and something happened, accident, they would not be covered as an on the job accident/workmen's compensation. Where did you go to school? In the Nei? Need to do better research. As for those on furlough for FY13, those who didn't work days this year have lost that pay for good. You didn't know that either did you?
on September 30,2013 | 01:13PM
manapua19 wrote:
localguy - Really? Because Im looking at the handout OPM sent me which states, "Agencies will incur obligations to pay for services performed by excepted employees during a lapse in appropriations, and those employees will be paid when congress passes and the president signs a new appropriation or continuing resolution." I didnt say those essential employees wouldnt get paid at all, I said they would be paid eventually. Further, "congress will determine whether furloughed employees receive pay for the furlough." Also, not once did i mention the employees who were already furloughed earlier this year due to sequestration. I was talking about the ones who will be furloughed now. Maybe you need to do better research before knocking on someone else.
on September 30,2013 | 11:46PM
frontman wrote:
Don't you just love government workers.......................why would they bite obama's hand when he feeds them very well.
on September 30,2013 | 04:38PM
lee1957 wrote:
Are you on drugs? Most government workers will be sitting at home wondering how to pay the bills.
on September 30,2013 | 06:55PM
HD36 wrote:
They should talk to their boss and figure out how the Federal Government is going to pay its bills first. We woouldn't be going through this excericise in the first place if we had a balanced budget.
on September 30,2013 | 09:06PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Yea you can thank all of those past Republican presidents for all those deficits. BTW who was the last president to have a surplus - hmmmmm I believe it was that Democrat named Clinton.
on October 1,2013 | 08:50AM
DAGR81 wrote:
Clinton's success came only after the midterm elections forced him to work cooperatively with a Republican congress. Too bad obama is a slow learner.
on October 1,2013 | 10:21AM
Anonymous wrote:
Oh yea, and lets remember who 'blew through' that federal surplus frm the Clinton administration, when he took office, I think his name was G. Bush(II)! Who then started 2 different wars in the Middle East, did nothing to stop or reduce the damage done from the 'Wall Street Crash' that caused a recession that was felt around the world, and then slithered out of the White House, when his term was over!
on October 1,2013 | 04:14PM
soundofreason wrote:
I've got this thing called a savings account. Handy little thing.
on October 1,2013 | 06:21AM
Malani wrote:
Yep, a savings account that won't last for long with our money being given to other countries.
on October 1,2013 | 08:28AM
Larry01 wrote:
Most people have a savings reserve, but many have little in that regard. Those folks live paycheck-to-paycheck - you're lucky you obviously have no concept of what that's like.
on October 1,2013 | 08:32AM
HD36 wrote:
You can only borrow more money to pay bills and go further in debt for so long.
on September 30,2013 | 09:05PM
pcman wrote:
IRT frontman on government workers. Government workers love the free day(s) they are getting from the pres. Obama has denied cost of living increases for the feds based the economy for 3 of the last 4 years. What a leader.
on October 1,2013 | 07:20AM
Malani wrote:
And the icing, All Congress is exempt from Obamacare. So what do they know that we don't for them to be exempt from Obamacare? Yep, the hand that feeds them is right.
on October 1,2013 | 08:27AM
Anonymous wrote:
90% of federal government workers, are not affected by who sits in the 'white house,' as their job has nothing to do or intersect with what the President does. They are just the 'worker bee's in the hive' keeping the machinery of government moving along.
on October 1,2013 | 04:10PM
localguy wrote:
serious - Depends. All furloughed workers this year did not get paid for they days of sequester. That money is gone forever. Yet our dysfunctional congress and senate continue to receive full pay showing they do not care about us. As for furloughed workers this year, it remains to be seen if our dysfunctional bureaucrats will pay them back. As for a "Free Vacation" you can thank your elected congress and senate for this waste of money. Believe me the workers would rather be at work then unsure about their pay.
on October 1,2013 | 08:01AM
frontman wrote:
obama can look you right in the eyes and lie to you..................a great block organizer from chicago
on October 1,2013 | 04:08PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Obama and Harry Reid have become the Party of No.
on October 1,2013 | 04:34PM
frontman wrote:
I'm waiting for obama to anoint himself king.
on October 1,2013 | 05:59PM
frontman wrote:
The democrats want to anoint Obama king................... nothing else will please the socialists.
on October 1,2013 | 08:37PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Not all true. Those that are in "accepted position" will be reimbursed. The bills still come in but the income is not there. So those living from paycheck to paycheck will be place in a predicament. Those that are furloughed will not be reimbursed so they will not be paid for your so-called "vacation". Speaking of "accepted position" why is it that Congress is not placed in an "accepted position" like the Federal government workers who are now going to be working without pay until this whole matter is resolved? Workers who are in a "accepted position" (those that are required to remain while others are on furlough) will get paid but not until the issue is resolved. Likewise Congress and the President should not be paid until this whole matter is resolved. Only until then will we have a sympathetic and understanding government that will work to resolve the issue for the betterment of everyone involved in a more timely manner. At this time Congress and the President are far removed from the realities of not receiving a pay check for basic needs.
on October 1,2013 | 11:39PM
sumoroach wrote:
ACA was pass without any GOP input. In fact "You have to pass the bill to see what is in the bill." attitude in 2010 when it was passed. (only DEMS voted on it). Now the law is upheld in the supreme court. But the DEMS don't want all the ACA to take affect and pick and choose what needs to be waivered or not. Let the law go take affect and no WAIVERS and see who will not like the law then. NO WAIVERS. Make the DEMS take the whole cake and eat it. NO WAIVERS That means CONGRESS has to buy their own health insurance for the government exchanges. NO WAIVERS. DEMS are picking and choose what part of the law takes affect, If it affects their own voters they give a waiver. Some of the middle class does not belong to any of these group and that is unfair to all.
on September 30,2013 | 04:33AM
Maipono wrote:
Sumoroach you make a very good summary of the problems politically that Obamacare has in congress. It was passed using a special process that had never been used before for bills other than those considered about he budget, without any input from the GOP. Obama at first said it wasn't a tax increase, then when arguing in the Supreme Court, the administration suddenly changed it's tune and said it was a new tax, in order to get a favorable ruling, then Obama grants waivers to Congress, big business, and big labor, but refuses to grant the same waivers to individual Americans. Now you will be fined by the IRS if you have no health insurance, even if you are young, healthy and can't really afford the premiums, Obama and the Democrats don't care, you will pay.
on September 30,2013 | 05:46AM
cojef wrote:
What happened to the "Land of the Free". If you choose not sign up for insurance coverage you will be fined from about $45 to $95, depending on your income and in later years the fine rises to $650. Detest the use of the word "mandatory".
on September 30,2013 | 07:03AM
lee1957 wrote:
Instead of mandatory, how about "voluntary or else"?
on September 30,2013 | 11:56AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Government should not be requiring americans to purchase medical insurance, they should be providing it to americans who can't afford to buy it themselves.
on September 30,2013 | 09:13PM
soundofreason wrote:
I believe the term you're looking for is..........Medicaid - for those who "can't afford". Then there are those who just don't WANT to afford. Cuts into the frequency of pizza nights.
on October 1,2013 | 06:23AM
Malani wrote:
And why should anyone be denied eating Pizza because of one mans law?
on October 1,2013 | 08:34AM
Malani wrote:
Too bad your statement wasn't told to Obama. But then he's not use to listening to other peoples advice.
on October 1,2013 | 08:32AM
mischal wrote:
And in the long run, would have been cheaper for the country. Too reasonable a solution. Instead of solving one problem, they escalated it into a major economic crisis, which, maybe was the intent; a small step towards the far left`s dream of a single payer system, the govt.
on October 1,2013 | 05:58PM
Pacej001 wrote:
It's a "tax" remember, not a fine. According to our sock puppet supreme court.
on September 30,2013 | 04:51PM
soundofreason wrote:
The ONE fine is less than the premiums. What do you think people will do?
on October 1,2013 | 06:22AM
Malani wrote:
"Land of the Free?" not anymore when we are being led into a one world government, not by the works of the Republicans I must add.
on October 1,2013 | 08:31AM
DiverDave wrote:
Correct Maipono,"for a 21-year-old nonsmoker HMSA starts at $128, with the highest deductible, at $6,350, and 60 percent of medical costs covered". So, all those snotty nosed kids that voted for "Hope and Change" now get the privilege of paying $128/month so they can pay the first $6,350, and then pay 40% after that. Wow! What a great "insurance" policy! LOL Of course if they want to be really taken they must pay $268/month and have a lower deductible. I wonder if these dumb kids will be happy to be forced to pay every month for something they don't want, and will be still happy they voted for Obama?
on September 30,2013 | 07:09AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
So DD, if these 21 year old snotty nose didn't ave ACA, what would be their plan? Huh? They would have been covered by??? Huh? Who pays the extra if they get sick or injured??? Huh??GOP plan? They don't have one??
on September 30,2013 | 03:04PM
lee1957 wrote:
They can always stay on Mommy and Daddy's plan, even if they aren't still living at home. Then again, if they had a job, they would probably be covered by their employer, even w/o ACA.
on September 30,2013 | 06:57PM
Anonymous wrote:
Not really, Lee1957, as there is an 'age limit cap' on healthcare coverage provided by your parents health insurance company.............As for health coverage by an employer, it agains will depend on how many hours a month you work to qualify for healthcare insurance.
on October 1,2013 | 04:21PM
lee1957 wrote:
Last time I checked 21 was five years under the ACA cap.
on October 1,2013 | 05:15PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
The Dems will not do what is right or what is good for the country only what is good for the party and promote their agenda.
on September 30,2013 | 07:25AM
Slow wrote:
Can you please post the agenda? I must not have given Rush my new PO box because I never got the Liberal Agenda I keep hearing about.
on September 30,2013 | 08:41AM
DiverDave wrote:
Slow, their agenda for 50 years has been "divide and conquer". Men against women. Whites against blacks. Rich against poor. Workers against welfare class. Where have you been?
on September 30,2013 | 09:14AM
Kaimiloa wrote:
True or not, what you just wrote is what the Dems say about the GOP. My opinion is that both parties do this as do most parties in any country.
on September 30,2013 | 09:53AM
8082062424 wrote:
You left out gay against straight and believer against non-believer . he split this county on so many levels it sad
on September 30,2013 | 11:30AM
lee1957 wrote:
Taste great vs. less filling!
on September 30,2013 | 06:58PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Sorry, even the Dems don't have it. They won't tell, post or devulge an agenda that they do not have. They have no intention of showing their ineptness. From 2008 all they have is the Obamacare that they want to ram down our throats. Only time the Dems speak up is when the Republicans bring forth their bills so the Dems can criticise and asign blame. Like Nancy Pelosi said "...pass it so we can read."
on September 30,2013 | 09:56AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
right and the GOP is not doing this for their party and to promote their agenda.
on September 30,2013 | 10:08AM
DiverDave wrote:
HCB: No, the Republicans are doing it for the American people that the far majority of appose Oamacare!
on September 30,2013 | 10:30AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
keep drinking the kool aid son.
on September 30,2013 | 11:04AM
DiverDave wrote:
Are you say CheeseBall that the Republicans are not representing the views of the majority of Americans on this issue?
on September 30,2013 | 11:18AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Yes,DD.
on September 30,2013 | 03:06PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Obama got re-elected did he not? It was more or less a referendum on his policies and Obamacare was it not? Where you been Dave ??
on September 30,2013 | 09:17PM
HD36 wrote:
Our country was founded on a Republic. Only certain people could vote because they were literate and educated. The majority of people think it's ok for the Federal Government to force you to buy something.
on September 30,2013 | 09:29PM
soundofreason wrote:
"A person is smart - PEOPLE are stupid" - Men In Black
on October 1,2013 | 06:25AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
read the polls son, 70% say shutting down the government over Obamacare is a bad idea.
on October 1,2013 | 01:59PM
HD36 wrote:
You're fighting a losing battle DiverDave. We live in a state that has the highest percetage of government workers in the United States. The word waste doesn't exist in their vocabulary.
on September 30,2013 | 09:26PM
boshio wrote:
The way I see this, is" whatever the tea party hates, must be good for america". Nothing will change, but wait, a gov. shut down also means no more taxes until we have a new congress.
on October 1,2013 | 06:50AM
NiteMarcher wrote:
I'm in favor of a shutdown! What? We seriously need to get our house in order--if we don't, our children's future will be greatly impacted. Federal employees should include these higher paid sectors and not the little guys: NSA (big time cuts needed here), NASA (forget about going to Mars & solve the problems here on Earth first), CIA (Culprits In Action - Cut um all out), All higher ups in the military (not the little guys) and don't forget about those in D.C.
on September 30,2013 | 05:33AM
mikethenovice wrote:
Cut back on the military and let the other side attack us wide open just so the rich can own a larger mansion?
on September 30,2013 | 06:17AM
Maipono wrote:
Mike isn't it funny that under Obama and the Democrats, the divide between the rich and the poor grew? And the country became 17 trillion dollars in debt to China, and other countries? Obama once called 9 trillion "unpatriotic", I guess he meant that America wasn't weak enough for he and his cronies. Meanwhile the super rich are becoming richer and it is becoming harder and harder for the average American to make it. Interesting yeah?
on September 30,2013 | 08:18AM
boshio wrote:
Its because the rich for once felt threatenedwith Obama and need to be sure they were protected to get even richer. America is run by the ones with the most money.
on September 30,2013 | 09:07AM
Maipono wrote:
boshio, I want you to think who supported Obama, it was the super rich like George Soros and one of the richest men in the world Warren Buffett, they knew that they would become richer if Obama and the Democrats got in, meanwhile the average American with the American Dream would lose badly. Now Obama and his cronies are getting richer, and you?
on September 30,2013 | 09:18AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
The last time I saw Warren Buffet on TV he was saying his tax rate is too low and should be raised to where it was in the 90's. You really think he wants to get richer? He gives most of his money to charity so he won't pay any taxes.
on September 30,2013 | 09:23PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
And Maipono, the super rich like Koch,Trump,Edelman support Obama? Wait, Obama ask for the super rich to pay more taxes??? So Obama is making them more rich? Huh?
on September 30,2013 | 03:09PM
Maipono wrote:
NanakuliBoss, it is very confusing, but let me help out with one explanation. Crony Capitalism is a term that is used for an economic system where politicians reward their supporters with contracts and money. The super rich have made their money, they are not afraid of increase in taxes because their money is overseas or in protected accounts, or they make money if the dollar does poorly. Obama then gives money to his favorite supporters as contracts, like Solyndra, GM, JP Morgan and other beneficiaries, using tax dollar and money he has printed up. Meanwhile, he threatens to raise taxes on the rich when he means you and me, to pay for his excesses. That's why the super rich loves Obama and the Democrats, they are so good at it.
on September 30,2013 | 04:05PM
Anonymous wrote:
Funny thing is, Maipono, many of those very same wealthy individuals have said they supported a 'higher tax rate' for those in the top 2% tax bracket, and Congress laughed it off as a joke! Their financial portfolio's are so diverse, that the only thing that can impact them, is a 'Wall Street Crash' and many of the ultrarich still managed to survive and thrive after it happened!
on October 1,2013 | 04:29PM
IAmSane wrote:
The divide between the rich and the poor has been growing way before Obama.
on September 30,2013 | 04:36PM
soundofreason wrote:
Look at the family size that "the poor" choose to have. Start there for your explanation.
on October 1,2013 | 06:28AM
Slow wrote:
The US has over 100 military bases around the world. Very few nations have any. Our military dwarfs that of the rest of the Earth combined. Who, exactly is "the other side?" China has one aircraft carrier. Kim Jong Un? Japan? Cuba? Iran? There is no other side.
on September 30,2013 | 08:45AM
pcman wrote:
IRT Slow on military Obama has already cut back over 50 overseas US military installations. Americans who work, live, travel, study and are assigned overseas are at greater risk than 4 years ago. The deaths of the four Americans at Benghazi, the deaths of 6 Americans in Kenya, the closing of 15 State Department embassies and consulates in North Africa and Middle East are examples of the inability of the US military to respond to threats and attacks of Americans and allies overseas Obama has already directed more US military facilities to close overseas over the next 5 years. Watch your own back, because the US government under Obama won't.
on October 1,2013 | 07:31AM
sailfish1 wrote:
In the past, a shutdown cost us more money. They gave back pay to all furloughed workers so that, essentially, they all got a free vacation. Not only that but many government workers spent a lot of time getting things ready for the shutdown and ignored a lot of work they are actually supposed to do.
on September 30,2013 | 11:27AM
localguy wrote:
And who was responsible for this fiasco? Your dysfunctional Senate and Congress. Doing what they do best, nothing.
on September 30,2013 | 01:17PM
localguy wrote:
NiteMarcher - Truly a professional rookie poster. Nothing of any value, no clue what is talking about.
on September 30,2013 | 01:15PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
I'm with you Marcher - serious cut backs needed in defense and medicare/medicaid spending. That's where All the money goes, everything else is just peanuts.
on September 30,2013 | 09:20PM
loquaciousone wrote:
Bonehead strikes again with his clueless tparty nuts.
on September 30,2013 | 05:50AM
DiverDave wrote:
Really loquacious, " clueless tparty nuts". If standing for lower taxes, and against a program of forcing citizens to buy bad insurance policies is clueless, then heaven help the tax payers of America!
on September 30,2013 | 07:44AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Continued pushing for the "lower taxes" for the higher income brackets is the problem.
on September 30,2013 | 08:33AM
DiverDave wrote:
More class envy divide and conquer politics from "CriticalReader". The top 5% of earners pay 75% of all taxes taken in by the U.S. government. That is a fact.
on September 30,2013 | 08:42AM
loquaciousone wrote:
There is a time and place for everything. The bonehead party doesn't seem to realize that wearing tank tops and shorts to a black tie affair is a bit too much.
on September 30,2013 | 10:28AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Now imagine they paid 50% of income in taxes instead of 30%, there wouldn't be a deficit.
on September 30,2013 | 09:26PM
boshio wrote:
Anyways, with a gov. shut down, "no more taxes until we have a new congress".
on October 1,2013 | 06:55AM
Anonymous wrote:
DiverDave, you know that there is a huge difference between those in the top 5%, when it comes to paying taxes and those in the bottom 60%, when comparing their gross/net wages! A substantial part of their income is taken out, for those at the bottome 60% when paying taxes, that greatly impacts their ability to support their family; while those in the top 5% are not affected or greatly impacted in paying taxes, nor is their ability to support their family affected at all! That is a fact!
on October 1,2013 | 04:38PM
lee1957 wrote:
Has there been a push for changes to the tax code after the last bargain, the one that increased the top tax brackets? I think not.
on September 30,2013 | 07:02PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
They stand for shutting down the government at any cost. Get a grip they are a minority pretending to be the majority. The GOP LOST the 2012 election, elections have consequences. Get used to it. The GOP will have to cave because even the moderate wing of the GOP knows that shutting down the government and defaulting on the debt is not good governance. So here is how it is going to play out now that the GOP knows that the Democrats and the President are NOT caving on Obamacare - The GOP will shut down the government for a week or so, then Speaker Boehner will bundle up the CR with a debt ceiling increase and put it on the floor and it will pass with the Democrats and a lot of Republicans signing on because the last thing he wants to do is to have a fight over the debt ceiling after the CR.. The Tea Party guys will go nuts but guess what, no one will care because they will have been exposed for the fringe group they are. The Republican Part will be split, fractured, and be at war with itself.
on September 30,2013 | 10:14AM
DiverDave wrote:
It's Monday morning, the government has been shut down all weekend, and no one even noticed, HCB.
on September 30,2013 | 10:37AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
No the government was not shut down all weekend, there were FAA employees manning the air traffic control towers, customs inspectors were working as well, in Have a friend in DC who works for the Treasury and they are open 24/7. No go back to drinking the tea party kool aid son.
on September 30,2013 | 11:07AM
DiverDave wrote:
It has already been made clear that his so called "government shutdown" will not affect key services like the military, and air traffic controllers. SS checks will still go out, and football games will still be played. The average person won't know the difference. The whole "government shutdown" thing has been nothing but fear mongering by the Dems, and the Dem controlled media.
on September 30,2013 | 11:26AM
poidragon wrote:
Right, Dave; say that again when you try to go to a national park and are denied entry, because the national park is shuttered due to the government shutdown..............another election cycle is nearing and I am very curious to see what the outcme will be for the GoP, as they are blamed for shuttering the fed government again, for petty politics!
on September 30,2013 | 02:14PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Unless you work for a government agency ...
on September 30,2013 | 09:27PM
pcman wrote:
IRT Diver on shutdown. I agree. The pres did not need a budget for the last 4 years to run the government so I don't know why he has to shut down the government now. What a lot of "shibai" (all show and no go).
on October 1,2013 | 07:38AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
I just heard @2:40pm PST, the FAA is shutdown.
on September 30,2013 | 03:00PM
Hawaiians wrote:
lol
on September 30,2013 | 02:05PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
The GOP should stick to their guns and shutdown this government.
on September 30,2013 | 02:58PM
soundofreason wrote:
STRONG agree.
on October 1,2013 | 06:29AM
lee1957 wrote:
Anyone who pretends to represent the sentiments of the other side is a partisan hack, part of the problem and not part of the solution.
on September 30,2013 | 07:04PM
mikethenovice wrote:
When will the Republicans start to cut from the rich? It's always from the poor.
on September 30,2013 | 06:15AM
cojef wrote:
When the number of people who refuse to work and pay taxes outnumber the number who are willing to work and pay taxes, democracy ceases to exist, spoke a wise man. Currently there are 45 million who pay no taxes, and receives dole from the Government. Quality of medical care for those who have been enjoying medical will not fail to receive this same quality. Simple mathematics, to the current population of professional doctors, you add 30 million uninsured without corresponding increase in doctors, what can you expect?
on September 30,2013 | 07:16AM
CriticalReader wrote:
cojef, Who is the "wise man" you're referring to?
on September 30,2013 | 08:32AM
lee1957 wrote:
Alexis de Tocqueville, "Reader".
on September 30,2013 | 07:07PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Forbes actually has a great article on people who pay no taxes. They published it in response to Mitt Romney's famous "47% of people are waiting for handouts" statement. Cutting to the chase of those not paying taxes 17% were students, persons with disabilities, long term unemployed, and persons with very low incomes. Service members deployed overseas also pay no taxes; 22 percent were senior citizens, and 61% of those not paying taxes were working people who paid payroll taxes but are not paying income taxes (most used the earned income credit to offset taxes). To say that these guys are on the "dole" seems to be an oversimplification. I think what you have is a bunch of low wage earners, disabled folks and old folks. Secondly the 30 million people you speak of, they are already getting medical care, they are already in the health system, just not paying for it. They will have to find more primary care doctors, but the idea is to have the uninsured stop using the emergency room as their heath care venue.
on September 30,2013 | 11:24AM
hiloboy wrote:
Spoken like a true independent thinker. People need to read more.
on October 1,2013 | 09:11AM
DiverDave wrote:
Ya, like there are no Democrats that are rich, eh mike? Lets start with Obama. Have you forgotten his $10,000,000 dollar book deal?
on September 30,2013 | 07:17AM
NITRO08 wrote:
Yes he got money but he is the one who wants to raise the tax on the rich wake up!
on September 30,2013 | 08:23AM
DiverDave wrote:
Nitro,The top 5% of earners are already paying 75% of all the taxes taken in! All their wealth could be confiscated and it wouldn't put a dent in Obama's deficit of 17 Trillion. The problem is not that the government doesn't take in enough money, it's that spending under Obama is OUT OF CONTROL! Obama reminds me of my first wife who would come home after shopping and tell me how she saved $200 on clothing at a sale at Macy's. Of course she maxed out the credit card for $2,000 doing it! LOL
on September 30,2013 | 08:50AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: I like how you ignore the first 10 Trillion that was spent by the Bush administration (not Obama). Obama wasn't even in office when the first 10 Trillion in debt was spent and by Republicans I might add, so stop making your party sound like it's innocent when it isn't. Both parties have a huge fault in this. Bush spent the first 10 Trillion and Obama spent the next 6-7 Trillion. Where were the Republican complaints about our deficit being too high during Bush's years? They didn't complain one bit, so your party should look in the mirror before it criticizes others. FYI, I have no stake in either party, so I am just calling it like I see it.
on September 30,2013 | 09:15AM
DiverDave wrote:
Bush did NOT spend 10 Trillion MKN. The 10 Trillion was the total debt rang up by all previous presidents combined. According to CBS News Bush in 8 years spent about 4 Trillion, much of it on military spending after 9-11. Obama has spent almost 7 trillion thus far, and at the current rate, will end up adding over 10 Trillion to the natonal debt, or more than all presidents combined before him! bing: How much did the Bush administration add to the national debt?"
on September 30,2013 | 09:35AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: What you fail to mention is that Obama inherited the two wars from his predecessor along with a lot of other government programs (e.g. Department of Homeland Security, TSA, new government buildings, etc.) ramped up during Bush's 8 years in office, so while the deficit has gone up by quite a bit under Obama, a lot of it is not really his fault since he had to continue those programs. You also fail to mention that he had to continue to stimulate the economy (this program was started under Bush) so that the economy could recover. Combine that with lower tax revenues due to the recession and that's why the debt has accelerated significantly under Obama. If Obama didn't prop up the economy during the recession, it would have turned into a depression (and we would be in deep kim chee right now). Again I ask you where were the protests of the Republicans in Congress during the Bush years and all of the government spending programs that Bush ramped up? LOL!!!
on September 30,2013 | 10:06AM
DiverDave wrote:
Most of the money spent by Obama has gone to bailing out his rich friends, banks, and failed "green schemes. It's funny how you say it is not "his fault". When does it become the fault of the football coach that never wins, or the CEO that causes a company huge losses, or in this case Obama that has been in office for 5 years now. If I hired a manager to turn my business around, and 5 years later, after showing no improvement, and doubling my debt, he defended his poor performance by saying, "It's not my fault, it was the guy before me". I would say: "That's not what you told me when I hired you. You said you knew how to turn this thing around". Then I would tell him "You're Fired!" and have security escort him out of the building.
on September 30,2013 | 10:47AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: The problem with your fantasy scenario is that Obama is not a CEO and he doesn't have uniateral control of the government. He basically has 1 hand and 1 foot tied behind his back since he's at the mercy of congress in terms of getting any legislation through. He can't make laws. He can only suggest them and sign them into law if they are acceptable. It's up to congress to actually debate everything and come to an agreement. No private company runs like the US Government and you comparing the Office of the President and a CEO's office is like comparing apples and oranges. LOL!!!
on September 30,2013 | 11:59AM
DiverDave wrote:
Obama himself said that he would turn this economy around in is first term. Got Alzheimers? Did you forget the "Summer of Recovery" nonsense? LOL
on September 30,2013 | 12:29PM
Kuniarr wrote:
MKN8 years under GWB the total deficit was $2.007 trillion.

In only 4 years under Obama the total deficit is $5.106 trillion.
on September 30,2013 | 07:57PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Out of "earnings" disregard reasonable living needs, and then, look at what's leftover. That's where tax revenues should be taken from. Both from the lower end of the income scale, as well as the top. And, it is. The point is, VASTLY more is available at the top of the scale, while what is available at the bottom, or even the middle of the scale shrinks with increasing speed. 75% is not enough relatively.
on September 30,2013 | 09:32AM
DiverDave wrote:
How much of their income should be taxed CR. Right now the bottom 50% of earners pay only 2% of all taxes collect, but are the recipients of over 60% of monies spent on programs for the so called "poor". Next time someone swipes their foodstamp card at the grocery store they should say a little thank you to those "bad" rich people that are paying for it!
on September 30,2013 | 09:55AM
poidragon wrote:
Ah, DD, which hurts more when taken out or your paycheck? the 2% taken from the bottom wage earners or the % taxed from the wealthy, who can write the taxes paid as a business deduction and still make money? Many of the top 2% have said they would be willing to pay more in taxes, but the GoP continue to balk at raising the tax rates on the wealthy, instead they continue to hammer on Social security, claming it is an 'entitlement' and working to reduce its benefits to those living on Social Security, after having paid into it for most of their working life!
on September 30,2013 | 02:28PM
GONEGOLFIN wrote:
Here is the problem DD-You talk about the the top 5% and their contribution is 75% of all taxes taken in-Unortunately, the 75% of income is not taxed at the same rate as lower income earners, therefore, the top 5% should be paying 95% of the taxes since they are earning 95% of the total income. How hard is that to envision? Problem is, there should be a flat tax rate so everybody pays their own share. As for the businesses and corporations-their taxes are woefully low with the all tax breaks and credits they get-I say stick with a flat tax rate and make everybody happy.
on September 30,2013 | 02:39PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Next time DD buys groceries, he should thank tax payers fir his pension.
on September 30,2013 | 03:20PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
You all realize it's congress that appropriates ALL spending right? In fact congress hasn't passed a budget in 4 years, they just keep passing short term spending measures that keep spending at the same level it was at when Bush was in office. The only real exception to this was the stimulus spending to prevent another depression that congress also approved. Still think it's Obama's fault?
on September 30,2013 | 09:44PM
Malani wrote:
DiverDave, obama did turn our economy around. He went from an economy that was broke and brought it down to empty. I wonder how many people know that obama sent their tax money to other countries?
on October 1,2013 | 08:55AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
DD is a military retiree that backs the super rich, only because Rush told him too. Really is living off the government dole, but chose to chastise union, of which he is attached to )Veteran).
on September 30,2013 | 03:17PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Have you served? You seem quick to label veterans as "living off the government dole". Just curious if you've experienced any military time. Vietnam? Korea? Gulf? I did my tour, got out, and have never received a nickel for it, but I respect those who put in their 20 plus.
on September 30,2013 | 03:49PM
lee1957 wrote:
Have you always been this dense or is it something you learned in public school?
on September 30,2013 | 07:11PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Hey he's got a point there ... if they're making 95% of all wages, maybe they should be paying 95% of all taxes. I can understand why low income folks pay no federal taxes, What I don't understand is how they are able to get tax return money when no taxes were even paid in the first place. Certain tax credits for the very rich and very poor are just too generous.
on September 30,2013 | 09:52PM
lee1957 wrote:
He did raise the taxes on the rich. He wants to do it again?
on September 30,2013 | 07:08PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Agree with Diver here. It's not about net worth in the pocket book. It's about net worth in the character bank. Many in the Tea Party are proving graphically how possible it is to be dollar rich, but morally bankrupt.
on September 30,2013 | 08:30AM
DiverDave wrote:
How are they "morally bankrupt" CriticalReader? Or do you just call people names and make wild accusations without backing them up?
on September 30,2013 | 09:38AM
poidragon wrote:
because the GoP and the Tea Party refuse to 'walk in the shoes of the poverty stricken' to see if what they legislate will actually work or not. Can you name any member of the GoP or the Tea party who has experience with receiving and actually living 'welfare allocations?' The GoP and the Tea Party talk the talk, but cannot back it up by walking in the shoes of the poor and down trodden!
on September 30,2013 | 02:32PM
Leinanij wrote:
Really? I've never heard them talk the talk because they don't care about the poor and down trodden. Mitt said the same thing - don't bother talking to them because they aren't going to vote for you. So they congregate in their country clubs and wonder why no one likes them.
on October 1,2013 | 01:03PM
lee1957 wrote:
Don't forget his Nobel honorarium.
on September 30,2013 | 07:08PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
The blacks, hispanics, and the poor are no better off since Obama took office. Oh well they have more entitlements to keep them down-trodden and remain as such. Just leave it to the Dems to pander to them.
on September 30,2013 | 10:02AM
DiverDave wrote:
Correct TPF, Welfare and other free handout programs are at an all time high under Obama. Isn't laughable how people justify how Obama was re-elected? It was all about keeping the "free"stuff. So, what this really proves is that votes can be easily bought with other tax payers money, so long as you demonize your opponent and convince the free handout folks that he other candidate will take their free stuff away. If anyone wants to throw up go to utube and watch "it's free swipe yo ebt".
on September 30,2013 | 11:07AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
DD is a Fox Parrot. No Aloha must be from south.
on September 30,2013 | 03:21PM
Skyler wrote:
Yeah 'Aloha' means you put down everyone else, right NB? punk.
on September 30,2013 | 07:20PM
soundofreason wrote:
Have you noticed - It always seems to be the "takers" who are the ones who preach for "Aloha"
on October 1,2013 | 06:36AM
soundofreason wrote:
You still don't get it do you? Let me simplify it for you. If a landlords taxes go up - whose RENT will go up accordingly? Whatever is done to "the rich", just gets passed on to the poor.......indirectly. You're still addressing this as an income problem when the real problem is spending.
on October 1,2013 | 06:32AM
pcman wrote:
IRT mike on the rich. You can take all the money from the rich and run the government for 3 months. Then what? Take all the money from the middle class? All the money from the middle class probably won't run the government for a year. Then what? We'll all be broke. We need jobs. Jobs generate revenue (taxes) to run the government, not people's money. Get it? The bottom 49% of Americans do not pay into the revenue pool ( federal income taxes). Don't you see a problem with that? That's where we are at. We need jobs and the pres has failed in doing that. And, Obamacare kills full time jobs. Get the picture?
on October 1,2013 | 07:49AM
Leinanij wrote:
No one has said to take all the money from the rich. We just want them to pay their fair share. Get the picture?
on October 1,2013 | 01:04PM
mikethenovice wrote:
The GOP will go out of their way to make sure that the poor don't receive the care they deserve.
on September 30,2013 | 06:18AM
DiverDave wrote:
The so called "poor" already get healthcare. Haven't you heard of Quest. It's the middle class and the young adults that will be hurt the most by this. Stop with the big bad Republicans thing. The majority of Americans do not want Obamacare. The Democrats own this forced insurance program lock, stock, and barrel.
on September 30,2013 | 07:22AM
NITRO08 wrote:
Not all have quest and what about the middle class that can't get health insurance cause they can't afford it! Why stop the ACA without trying it first? If it don't work then stop it. Instead of trying to stop it why don't the repub's come up with there own health care bill to try to help the people of this country?
on September 30,2013 | 08:33AM
DiverDave wrote:
Nitro, The middle class that you say can't afford it will be forced to (afford) buy it or be penalized on their taxes.
on September 30,2013 | 08:56AM
GONEGOLFIN wrote:
DD, I think the point NITO is trying to make is: you do not even know how obamacare will work, yet you go off on a tangent telling us you know. Well, buddy, until it is in action-YOU DONT KNOW JACK!
on September 30,2013 | 02:43PM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: Quest is in Hawaii only. You realize that Quest is Hawaii's version of Obamacare for the poor right? LOL!!! Also, what's wrong with the middle class version of Obamacare? It looks like it wouldn't be that expensive for me to get the high coverage plan. 3 years ago, such a plan wasn't even available unless you went through an employer. Obamacare frees up a lot of people that are working for an employer just for the health coverage to get away from that and pursue their small business dreams. I saw a news article just this past weekend that illustrates this. Stop being the bogeyman and saying it's all bad when it isn't. Obamacare gets rid of medical cost lifetime caps (great for people with chronic health conditions that they can't help), allows parents to provide medical insurance to their children until age 26, and insurance companies can't drop you if you're sick. You can't get those benefits from the current Quest program.
on September 30,2013 | 10:40AM
DiverDave wrote:
All states have some form of healthcare in place for the poor, as well as laws that say that if you come to a emergency room you can't be turned away. Obamacare is not free, and just because someone can't afford it now, they must buy (afford) it under Obamacare. So these people can just say goodbye to their tax return if they don't. As far as "Obamacare frees up a lot of people that are working for an employer just for the health coverage to get away from that and pursue their small business dreams" that is nonsense argument. That should account for about 1/100th of one percent of the nation.
on September 30,2013 | 10:57AM
poidragon wrote:
I will go so far to say that you have never experienced going to an 'emergency room' and being treated an illness or ailment, knowing full well that you can't afford the medical care! There is a big difference in medical treatment and staff attitude, when a patient comes in and the staff knows they can't pay for services rendered!
on September 30,2013 | 02:38PM
hawaiikone wrote:
My brother has been an ER doctor for 35 years, and your comment regarding attitude is simply wrong.
on September 30,2013 | 03:53PM
CriticalReader wrote:
So, either you don't have health insurance, or your brother discusses his patients' care and insurance circumstances with you?
on October 1,2013 | 01:51PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Mr. reader. Try again.
on October 1,2013 | 03:32PM
poidragon wrote:
hey DD, have you bothered to experience for yourself, what healthcare is like on Quest? It's no picnic and you are showing yourself to be just like the lemmings of the GoP, by being led with a rope tied to your nose and being led around like a 'pack mule!'
on September 30,2013 | 02:35PM
localguy wrote:
Once again dysfunctional bureaucrat John Boehner is the poster child for what is wrong in the congress and senate. A bunch of losers who after squabbling all year and longer, can't come together to make a decision. They wring their hands and whine, "We need more time, many years to get this done." No, you don't need more time. Just admit you are incompetent, resign, and we will find people who can get it done on time, on budget. Current congress and senate are a bunch of whiny, snot nosed children fighting in the playground. No leadership from anyone, only take care of #1. And so laughable they are considered "Essential Government Personnel" who get paid even when government shuts down. Wrong answer. Essential people get the work done on time to standard. Stop the pay for this loser group until they do their job.
on September 30,2013 | 06:35AM
cojef wrote:
It's all about entitlements!
on September 30,2013 | 07:17AM
boshio wrote:
All this wouldn't be a problem if we all could have the same health care plan and retirement "entitlement" that Boehner has.
on September 30,2013 | 09:12AM
hiloboy wrote:
Entitlements? Are you referring to the farm subsidies, oil subsidies?
on September 30,2013 | 10:01AM
DiverDave wrote:
Really localguy, John Boehner is the problem? Did he vote for Obamacare that the majority of Americans do not want? Who else is speaking up for this majority? Thank goodness that someone is, and is willing to take a stand against forcing the people of America to do something they don't want to do.
on September 30,2013 | 07:26AM
CriticalReader wrote:
A clear majority of Americans WANT and affordable health care act. The numbers being quoted to the GOP sheep as "anti" Obamacare include a significant number - in the teens - of individuals who believe Obamacare is flawed because it does not go FAR ENOUGH (e.g does not provide for a single payer system). The numbers I want to see are the % of GOP anti-Obamacare-ites who can't get health insurance themselves, the number of the same group who have health care through employment or pension, and the number receiving health care benefits through the federal gov't. In other words (in order) the numbers for the ignorant-trailer-park-trash, the numbers for the non-Christians, and the numbers for the hypocrites.
on September 30,2013 | 07:52AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
I would not trust anything that the Government is trying to shove down our throats. Freedom is what I'm talking about.
on September 30,2013 | 07:58AM
CriticalReader wrote:
And, thank you for your service and contribution to the economy, keeping alive industries in this Country that manufacture guns, produce tin foil for hats, and assemble rocking chairs.
on September 30,2013 | 08:08AM
mischal wrote:
...especially when they exempt themselves from it! Good enough for you but not for me.
on October 1,2013 | 06:29PM
DiverDave wrote:
The facts "CriticalReader" are that the far majority, about 57%, of Americans do not want THIS program. It's easy to say that all Americans want cheap reliable new cars. Or, a clear majority want affordable big homes. Or, the majority of Americans want affordable health care. That's not in dispute. What is in dispute is that this crazy mess called Obamacare is not the answer, and in fact does none of the things it was said to it would do when Obama pitched it originally.
on September 30,2013 | 08:09AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: It does none of the things it was said that it would do? So eliminating lifetime cost caps, the insurance companies being unable to drop you when you are sick, and allowing parents to cover their kids with health insurance until they are 26 is chopped liver??!!! Dude get a clue!
on September 30,2013 | 10:43AM
DiverDave wrote:
Obamacare does have a few, a very few, things that are good. It's the other 2100 pages that has things that aren't. That is why the Republicans current offer if to delay implementation for a year to go over it, and fix it. Dems and Obama have said "NO COMPROMISE!" So much for the democratic process.
on September 30,2013 | 11:38AM
Malani wrote:
Too bad DiverDave that the people that need to be convinced of your statement don't open their eyes to see and understand why there is this shut down. The problems of obamacare need to be fixed now not later. Too bad we don't have a bullet list from day one of the to present of obamas list of "this is what I will do and this is what is best for america" Bet every he did would not match his list.
on October 1,2013 | 09:13AM
mischal wrote:
So, when your dying kid needs a lung transplant and the govt. tells you it`s against regulations and someone like Sebilious refuses to sign a waiver, in spite of the fact doctors are saying the surgery will be successful, you`ll be okay with that. The govt. has far over reached their authority and should not be in the business of deciding what patients live or die in direct contradiction of a doctor`s prognosis.
on October 1,2013 | 06:36PM
localguy wrote:
DD - Boehner has only his way or the highway. Have you ever actually listened to this bureaucrat talk? He can't even make sentences. He and his thugs had all year to work this out and failed. They need to admit it is over and move on. You can't always get your way so quit whining. The best part of Boehner ran down his father's leg at the moment of conception.
on September 30,2013 | 01:21PM
localguy wrote:
DiverDave. - Wow were you wrong. Off the scale. Didn't you read this? But the best guess from the Congressional Budget Office in a report requested by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is that the law will save the government roughly $109 billion through 2022. Ref: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/shutdown-could-hinge-medical-device-tax-repeal-8C11299079 Your apology for shibai posting has been accepted.
on September 30,2013 | 01:56PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
What do the Republicans not understand? Obamacare was voted on by the people in two elections in which Obama won. In essence, the people have already made a decision to support Obamacare. When millionaires and billionaires poured money into Romney's campaign to try and prevent an Obama win it was very apparent that the rich were against it. But the sudden influx of money into Romney's effort to end Obamacare still did not overcome support for it. The true motive behind this whole thing was revealed when the Republicans stated that they are not just trying to remove parts of the Obamacare but to kill the higher taxes on the rich. What amazes me is that many poor or middle class are actually siding with the Republicans which is not in their best interest. The Republicans couldn't care less if our economy goes down. All they care about is their wallet and their fellow rich supporters' wallet. Their action is reprehensible. They are holding our government budget hostage in order to continue to fight for their agenda which is to kill Obamacare because the rich do not want to pay for this measure that would make health care more affordable to the poor and middle class. Most insidious of all, the rich want to use this measure to kill the higher taxes on the rich. Our economy is going to be greatly affected by a government shutdown in the form of lost wages and stocks plummeting. Foreign countries that invest in our companies will cut their spending on our business resulting in further downturns. But the Republicans could not care less. As long as they make their grand stand to to fight Obamacare and higher taxes on the rich. It appears that they want to see America fail for their political aims. Their chatter regarding how great our country is is nothing but a sham. Glenn Beck and company speak of how our country was founded on this and that (traditions) but will support the upending of our system by forcing our budget to be tied to something that it should not be. They are trying to force a precedent. What the Republicans do not want you to know is that if we shut down our government, we in essence will set up a domino effect on our economy. The last furloughs were met by Republicans stating that it had no effect on our economy. That is simply naive thinking. The effect of furloughs are not immediate. It will be seen in less spending by those directly affected by the furloughs. With that follows those that are affected by the furloughed in the form of less revenue. With that follows lay offs of workers as revenues go down. And so on and so forth. This political grandstanding by Boehner is outrageous. This man is out to destroy America for the agendas of the rich. The Republicans must remove this man from his position as he is poison to their party. People will start seeing how petty and foolish this whole grandstanding is. When a Republican reads a children's book to put a wrench in our government, it is just not helping the people. The Republicans have become desperate and will use whatever they can to obstruct something that has already been voted upon in essence twice. It's mettle has already been decided upon by our Supreme Court. Now that the Republicans are not having their way they are trying to sabotage it all the way. And all this to the embarrassment to the world. As the world watches our country become petty and silly we tell the world that our democracy is the greatest. We need to stop this madness.
on September 30,2013 | 07:53AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Obama did not "win" the election, he bought it with the help of his partners the media and fraud, and way too many low information voters.
on September 30,2013 | 08:00AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Dude, you forgot to put "FOX" in front of your search. If you only search "NEWS", you're going to end up here. It's two words. "Fox" AND "News" (leave out the AND. Only put the words between the " " in your search).
on September 30,2013 | 08:11AM
NITRO08 wrote:
Yes he did win, Mit was trying to buy the election they spent a lot of money trying to win and don't forget fox news spreading there lies too. Come on wake up. The people voted for Obama.
on September 30,2013 | 08:37AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Obviously you are not aware that millionaires and billionaires poured in tons of money on Romney at the last moment when they realized that Obama was "winning". If there is any "buying" of a presidential seat, it was attempted by Romney and his cronies.
on October 1,2013 | 10:23AM
DiverDave wrote:
nodaddy, "Obamacare was voted on by the people in two elections in which Obama won". No it wasn't. Obama won because of all the free handout folks that didn't want to have any of their free stuff taken away. Obama won by divide and conquer politics. Either the "Bad Republicans" don't want women to have contraception, or the "Bad Republican" want to cut foodstamp programs, or the "bad Republicans" are bunch of "racists"....it just goes on and on. As far as a so called" shut down" hurting the economy that is also false. After the Clinton Administration's shut down the economy actually spiked upward.
on September 30,2013 | 08:23AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: The truth hurts doesn't it? Isn't what you mentioned the party platform for the entire Republican Party? LOL!!! The Republicans and Democrats both have faults, but the Republican party has some pretty twisted views since you listen to crazy people like Rush Limbaugh. Oh and by the way, the reason the economy spiked upwards despite the government shutdown was because of the growth of something called the Internet. We don't have anything nearly as innovative in the pipe right now, so a PROLONGED government shutdown WILL hurt the economy because there will be a huge hit to consumer spending.
on September 30,2013 | 09:41AM
DiverDave wrote:
The only platform that the Dems had was the "freestuff" platform. Welfare spending is now at an all time high under Obama. And isn't it sad that the Obama discourages success and innovation, and when it occurs thinks that we should tax and regulate it more? BTW the local radio station does not carry Rush, so no I don't listen to Rush.
on September 30,2013 | 10:02AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: Welfare spending is at an all time high because we just went through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression which resulted in 8 million jobs being lost. A lot of people that lost their jobs came from industries that these jobs probably won't come back (e.g. manufacturing in Detroit). As for listening to Rush, you know there's this great invention called the Internet where you can listen to him from the convenience of your PC, tablet, or phone anywhere and anytime right? LOL!!! It's not only Rush that's crazy. FOX News and Glen Beck are crazy too. LOL!!! The same can be said for a lot of the nutjobs on MSNBC. That's why I only watch the local news stations where they don't put a political spin on everything.
on September 30,2013 | 10:58AM
DiverDave wrote:
No MKN, we are still in the economic crisis, ask the 9,000 less people working in Hawaii now than at the start of Obama's first term. When a family of 4 can make $52,000 (twice the poverty level) and still qualify them for foodstamps here in Hawaii that's not caused by the recession, that's called vote buying.
on September 30,2013 | 11:47AM
MKN wrote:
@DiverDave: Not really. Our local economy has been growing by a lot the last couple of years. Those 9000 people are probably on the job now with rail construction starting up again and all those new buildings coming up in town. LOL!!! I know some people that are on welfare and foodstamps that voted for Romney, so how is that vote buying again? Also, if you wanna talk about vote buying, how about the billions of dollars spent by the rich to get people to vote for Republicans? It goes both ways, so stop trying to paint Republicans as being innocent when they aren't any better. LOL!!!
on September 30,2013 | 12:18PM
DiverDave wrote:
No they are not "probably" on the job. If they voted for Romney it was after 4 years of "no jobs Obama" they had nothing to loose.
on September 30,2013 | 12:52PM
localguy wrote:
DD - You forgot to include our dysfunctional congress and senate as part of the problem. They are the ones who make the final decisions, not Obama. Hold them accountable for their failures.
on September 30,2013 | 01:22PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
DiverDave, although I don't normally respond to responses that don't make sense, you just contradicted yourself. You say that the shutdown will not necessarily cause a problem with the economy but you say that we are in an economic crisis. A shutdown on an already troubled economy can only make things worse. Further, as MKN has mentioned, the economy was different at the time when a shutdown occurred previously where the economy did not take a downturn. At that time we did not have an economy that was destroyed by an ill-advised war that drained the economy and at that time there was a boom in the economy in progress in the form of dot coms. Today, we do not have such a luxury to help our economy ride through costly government shutdown. Today, we have a big deficit and large unemployment. And if you think it is attributed to Obama, you've got some researching to do as he inherited the problems from a previous administration.
on October 1,2013 | 10:37AM
Kuniarr wrote:
The real culprit for this economic crisis that the US is in is Bill Clinton for entering into a Free Trade Agreement with China in 1999 and causing China to enter the World Trade Organization.

Manufacturing makes the US wealthy econmically. Loss of Manufacturing makes the US poor economically.

All countries that do not have manufacturing capabilities are economically poor. China, whose economy was in agriculture was a poor economically. Today China is booming economically because it has acquired US manufacturing abilities.
on September 30,2013 | 08:05PM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Agree.
on October 1,2013 | 06:57PM
Malani wrote:
I wonder if we didn't have republicans or democrats how many would not vote on the side of obama?
on October 1,2013 | 09:22AM
Malani wrote:
Obama won because of his enticing words which fooled the american public. The problem is they still believe in his words.
on October 1,2013 | 09:18AM
GONEGOLFIN wrote:
NDNTB-nice post-I agree whole-heartedly with you. Unfortunately, the unknown or change is always hard for people to adjust to. Much like the rail-obamacare, once in the works will be a blessing for most just like the rail-it will be beneficial, but until people can transition their way of thinking, obamacare, rail, or anything else involving people's ability to change will always be hard. WE all need to learn to open our minds and think outside of the box.
on September 30,2013 | 02:50PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
I give u credit, as the longest paragraph I ever wrote was about one third as long as yours. u have my vote as the next filibustering senator for The US Congress from The Great State of Hawaii.
on September 30,2013 | 06:32PM
soundofreason wrote:
"What do the Republicans not understand? Obamacare was voted on by the people in two elections in which Obama won. In essence, the people have already made a decision to support Obamacare">>> LET me remind you that NO ONE "knew" WHAT was IN Obamacare, hence the "We have to vote for it to see what's in it"...... quote. So, if your stance is that people VOTED for it, then you are bragging about supporting the actions of IGNORANCE. THAT'S what you want to tout?
on October 1,2013 | 06:39AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Lest you forgot, the Senate AND House passed the bill and passed the Supreme Court. And no, I am not bragging. Bragging is for people like you who have the arrogance to twist what is said.
on October 1,2013 | 10:42AM
jussayin wrote:
Same story, and same issue. If this was a private company, or even a college such as USC, the CEO/head coach would be fired as the person who is ultimately in charge and should assume responsibility. Oops, but this is politics and the government. Different rules. Something goes right, it's because of me. Something goes wrong, it's because of the other guy. Not worth getting excited about; it's the same thing for 5 years now. Expect more as the debt ceiling debate comes up next.
on September 30,2013 | 08:12AM
DiverDave wrote:
Yes jusayin, Somehow Obama will twist the truth and say that the 6 Trillion in new debt he has spent bailing out rich guys, banks, and cockamamie "green" schemes is the fault of the Republicans not wanting to charge rich people more taxes! LOL
on September 30,2013 | 08:34AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Eh, just surfed by FOX. Sarah Palin was on. She's arguing Obamacare is unconstitutional. And, they asked her how many dogs she has, and she couldn't count how many.
on September 30,2013 | 08:41AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Are you for or against the Constitution?
on October 1,2013 | 10:11AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Sorry, wrong again, Diver. The fact of the matter is that 2/3 of the Country want to let Obamacare go forward and play itself out. I think that's because American people basically are realistic and see the ultimate fairness, the wisdom of discharging obligations under the social contract we all live under, and the humanity of it. Advocacy of anything but affordable and accessible health care is simply a red badge of greed, avarice and ignorance. Thankfully, the real numbers still reflect that complete greed, avarice and ignorance are a minority in America. Yet, the numbers are still high enough to be disturbing.
on September 30,2013 | 08:28AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Exactly, the Republicans have the nerve to state that it is about fairness to the people when in fact it is not their true reasoning for fighting Obamacare. It is about the rich not wanting to subsidize an opportunity for the people to afford health insurance. The Republicans must think that we are stupid enough to buy their reasoning. Since when was their agenda about helping the poor and middle class acquire health care?
on October 1,2013 | 10:46AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Sorry, wrong again, Diver. The fact of the matter is that 2/3 of the Country want to let Obamacare go forward and play itself out. I think that's because American people basically are realistic and see the ultimate fairness, the wisdom of discharging obligations under the social contract we all live under, and the humanity of it. Advocacy of anything but affordable and accessible health care is simply a red badge of greed, avarice and ignorance. Thankfully, the real numbers still reflect that complete greed, avarice and ignorance are a minority in America. Yet, the numbers are still high enough to be disturbing.
on September 30,2013 | 08:34AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Sorry, wrong again, Diver. The fact of the matter is that 2/3 of the Country want to let Obamacare go forward and play itself out. I think that's because American people basically are realistic and see the ultimate fairness, the wisdom of discharging obligations under the social contract we all live under, and the humanity of it. Advocacy of anything but affordable and accessible health care is simply a red badge of greed, avarice and ignorance. Thankfully, the real numbers still reflect that complete greed, avarice and ignorance are a minority in America. Yet, the numbers are still high enough to be disturbing.
on September 30,2013 | 08:35AM
DiverDave wrote:
CriticalReader you can say that 2/3rds of the Country want it to go forward, but that doesn't make it true. I need you to cite that source. Everyone loves little puppies, but this dog called Obamacare won't hunt.
on September 30,2013 | 09:21AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
DiverDave, maybe you can cite your information regarding your claim that a government shutdown will not affect the economy. You might be surprised to find that economists do not agree with you.
on October 1,2013 | 10:48AM
DanLBoom wrote:
Lets See .... News Flash!! The major population opposes Obamacare..And agree it needs to be fixed first. Republicans are offering (one of many ) to postpone Obamacare and staighten out the mess within.AND to keep funding the government to avert a government shutdown. Democrats offer : "No Deal" . Keep funding Obamacare or else.....So who Really is responsible for the government shutdown??? So Where is the compromise ???? "Your quess is as good as mine" . Favorite quote of the day.Howard asks: Do you think a government shutdown will happen??Answer": "Your quess is as good as mine" . Collen Hanabusa. Don't you love it. I feel better already. Imua
on September 30,2013 | 08:38AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Republicans offer no alternatives or "improvements" to Obamacare other than a pure gutting, without any provision for current needs. That's why of the numbers that oppose Obamacare, a signficant portion "oppose" because it does not go far enough. Continuously suggesting Obamacare should not be implemented in it's current form because Amwerica does not want it is actually sophistry.
on September 30,2013 | 09:36AM
DiverDave wrote:
Forgetful memory Critical? The Republicans were never been allowed into the closed door Dems meetings on Obamacare prior to voting on it. Obama has said any time that he refuses to talk to, or compromise, with the Republicans on Obamacare. What planet have you been on MSLSD channel?
on September 30,2013 | 10:10AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Hmmmm. Team Partiers can come up with 21 hours straight of material for public consumption, but can only talk about additions or allege improvements to Obamacare behind closed doors? And you used the word "compromise", claiming the Dems refused to do it. Seems like it's the GOP that's taking the all or nothing approach. Kill Obamacare or we'll scream. Kill Obamacare or we'll kick. Kill Obamacare or else we'll shut down government. At a certain point in every hostage situation involving a lunatic pointing a gun to the head, talking is futile.
on September 30,2013 | 12:28PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Defund this massive tax hike.
on September 30,2013 | 10:57AM
Kuniarr wrote:
Obamacare is Socialized medicine which has no place in the US.
on September 30,2013 | 08:06PM
Slow wrote:
Which "other side?" China? Japan? Kim Jong Un? Norway? Pakistan? Guess who has al the ships, planes, guns and missiles? Us or the rest of the world combined?
on September 30,2013 | 08:52AM
boshio wrote:
All government shut downs should mean: No More Taxes until we have a new congress.
on September 30,2013 | 09:51AM
entrkn wrote:
Our children will read about the self-destruction of the Republican party like they read about dinosaurs now...
on September 30,2013 | 10:21AM
Rapanui00 wrote:
The two party system is broken - but I would rather side with Republicans then the entitlement Democratic Party!
on September 30,2013 | 11:09AM
false wrote:
Now is a great time to go through your stock portfolio and cull out the non-producers. The market will go down and will present a buying opportunity with the cash freed up.
on September 30,2013 | 10:21AM
Wonderful_World wrote:
he-he, I was just doing that!
on September 30,2013 | 10:54AM
PMA wrote:
Glad you're not my broker, false, indexes are all up today.
on October 1,2013 | 07:54AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
As his name implies, his statement is "false".
on October 1,2013 | 10:49AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Tom Berg go get a new computer so u need not be falsified lol.
on October 1,2013 | 11:50AM
loquaciousone wrote:
The repubican party will be forever known as the bonehead party led by head bonehead boner.
on September 30,2013 | 10:25AM
Rapanui00 wrote:
Obamacare is unconstitutional and another case of "socialism" and class warfare brought on by Obama -
on September 30,2013 | 11:07AM
DiverDave wrote:
Correct Rapanu00, Even though he will be looked upon as a weak and failed President, there is no doubt that he is the King of divide and conquer politics. While completely shameful, he has shown himself to be the King, in more ways than one.
on September 30,2013 | 11:57AM
CriticalReader wrote:
The American Taliban (the Tea Party), is about to succeed in doing what the Afghan Taliban backed Al Qaeda could not - shutting down the US government. What an accomplishment! What a turn of events. Just shows how dangerous demented zealots can be to America, however they cloak themselves.
on September 30,2013 | 12:02PM
DiverDave wrote:
CR, Now you are comparing Americans in favor of lower taxes to the Taliban. Typical name calling junk. I guess you have nothing but childish name calling to add. But, you have learned well from your man Obama, the "Divide and Conquer Specialist!"
on September 30,2013 | 01:10PM
HD36 wrote:
The government has shut down 17 times already, most recently when Tip O Neil was speaker of the House.
on September 30,2013 | 03:49PM
AhiPoke wrote:
I'm neither a republican nor in the tea party. I'm a citizen and a parent concerned about our nation's mounting debt being dumped on our next generation. I find it sickening to see our politicians fight over someting they created. Both parties had a hand in building this problem. The media tries to blame the tea party but when have you heard of a solution coming from the white house? In fact, wasn't it our president that voted against increasing the debt limit when he was a senator. So what's changed? Nothing, other than now it's his idea.
on September 30,2013 | 11:10AM
DiverDave wrote:
Yes AhiPoke, Obama was heard running through the White House recently yelling, "So little time, and so much money yet to spend!"
on September 30,2013 | 11:50AM
CriticalReader wrote:
DId this come from the same source as your polling and taxpayer stats?
on September 30,2013 | 12:04PM
DiverDave wrote:
At least my stats can be verified, CriticalReader.
on September 30,2013 | 12:38PM
CriticalReader wrote:
K verify them.
on September 30,2013 | 12:51PM
DiverDave wrote:
Simply go to the "National Tax Payers Union" and click on "Who pays income taxes?". Now you prove your false claim that 2/3rds of the American people want to go a ahead with Obamacare.
on September 30,2013 | 01:11PM
CriticalReader wrote:
You mean the page with the 2009 stats showing 5% paying far less than you assert (75%)? C'mon, brah, search harder. Try add "Tea Party Dementia" to your google search.
on September 30,2013 | 02:33PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
DiverDave, what have you been divining in? The stats that you claim has nothing to do with whether people voted for Obamacare or not. It does not add to the conversation.
on October 1,2013 | 10:59AM
yskeulb wrote:
The Republicans should demand Tort Reform instead of shutting down Obamacare.
on September 30,2013 | 11:21AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Sooner or later we were bound to hear from a doctor.
on September 30,2013 | 12:05PM
DiverDave wrote:
That was talked about, but the Dems wouldn't hear of it and passed Obamacare while they still had full control of both houses and the Presidency. Of course, Obama is a lawyer, so any tort reform would be out of the question.
on September 30,2013 | 12:20PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
DiverDave, how is Obama being a lawyer have anything to do with tort reform? If anything, he would be FOR it if you base it solely on his being a lawyer.
on October 1,2013 | 11:01AM
hawaiikone wrote:
You must be a democrat
on October 1,2013 | 03:40PM
Kuniarr wrote:
Obamacare is nothing more than a law enacted exclusively by Democrats without a single Republican having a voice on this particular law. Plus not a single Democrat who rammed this law down the peoples throat knows exactly what this law is because this law with over 11,000 pages of regulations is so voluminous that nobody really has a complete knowledge of what Obamacare is.
on September 30,2013 | 11:47AM
DiverDave wrote:
True Kuniarr, and since the Republicans are speaking for the majority of the people in the U.S. on this topic it is the same Dems and President that are denying the people's voice to be heard.
on September 30,2013 | 12:16PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Soooo any time there's a vote along party lines on a bill with lots of pages, the opposing side gets to shut down government if they manage to gain (actually "regain", cuz it's gone back and forth in history), a majority somewhere capable of engineering the closure of government? That's the new American political paradigm? I point this out merely to demonstrate how inane your comment is and not for any other reason.
on September 30,2013 | 12:14PM
DiverDave wrote:
This not a new phenomena CR. Dems did the same shutdown during Reagan's administration. The difference in the past was a compromise was always found. Obama refuses to even talk. So much for leadership, "It's my way and that's it!". What he doesn't understand is that he isn't just saying this to Republicans, he is saying this to the majority of American people.
on September 30,2013 | 12:36PM
Thor wrote:
If this was a private business they would be filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, just saying.....
on September 30,2013 | 12:36PM
niimi wrote:
I don't know, I was raised during Burns and Ariyoshi, a time where my fellow Democrats were all fiscally prudent. So I hope this shutdown goes on for months until my fellow Democrats learn a lesson and go back to their roots in fiscal prudence.
on September 30,2013 | 12:38PM
DiverDave wrote:
It's been a great discussion all. Now I have to go to my pesky job, so I can pay for the insurance I already have, and chose without Obama's help. Talk to you all again soon.
on September 30,2013 | 01:15PM
localguy wrote:
Boehner and his merry band of thieves plus all the other clueless clowns of congress and senate just don't get it. They see nothing wrong in playing games with the American economy, our paychecks, just so they can have their way. Bunch of petty bureaucrats, snot nosed, red headed step children who all need a good trip to the wood shed. How can they go to work each day knowing nothing will be done, just sit there and get paid while the rest of us suffer. If you haven't written your dysfunctional rep, need to let them know they rate lower than used car sales reps and proctologists. What a bunch of losers, legends in their own mind.
on September 30,2013 | 01:05PM
localguy wrote:
Boehner and his merry band of thieves plus all the other clueless clowns of congress and senate just don't get it. They see nothing wrong in playing games with the American economy, our paychecks, just so they can have their way. Bunch of petty bureaucrats, snot nosed, red headed step children who all need a good trip to the wood shed. How can they go to work each day knowing nothing will be done, just sit there and get paid while the rest of us suffer. If you haven't written your dysfunctional rep, need to let them know they rate lower than used car sales reps and proct ologists. What a bunch of losers, legends in their own mind.
on September 30,2013 | 01:05PM
Hawaiians wrote:
http://gabbard.house.gov/frequently-asked-questions-government-shutdown#2 This answers alot of questions regarding a possible shut down!
on September 30,2013 | 02:22PM
Skyler wrote:
Thanks for that.
on September 30,2013 | 07:22PM
OnlyChrist wrote:
"...to act responsibly and do what is right for the American people" ??? Everything went wrong for the American people from day one when Obama took office ???
on September 30,2013 | 02:02PM
CloudForest wrote:
DEMS = Tyranny
on September 30,2013 | 03:34PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
"House Speaker John Boehner responded a few hours later on the House floor. "The American people don't want a shutdown and neither do I," he said. Yet, he added, the new health care law "is having a devastating impact. ... Something has to be done."" Mr. Boehner is completely out of his mind to believe that he has to hold our budget hostage in order to fulfill his agenda. The people have already voted twice in essence to the Obamacare. The Supreme Court has already cleared it. But the Senate and House has already passed it. Now, because these Republicans are not happy they are taking our budget hostage and putting our economy in jeopardy. If Boehner really does not want to see a government shutdown, then he would not be doing what he is doing. He must think that we, the people, are stupid to buy his reasoning. Mr. Boehner, this is not the time and place to play your political games. A government shutdown will do much to damage our economy which at this time is in a very fragile state. Forcing his agenda on the budget is a precedent that our President would be foolish to comply with. Mr. Boehner knows that. He is using this issue to do his political grandstanding for the advancement of the Republican party. But in the end, this may backfire on him and the Republicans as people begin to see how foolish he is. Someone needs to remove this selfish crazed man off the podium and replace him with someone with common sense.
on September 30,2013 | 04:17PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Harry Reid is worst.
on September 30,2013 | 04:54PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
""This is a matter of funding the government and providing fairness to the American people," said Boehner. "Why wouldn't members of Congress vote for it?"" Fair to whom, Mr. Boehner? The rich?
on September 30,2013 | 04:26PM
frontman wrote:
I know this is a bias left wing rag but for once tell the truth................. Democrats are shutting down the government not the Republicans.
on September 30,2013 | 04:34PM
primowarrior wrote:
According to Byron York, a Conservative columnist for the Washington Examiner, there are about 175 GOP members of the House who would vote for a "clean" funding bill if Boehner would bring it to the floor for a vote. Apparently, the Tea Party has control of Boehner.
on September 30,2013 | 04:34PM
Pacej001 wrote:
So negative these comments. Think positive. There's a silver lining to the grey shutdown cloud: EPA closed, a big economic plus. IRS activities limited, don't need to explain. The NLRB's 1,600???!! employees off the job. Parks closed, less stress on wildlife. ------ I say let the goodness happen.
on September 30,2013 | 05:03PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Yes, and Obamacare will go forward even with the government shut down the way the GOP House has arranged it. So stupid.
on September 30,2013 | 08:03PM
loquaciousone wrote:
The republican party will be forever known as the bonehead party led by head bonehead John.
on September 30,2013 | 05:37PM
PMA wrote:
Duh!!! When you have nothing to add, call names.
on October 1,2013 | 08:01AM
Kapaho wrote:
Politics as usual. It's sickening that damn GOP house leader is using his own agenda instead of the party and the people to bring the government to a halt. He is always against Obama and will do anything to make Obama look bad. Kick that red neck out of congress.
on September 30,2013 | 06:24PM
false wrote:
All this rhetoric back and forth. The sad fact is that YOU, the U.S.taxpayer, will be paying for this subsidized program.
on September 30,2013 | 06:59PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
As a tax payer, I have no problems paying so that others who cannot afford health care get it. I would rather have my tax dollars pay for my fellow citizens as by helping them we help make America a better place to live.
on October 1,2013 | 11:04AM
BluesBreaker wrote:
I'm okay with that. The gap between rich and poor has never been greater in this country. There are a lot of working poor who need health care for themselves and their families (those who are destitute can get Medicaid). If those better off chip in and it helps reduce the inequality, that sounds fine. We can't continue to have a stable country when only a few have the majority of the money and millions are just scraping by.
on October 1,2013 | 06:56PM