Quantcast
  

Sunday, April 20, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 176 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

White House meeting yields no progress on shutdown

By David Espo

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:19 a.m. HST, Oct 03, 2013


WASHINGTON >> President Barack Obama brought congressional leaders to the White House Wednesday for the first time since a partial government shutdown began, but there was no sign of progress toward ending an impasse that has idled 800,000 federal workers and curbed services around the country.

The standoff continued after a White House summit with chief executives as financial leaders and Wall street urged a resolution before serious damage is done to the U.S. and world economy.

Obama "refuses to negotiate," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio., told reporters after private talks that lasted more than an hour. "All we're asking for here is a discussion and fairness for the American people under Obamacare."

But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said moments later, "We're locked in tight on Obamacare" and neither the president nor Democrats will accept changes in the nation's 3-year-old health care law as the price for spending legislation needed to end the two-day partial shutdown.

With the nation's ability to borrow money soon to lapse, Republicans and Democrats alike said the shutdown could last for two weeks or more, and soon oblige a divided government to grapple with both economy-threatening issues at the same time.

The White House said in a statement after the meeting that Obama had made it clear "he is not going to negotiate over the need for Congress to act to reopen the government or to raise the debt limit to pay the bills Congress has already incurred."

It added, "The president remains hopeful that common sense will prevail."

The high-level bickering at microphones set up outside the White House reflected the day's proceedings in the Capitol.

The Republican-controlled House approved legislation to reopen the nation's parks and the National Institutes of Health, even though many Democrats criticized them as part of a piecemeal approach that fell far short of what was needed. The bills face dim prospects in the Senate, and the White House threatened to veto both in the unlikely event they make it to Obama's desk.

"What we're trying to do is to get the government open as quickly as possible," said the House majority leader, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia. "And all that it would take is us realizing we have a lot in agreement."

Earlier, an attempt by Democrats to force shutdown-ending legislation to the House floor failed on a 227-197 vote, with all Republicans in opposition. That left intact the tea party-driven strategy of demanding changes to the nation's health care overhaul as the price for essential federal financing, despite grumbling from Republican moderates.

The stock market ended lower as Wall Street CEOs, Europe's central banker and traders pressed for a solution. Chief executives from the nation's biggest financial firms met Obama for more than an hour today, some of them plainly frustrated with the tactics at play in Congress and with the potential showdown coming over the debt limit.

"You can re-litigate these policy issues in a political forum, but we shouldn't use threats of causing the U.S. to fail on its obligations to repay its debt as a cudgel," Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs, said after the meeting.

Democrats were scathing in their criticism.

"The American people would get better government out of Monkey Island at the local zoo than we're giving them today," said Rep. John Dingell of Michigan.

The Republican National Committee announced it would pay for personnel needed to reopen the World War II Memorial, a draw for aging veterans from around the country that is among the sites shuttered. In a statement, party chairman Reince Priebus challenged Democrats "to join with us in keeping this memorial open."

Democrats labeled that a stunt. "We've already been working on a plan to open the Memorial -- and the entire government -- after the GOP caused them to close," said party spokesman Mo Elleithee. "It's called a clean" spending bill.

As it turned out, more than 125 World War II veterans from Mississippi and Iowa who were initially kept out of the memorial Tuesday were escorted to the site with the help of members of Congress. Officials made further arrangements to allow veterans groups into the memorial during the shutdown.

A sampling of federal agencies showed how unevenly the shutdown was felt across the government.

The Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Housing and Urban Development listed only six percent of their employees as essential, and therefore permitted to work during the impasse. James R. Clapper, director of national intelligence, said about 70 percent of civilian employees in agencies under his control had been sent home.

By contrast, about 86 percent of employees of the Department of Homeland Security remained on the job, and 95 percent at the Veterans Affairs Department.

One furloughed employee, meteorologist Amy Fritz, said, "I want to get back to work." At a news conference arranged by congressional Democrats, the 38-year-old National Weather Service employee said she has more than $100,000 in student loan debt and is looking at ways to cut her budget.

In an interview with CNBC before meeting with lawmakers, Obama said he would not negotiate with Republicans until the government is reopened and Congress votes to raise the debt limit.

"If we get in the habit where a few folks, an extremist wing of one party, whether it's Democrat or Republican, are allowed to extort concessions based on a threat (to)  undermine the full faith and credit of the United States, then any president who comes after me, not just me, will find themselves unable to govern effectively," he said.

"The White House said Obama would have to truncate a long-planned trip to Asia, calling off the final two stops in Malaysia and the Philippines.

The shutdown also intruded into the race for governor of Virginia.

Terry McAuliffe, the Democrat, said he supported legislation to guarantee retroactive pay for furloughed federal employees. The Republican contender, Ken Cuccinelli, called on members of Congress to decline their pay as long as the shutdown lasts.

The House sidetracked legislation Tuesday night to reopen some veterans programs, the national parks and a portion of the Washington, D.C., municipal government. All three bills fell short of the two-thirds majority needed when Democrats voted overwhelmingly against this.

Republicans tried again, this time under rules requiring only a simple majority. The parks measure was approved on a vote of 252-173, with 23 Democrats breaking ranks and voting in favor. The vote to reopen NIH was 254-171. The House also voted to allow the Washington, D.C., government to use the taxes it collects to operate programs.

Votes were deferred on more bills, one to assure pay for members of the National Guard and Reserves and another to allow some veterans programs to resume.

The NIH bill was added to the day's agenda after Democrats had said seriously ill patients would be turned away from the facility's hospital of last resort, and no new enrollment permitted in experimental treatments.

Democratic Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York said the Republican response was a ploy. "Every time they see a bad headline they're going to bring a bill to the floor and make it go away," she said.

Some Republicans took obvious pleasure in the rough rollout Tuesday of new health insurance markets created under Obama's health care law. Widespread online glitches prevented many people from signing up for coverage that begins in January.

Rep. Trey Radel of Florida said a 14-year-old could build a better website "in an afternoon in his basement."

At issue is the need to pass a temporary funding bill to keep the government open since the start of the new budget year on Tuesday.

Congress has passed more than 100 temporary funding bills since the last shutdown in 1996, almost all of them without controversy. The streak was broken because conservative Republicans have held up the current measure in the longshot hope of derailing or delaying Obamacare, just as the health insurance markets at the heart of the law opened on Tuesday.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 176 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(176)
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.
kailua000 wrote:
TODAY? They were not working yesterday? the President calls a meeting for TODAY? they should be working 24/7 till its done. PERIOD.
on October 2,2013 | 06:32AM
OldDiver wrote:
There are currently enough votes in the Republican controlled House to pass the clean bill. The hold up is Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner refusing to hold an up or down vote to please Tea Party Republicans.
on October 2,2013 | 08:53AM
hanalei395 wrote:
For the coward, John Boehner, the Tea Party Republicans come first, not the country.
on October 2,2013 | 10:17AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The government shutdown by the Tea Party Republicans is backfiring on ALL Republicans.
on October 2,2013 | 10:43AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Capitulating in any way to Boehner, or letting him "save face", teaches him and his Republican House cohorts nothing. Stand firm Mr. President. We ask you to do that in the face of challenges to our Government from the rest of the world. Do it in the face of this challenge to our Government from WITHIN, regardless if it is borne of ignorance, meanness and racism (likely), or simply stupidity (OK, normally somewhat redundant for normal people, but Republicans are abnormal people).
on October 2,2013 | 01:06PM
HD36 wrote:
Stand firm Tea Party Republicans, the only group that respects the Constitution of the United States. The majority of people want to wait untill the market collapses the bond market, but by then it will be too late.
on October 2,2013 | 03:32PM
EightOEight wrote:
Yes, PLEASE, stand firm so Dems can win back the House next year.
on October 2,2013 | 04:42PM
hanalei395 wrote:
"Stand firm" on the Tea Party's ransom ....Shut down Obamacare, or the government will be kept shut down.
on October 2,2013 | 07:45PM
goinglobal wrote:
Just like Harry Reid would not have an up or down vote on the budget for the last 4 years..... talk about hypocrasy...
on October 2,2013 | 12:08PM
OldDiver wrote:
The Senate passed a budget six months ago and sent it to the House. Republican House Speaker John Boehner refuses to send to the House for debate.
on October 2,2013 | 02:19PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Now why, oh, why could that be? Could it be that the Republicans have given up on a sane, collaborative budgeting process after four years of continuing resolutions, no national budget, forced by the democrat senate and the failure of Obama to negotiate in good faith in the fiscal cliff mess before the sequester took place? Answer: YES.------------ So, now, your camp is all up in arms about the budgeting process you've forcefully ignored, for partisan political advantage, for ALL of Obama's first term? ---------- And this call for Boehner to just let the House vote, another sudden conversion to pure democratic process after Harry Reid has kept House Bill after House Bill from being debated, much less voted on by the Senate. --------- So, bottom line, you fellows need to put on the sweater with the big red "H" on it and wear it 24/7.
on October 2,2013 | 04:53PM
OldDiver wrote:
Total Fox News nonsense.
on October 2,2013 | 05:17PM
Pacej001 wrote:
My sympathies. Running out of ammo during a firefight is a B----.
on October 2,2013 | 06:26PM
EightOEight wrote:
Old Diver, thumbs up.
on October 2,2013 | 06:52PM
Denominator wrote:
Amazing how Obama is so tough with Republicans and such a wimp with Russians, Syrians, Iranians, Chinese and just about anyone.
on October 2,2013 | 08:04PM
EightOEight wrote:
Denominator, I assume you're willing to pay for WWIII, right Mr. macho?
on October 2,2013 | 09:17PM
carolm wrote:
No it's not. The Democrats don't want a budget since they only want to spend, spend, spend.
on October 2,2013 | 09:21PM
serious wrote:
And what is our President doing today? Business as usual, he's doing a campaign speech in Maryland.
on October 3,2013 | 04:32AM
Denominator wrote:
Total MSNBC plop!
on October 2,2013 | 08:06PM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:34PM
EightOEight wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 09:18PM
SteveToo wrote:
The hold up is Obama and the Democrats who refuse to give a little.
on October 2,2013 | 08:06PM
meat wrote:
The House, Republican led, voted and passed, with the help of a few Democrats 4 compromises and sent it to the Senate led by Democrats to avoid the shutdown. Only to have Harry Reid and the Senate REJECT them without floor discussion So yesterday the House again passed a bill, with the support of 30 Democrats to put back gov. funding for cancer services for children and sent that to the Senate to get passed and guess what, REJECTED. Then Harry Reid was quoted saying, "why would we want to do that.". You Democrats are a piece of cake.
on October 3,2013 | 05:28AM
EightOEight wrote:
If the Tpubs cared so much about kids with cancer they wouldn't have rejected to move into budget conference with the Dems 18 times this year. Now that they're feeling the heat they want bandaid solutions. I wouldn't negotiate in piecemeal either.
on October 3,2013 | 06:26AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The President will remind the Republicans ......Obamacare is here to stay. PERIOD.
on October 2,2013 | 09:57AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Boehner says that Obama "will not negotiate" ... IN OTHER WORDS ...Obama will not postpone Obamacare for a year.
on October 2,2013 | 01:07PM
Skyler wrote:
Obamacare is postponing itself by being glitchy. Don't know what their (R's) issue is, honestly.
on October 2,2013 | 02:13PM
hanalei395 wrote:
The glitches, because of the millions logging on, is making the bimbos (male and female) on Fox "News" happy and "giddy". "That proves Obamacare is not working".
on October 2,2013 | 02:28PM
mischal wrote:
So, is it okay with you that the Dems are forcing Obama Care on the nation but exempted themselves from it so they can get their 72% subsidy? How is that fair?
on October 2,2013 | 02:49PM
hanalei395 wrote:
You STILL don't get it. ... Obamacare is for those with NO HEALTH CARE. And the MILLIONS in the nation who are signing up for Obamacare, .... they are NOT being "FORCED" to do it.
on October 2,2013 | 03:12PM
EightOEight wrote:
mischal, why do you believe the spin on the right? GOP Staffer on Vitter Amendment: "Congress Literally Threw Staff Under The Bus" http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/obamacare-employer-contribution-exemption-vitter-amendment%20 and http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/25/no-congress-isnt-trying-to-exempt-itself-from-obamacare/
on October 2,2013 | 04:37PM
bsdetection wrote:
Congress did not exempt itself from the ACA. Like all other Federal employees, they were not covered by the law because the law is for people who don't have health insurance. Chuck Grassley introduced an amendment which would require Congress to give up their Federal health coverage and enter the ACA marketplaces because he assumed Dems would vote against it; then he thought he would be able to campaign by saying that Dems wanted the ACA to apply to other people but not themselves. Dems called his bluff and voted for his amendment. Part of Congress' compensation package was that the government paid most, but not all, of their health insurance premiums. The 72% subsidy they are getting toward the cost of being in an ACA marketplace is the same amount that the government paid before. No reasonable person would expect that someone would give up their employer-paid health coverage, join the ACA marketplace, AND forfeit the portion of their health coverage that the employer paid. This is a Fox News fake story, a Potemkin Village.
on October 3,2013 | 06:41AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
No Obama is will not postpone it for a year because next year the Republicans will do the same thing, then the year after that, the same thing. Its kinda like some guy kidnapping your wife and telling you he'll let her go if you pay a ransom, so you pay then the next year he figures you for an easy mark and he kidnaps your wife again. The difference here of course is, the Republicans are trying to hold Obamacare hostage with the ransom being defunding or delaying the signature legislative accomplishment. They have to do this because they could not repeal Obamacare the old fashioned way, by winning elections and repealing the act legislatively. Here is what is so wrong about this, you have a beef about a program, so you shut down the government. That is just plain wrong. The Republicans are so obsessed with killing Obamacare, and so frustrated that they could not prevail at the ballot box, they are doing it the only way they know how, hostage taking. The only problem is, they are shooting the economy and the millions of Americans who work in public service and depend on government services. Oh by the way, if you haven't noticed, Obamacare is rolling out, yeah there has been some cliches but lets face it, Obamacare is the law of the land, by the end of the year millions of people will be getting affordable health care and as every month passes, more and more Americans will be invested in the Affordable Care Act that repeal will simply be impossible. Get over it jerks, reopen the government.
on October 2,2013 | 03:17PM
Denominator wrote:
Funny how "affordable health care" in Hawaii will cost all of us more money.
on October 2,2013 | 08:10PM
hanalei395 wrote:
What is funny, is that you're a funny liar.
on October 2,2013 | 08:24PM
hawaiikone wrote:
It has cost me 18% more. You and Barry are the liars.
on October 2,2013 | 10:07PM
hanalei395 wrote:
All health care rates were going up, way before Obamacare. And what's "funny", you think Obamacare is doing it.
on October 3,2013 | 04:34AM
hawaiikone wrote:
Not when the trustees of my health coverage detail exactly why the rules in obamacare require the 18% premium hike.
on October 3,2013 | 03:23PM
kahuku01 wrote:
Denominator: Unaware! Please give us an insight of some factual figures as to how in Hawaii. it will cost us more money. Willing to be amazed at your statement.
on October 3,2013 | 04:01AM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:34PM
frontman wrote:
Democrats want a government shutdown, even if Michelle loses he 18, yes 18, assistants.
on October 2,2013 | 03:38PM
EightOEight wrote:
You people are getting desperate. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/firstlady.asp
on October 2,2013 | 04:30PM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:34PM
EightOEight wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 09:19PM
soundofreason wrote:
"Is the Obama administration employing a make-it-hurt strategy to gain political leverage in the budget battle on Capitol Hill? Republicans are making that charge as the stalemate drags on, and point to the Pentagon furlough of 400,000 civilian staffers -- even though Congress passed and the president signed a bill to supposedly keep them on the job. "
on October 2,2013 | 06:45AM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:35PM
EightOEight wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 09:19PM
Carang_da_buggahz wrote:
So, a couple hundred thou government workers are spending another day not working? Good. Then it's just business as usual, eh? They ought to be feeling right at home about now.
on October 2,2013 | 06:45AM
kailua000 wrote:
my concern is for the US Military - they should be getting their paycheck before politicians. My son is stationed overseas, he works whether or not he gets a paycheck and their paycheck isn't much as it is.
on October 2,2013 | 08:52AM
primowarrior wrote:
I believe Congress passed, and Obama signed, a provision to pay the military anyway.
on October 2,2013 | 09:19AM
Skyler wrote:
You are correct.
on October 2,2013 | 02:14PM
serious wrote:
Yes, I got my pay today!! Military retired!!
on October 2,2013 | 03:42PM
GONEGOLFIN wrote:
You may be surprized just how big it really is. If he is getting overseas pay, cola, housing....whatever.....I guarantee you he's making more than you think.
on October 2,2013 | 03:40PM
EightOEight wrote:
My concern is for ALL Americans who will not be getting a paycheck because of this fiasco through no fault of their own.
on October 2,2013 | 06:39PM
markat wrote:
In order for a democratic government to function, lawmakers must be willing to participate in rational discussion and balanced negotiation. There is an inherent understanding that when there are two opposing views, give-and-take is often required to reach a medium. Unfortunately, our democratic system has broken down entirely, and we have now put immature, irrational, idiots in charge of a function for which they are incapable of performing. Rather than keeping the interests of the country in mind, they are behaving like little brats, refusing to participate unless they get their way. It is much like the child who doesn't get his way and decides to take all his toys home so no one else can play. The erosion of rationality and maturity that we have seen in Congress over the recent years signals a breakdown in the democratic process. I wouldn't be surprise to see fistfights breaking out in Congress in the near future, much as we've seen in European and Asian lawmaking bodies. One of Congress primary functions is to pay its bills and keep the country running. To shut down the government is akin to a business shutting down. When a business cannot pay its bills and must shut down, the people running the business are essentially 'fired' for failing to keep it afloat. The same should happen to Congress. They should all be fired for failing to fulfill the most fundamental responsibility that they are charged with. Unfortunately, our lawmakers have sold us out along with the democracy upon which this country was built so even if we fired them all, the next group that comes along will still be challenged with the framework of corruption that has replaced true democracy. The 'mutated' democracy is run by big business,for big business but being paid for by the people. Broken democracy, broken government. Sorry, I don't have an answer, but thanks for letting me vent anyway.
on October 2,2013 | 07:20AM
pcman wrote:
IRT markat on democracy. As shown by the president, he can call for or against a furlough for all or a fraction of federal workers and military if he wants to. The pres chose the furlough to take place. So he did not negotiate a compromise between the Senate and the House of Reps.
on October 2,2013 | 10:27AM
GONEGOLFIN wrote:
pcman, I doubt the pres's job as you put it is to "negociate a compomise". I would have you refer back to the previous comment from markat.
on October 2,2013 | 03:44PM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:35PM
EightOEight wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 09:19PM
false wrote:
Man, you took up a lot of space. LOL
on October 2,2013 | 11:35AM
Skyler wrote:
And it's a hard read without breaks in there. < br > is your friend.
on October 2,2013 | 02:15PM
BO0o07 wrote:
I don't know if others agree with your comment above but for me, you hit the nail squarely on the head.
on October 2,2013 | 03:15PM
localguy wrote:
Republicans are feeling the heat bad. Just as Gingrich failed the party and was wiped away, looks like Boehner is yesterday's news, soon to be on the political ash heap. No loss there, the fool is a legend in his own mind. No integrity, just thinks he is another pretty face for the party. Really. Looks more like a horses patoot, an egg sucking mule. They just don't care how the rest of us are treated, how backwards their failure makes the USA look. Bureaucrats, bottom of the gene pool.
on October 2,2013 | 07:29AM
kailua000 wrote:
Democrats are just as accountable for this mess as the Republicans. No one wants to budge. They BOTH took a 2 week vacation knowing this was going to come upon us, meeting the last minute as if they were going to pass a budget or law in under 24 hours. They should be on the job 24/7 till they fix this mess. They need to do the jobs they were elected to do and if not, removed each and every one of them next election day. no wait, I must be a tea bag crazy and a racist to make a statement like this.
on October 2,2013 | 08:57AM
false wrote:
Obama's "My way or the highway" attitude should make Mufi proud.
on October 2,2013 | 01:09PM
312guy wrote:
that was bush remember "im the decider"
on October 2,2013 | 07:36PM
Pacej001 wrote:
"party .. was wiped away". You know, this stuff just isn't that hard to look up. In the 1996 Congressional election (after the Gingrich shutdown, winter 1995-1996), The Republicans lost two House seats and gained two Senate seats, overall, retaining the majority in BOTH houses of congress. Given the singular unpopularity of Obamacare (as opposed to the less clear reasons for shutdown in 1995), the Republicans could and should do even better in 2014, provided they hang in there until Obama climbs down off his "I won't negotiate" pedestal which doesn't pass the common sense test.
on October 2,2013 | 05:10PM
EightOEight wrote:
Today, after the White House meeting: House Republicans are continuing to play hardball in negotiations over the spending bill that precipitated the government shutdown on Oct. 1, apparently out of fear that compromise would weaken their power. "We're not going to be disrespected," Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) told The Washington Examiner. "We have to get something out of this. And I don't know what that even is." If that's not insanity I don't know what is.
on October 2,2013 | 07:29PM
Pacej001 wrote:
I thought Obama decided not to negotiate with the Republicans.
on October 2,2013 | 07:37AM
EightOEight wrote:
President Obama said he will not negotiate to defund the ACA or on raising the debt ceiling. That's it. Implying otherwise is conservative smoke and mirrors.
on October 2,2013 | 12:12PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Okedokey. I agree the repeal thing was a bridge too far. However the Republicans aren't asking for that now. They're asking for a one year delay (like the one year delay Obama just gave big business) and for basic fairness (like, why should business get a delay, but individuals not) and that Congressmen and their staff not be given huge subsidies to buy Obamacare insurance policies, subsidies that no one else at that income level will be getting. ----- Do the democrats hate fairness? Just asking.
on October 2,2013 | 05:15PM
EightOEight wrote:
Delay=give us more time to kill The ACA. Forget it. As for the bogus exemption/subsidy argument, please read the articles I referred mischal to. Do Tpubs hate for Americans to have affordable health care? Just asking.
on October 2,2013 | 06:59PM
kuroiwaj wrote:
Interesting, Pres. Obama blinked. Now, we shall see how he governs on this issue of the Govt closure and Debt. He has failed on nearly all the other major issue impacting Americans.
on October 2,2013 | 07:53AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Really now, Obama blinked. Get a grip the one thing the Republicans want, a repeal or defunding of Obamacare is simply not going to happen. He is simply not going to let his signature piece of legislation be taken hostage. No the poor Republicans have no choice but to take a hostage because they could not accomplish their goal of repealing Obamacare the good old American way - by winning elections. They don't care that the American people first elected a president who made healthcare reform his signature item, they then re-elected him again AFTER Obamacare was passed. No, if they could not accomplish their goal at the ballot box they turn to legislative terrorist, take a hostage, and when the President doesn't cave, shoot the economy, federal workers and the public who receive help through various federal programs.
on October 2,2013 | 08:29AM
kuroiwaj wrote:
HI HawaiiCheeseBall, don't wish too hard for you may get your wish of Pres. Obama giving in on the one year delay on Obamacare. He kept saying he was never going to meet and negotiate with the Republicans, and a day following the opening of Obamacare he calls for a meeting with the Congressional leaders. He is going to give in again, as he has many times facing other leaders. He is a wimp.
on October 2,2013 | 10:58AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Bro you know what - he is a wimp. BUT. I don't think he will ever compromise on his legacy and that's what the Affordable Care Act is. He know if he agrees to a one year delay a year from now the Republicans will simply take another hostage and demand another delay, then another, then he will be out of office. That is the big miscalculation the Republicans are making, he simply cannot concede on Obamacare. Secondly is I suspect he feels that is simply wrong to tie Obamacare to the budget and debt ceiling. No I think the President's strategy will be to pound Speaker Boehner to have an up or down vote on the continuuing resolution. Boehner knows he cant do that because it would pass, but by asking for an up or down vote it further the rift between the centrist and conservative republicans and lays naked the Republican's culpability for the shut down.
on October 2,2013 | 11:27AM
mischal wrote:
Yep. The ACA is his legacy and it`s such a great program, he exempted the WH from it.
on October 2,2013 | 02:53PM
Pacej001 wrote:
The Rs are asking for DELAY, not repeal, not permanent/infinite defunding. Performing the House's constitutional duty as a co-equal with the Senate on budget matters doesn't mean the House has to just roll over and agree with whatever Harry Reid tosses at them. This, Cheese, is why we have House elections every two years, so the immediate will if the people can be heard. In the 2010 election, the democrats got the boot and in 2012, the House stayed in Republican hands, mainly because enough people hate Obamacare so much that they kept the Republicans in charge. ---- All this hostage, arsonist, anarchist, suicide bomber baloney being thrown at the republicans is just denial of the two House election results.
on October 2,2013 | 05:22PM
EightOEight wrote:
Will of the people....you mean like how most people want stricter background checks and gun control?
on October 2,2013 | 07:04PM
kuroiwaj wrote:
After tonights meeting, stalemate. No one moved. Now, the next meeting, when and what time. The Republicans win every time Pres Obama and Sen Reed cannot move the Speaker. Here comes the WWII veterans.
on October 2,2013 | 01:29PM
kahaluu96744 wrote:
This all started five years ago when the Senate refused to pass a federal budget like it is supposed to do as part of its job because it does not want to make the hard choices. Since then, the administration has not submitted its budget on time and the Senate ignores its responsibility to pass a workable federal budget so we have Continuing Resolutions to keep on spending. If the administration and Congress did their jobs, we would not be in this position today.
on October 2,2013 | 08:06AM
kailua000 wrote:
thank you! finally someone is speaking the truth.
on October 2,2013 | 08:58AM
CriticalReader wrote:
No, it goes back to Reagan being stupid enough to let that maniac David Stockman dictate American economic policy.
on October 2,2013 | 01:17PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Finally, It's Reagan's fault?
on October 2,2013 | 05:23PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
This Pres said he will balance the budget when he was campaining for the POTHUS. Has those words ever cross his lips these pass few days or weeks? When the Government forces the citizens to do as they say, it's time to be really concerned.
on October 2,2013 | 09:13AM
primowarrior wrote:
The administration was late submitting it's budget because it needed to factor in the effects of sequestration. The Senate passed a budget six months ago. The next step should have been to go to conference with the House and their version to work out any differences, but Boehner has consistently refused calls by the Senate to name his conferees and allow this process to move forward.
on October 2,2013 | 09:26AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Check this out: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/10/house-republicans-wait-at-a-table-for-dems-to-negotiate-budget/
on October 2,2013 | 09:47AM
EightOEight wrote:
Nothing but a photo op in a desperate attempt to deflect blame for the shutdown. "Murray highlighted that this latest round of manufactured crises could have been avoided if Republicans joined Democrats in a budget conference when the Senate and House budgets passed 179 days ago. Murray and Senate Democrats have come to the Senate floor 18 times to request consent to move to a budget conference with the House, and were blocked each time by Republicans." http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/pressreleases---statements?ContentRecord_id=4bd877f4-0401-4837-8f90-730a91519fc6
on October 2,2013 | 11:02AM
goinglobal wrote:
What about the last 4 years when Harry Reid refused to even vote on a budget??? Funny you cant remember that
on October 2,2013 | 12:06PM
EightOEight wrote:
You living in the here and now, goingglobal, or you want to stay stuck in the shutdown? 18 rejections to go to budget conference in the last six months. What don't you get?
on October 2,2013 | 12:47PM
Pacej001 wrote:
After four years of being jerked around by the democrat senate's failure to produce a budget resolution, it's pretty hard to blame the Republicans for returning the favor. With no presidential leadership and no indication that the democrats or the president would negotiate in good faith after the sequester mess, why would the Republicans do otherwise?
on October 2,2013 | 05:27PM
EightOEight wrote:
Oh, pace, so that's what this shutdown is all about...revenge against the Dems and Obama. Got that all you furloughed workers??
on October 2,2013 | 06:46PM
Anonymous wrote:
Mahalo for setting the record straight and putting things in perspective. You clearly defined the problem. Boehner walked into a trap and doesn't know it. The Constitution REQUIRES that an annual budget be passed. The Republicans should have focused on ensuring that the Senate met its obligation rather than focus on Affordable Healthcare. They lost that vote so let it go. When the "train wreck" occurs as predicted, the Democrats will have no one else to blame. The intent may be good, but the planning leaves a lot to be desired and the consequences will devastating. It's already a flop. People can't register, receive information or make choices like they should in the 36 states where the federal government is running the program. They're talking about hiring interpreters in 150 different languages. Why this huge expense? Aren't Americans suppose to be able to speak, read and understand English?
on October 2,2013 | 09:57AM
goinglobal wrote:
You seem to forget the Harry Reid has not voted on a budget for the entire first term of Obama....
on October 2,2013 | 12:05PM
AhiPoke wrote:
It's a start. What I'm watching for are signs of true negotiations not political posturing, on both sides. Hopefully that happens.
on October 2,2013 | 08:06AM
kennysmith wrote:
I WANT TO KICK THEM OUT OF OFFICE
on October 2,2013 | 08:11AM
kailua000 wrote:
every last one of them, republic and democrat
on October 2,2013 | 08:58AM
Bdpapa wrote:
Yes! Total recall!
on October 2,2013 | 09:39AM
kuroiwaj wrote:
Hawaii doesn't have any Republicans in Congress to kick out.
on October 2,2013 | 11:03AM
false wrote:
Awww.... kick em out anyway!
on October 2,2013 | 11:38AM
false wrote:
Hawaii might be a good place to start.
on October 2,2013 | 11:37AM
primowarrior wrote:
I think the President and Reid should not negotiate. If roles were reversed, and we had a Republican President and a Democrat House, and the Democrats had attached a provision to the CR to, for example, raise taxes or increase spending, would the Tea Party controlled GOP and President be willing to negotiate? Of course not, and they would be right not to. I think it is dangerous for one side to attach provisions to "must pass" legislation like funding the government and the debt ceiling to try to force concessions from the other, because the impasse that will result may prevent the "must pass" legislation from actually being passed, which can cause damage to our country. Submitting to negotiations under these conditions will only encourage more of this dangerous behavior. I think Boehner and the GOP also understand this. In 2010, they issued "A Pledge to America", which can be found on the GOP(dot)gov website. It includes a statement where they promised not to attach any bills to "must pass" legislation, and to advance major legislation one issue at a time. Other items on that page have been checked off as accomplishments. This has not. They've already broken that promise, and are planning to again when the debt ceiling comes up. I think it's a dangerous game that should not be encouraged.
on October 2,2013 | 09:39AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
If we had a GOP President we would have a budget in place. During his campaining Obama said he will balnce the budget. There's no budget and it is not being balanced. Where's the bias currupt media on this?
on October 2,2013 | 09:50AM
primowarrior wrote:
If we had a GOP President, I still don't think we would have a budget in place, because fundamental differences between the parties would still exist. I think we can point the finger at both sides for the lack of a budget. It's not just Obama's fault.
on October 2,2013 | 10:09AM
NITRO08 wrote:
It's the tea party that doing all the damage not all republicans.
on October 2,2013 | 10:26AM
primowarrior wrote:
I hope that the moderates in the GOP will find the courage to stand up to them, as some already are.
on October 2,2013 | 10:32AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
But the Dems do not produce a budget and won't tell anyone their agenda as we saw from 2008 to 2010 except for Obamacare. Now they did meet behind closed doors and not invite the GOP for any input except to blame them even though the do nothing Dems have nothing to offer except spend, spend, and spend. Has Obama balanced the budget like he said he would? Why won't the media press him on this?
on October 2,2013 | 10:34AM
primowarrior wrote:
The Senate Democrats produced a budget six months ago, but Boehner refuses to negotiate with them. As for Obama promising to balance the budget, didn't he make that statement before the recession started? I don't think it's fair to hold him to it, under those conditions. Perhaps the media feels feels this way, too.
on October 2,2013 | 10:53AM
goinglobal wrote:
The house has sent a budget to the senate every year.... Reid will not allow it to come to a vote... This year reid makes some pie in the sky thing that increases spending by 25% and he is the good guy??? You should really pay attention to what is going on in the world... Republicans should keep the govt closed until they negotiate... Remember Obama had to bribe his own Senators to pass this stupid law, then Obama single handedly modified the law to decide who has to play by the rules and who does not.. Unconsttutional...
on October 2,2013 | 12:01PM
NITRO08 wrote:
You are not very smart to say they should keep it close, we the tax payers will end up pay millions of dollars due to the shutdown.
on October 2,2013 | 12:48PM
pcman wrote:
IRT primo on budgets. All presidents (Dems and Repubs) in the past had budgets. Obama is the only pres that never had a budget because the Senate never passed one like the House did. This is why Obama spent $6.5 Trillion over4 years while Bush spend only $4 Trillion over 8 years.
on October 2,2013 | 11:19AM
primowarrior wrote:
The Senate passed a budget six months ago. Republicans have consistently refused to conference with them on it.
on October 2,2013 | 11:30AM
goinglobal wrote:
So what about the last 4 years of budgets Harry reid refused to vote on in the senate???
on October 2,2013 | 12:04PM
primowarrior wrote:
Perhaps that points out the deep divide in Washington these days. The Republicans want things that the Democrats oppose, and vice versa, and everyone seems willing to stick to their guns because gerrymandering allows them to do so.
on October 2,2013 | 12:21PM
pcman wrote:
IRT primo on GOP pres. Under Bush, the US had a budget every year. Obama is the only pres that never pushed for a budget, because he did not want one that would require him to keep the spending down for all funded items. Without a budget he could, and has, spent money like a drunken sailor.
on October 2,2013 | 11:30AM
primowarrior wrote:
Here is an article from The Economist that explains why the Senate could not pass a budget for years. Lots of parliamentary mumbo jumbo, but it sounds to me like the Republicans in the Senate successfully blocked attempts at passing one. The House, of course, only needs a simple majority. I don't know how much Obama did or didn't push for a budget, but he didn't have one because Congress couldn't agree on one. I hope this url shows up correctly if I change a few things: (www)(dot)economist(dot)com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/02/parliamentary-procedure
on October 2,2013 | 11:45AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Spending is at the same level it was under Bush, but then you know that already don't you.
on October 2,2013 | 05:24PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
"He will not offer concessions to Republicans in exchange for not tanking the economy," Carney said. It's not only the economy of our country that u r holding hostage Barry, it's life as we know it on Earth. THINK ABOUT IT, MAN !!
on October 2,2013 | 10:55AM
EightOEight wrote:
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Get a life...
on October 2,2013 | 11:26AM
sailfish1 wrote:
Oh, get a grip!
on October 2,2013 | 06:37PM
false wrote:
All of them are a bunch of knuckleheads playing of the back of the people.
on October 2,2013 | 11:33AM
jussayin wrote:
Yup, I agree. Bunch of clowns who talk and talk and talk. Where are the decisions? Where is the leadership? Do they know what they're doing? Waste of taxpayers money.
on October 2,2013 | 11:53AM
CriticalReader wrote:
The Country is speaking through it's highest elected leader, its Senate, and now a majority of the House of Representatives. The Tea Party must be eradicated by giving it no voice, no quarter, and no appeasement in the pursuit of National interests and purposes. It is not wise to place our personal safety, fortunes, or peace of mind in the hands of a lunatic. Why we, for one moment, permit a handful of lunatics (Tea Party Congresspersons) to define or determine the course of our government is mind boggling. They shut our National government down, Mr. President. For no good reason. Now, shut them down, once and for all. And, cover the lost pay of furloughed Federal employees by taking equivalent amounts OUT of appropriations to Tea Party districts, cutting off Affordable Health Care website and enrollment mechanism access to all IEP's and postal addresses in their districts, and remove and refrain from adding any and all federal offices and/or federal contractor activities from their districts. It is what they want.. Give them and their constituents precisely what they ask for.
on October 2,2013 | 01:00PM
CriticalReader wrote:
The Republican threat is simple: Give us what we want, or we kill the US economy. Osama Bin Laden's basic goal in 9-11 was to tank the US economy. An intermediary goal was to embarrass our then President and his Administration. At the very least, he delighted in totally stressing us all out. That was his intent, that was his purpose, and that is what his actions were directly aimed at achieving - unless he could get whatever it is he wanted from the US and the world. For that we called him a terrorist. I agree with that definition of terrorist. Whether they wear Calvin Klein suits or robes and turbins, whether they live here or abroad, people who do that to our nation are terrorists. We are under attack by Terrorists. Fox News is their PR firm.
on October 2,2013 | 01:28PM
Pacej001 wrote:
To put the Republicans in the same boat as Bin Laden is an outrageous misstatement fully compatible with the inflammatory rhetoric being use by our juvenile president and other democrats, worthy of nothing but contempt. That's where our divisive president has taken us. That's who and what he is. However, that doesn't justify others who follow that path.
on October 2,2013 | 05:34PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Refute the logic logically, then you might have a point. Tea Party strategy hallmarks and goals are no different in principle than Bin Laden's. Hurts, huh? Thinking your support of this mess was somehow patriotic when it basically resembles that of a cave dweller.
on October 2,2013 | 06:18PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, other than being an outright falsehood that The Tea Party, mainly conservative middle class people, share any form of common goal with Al Qaeda is hyperbole in its purest form,:illlogical, hyper emotional, vicious, vindictive, and contemptible. There you have it--- the state of modern progressive thought, at best a granny-over-the-cliff slur delivered with myopic arrogance (too bad I already used "contemptible").
on October 2,2013 | 06:33PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Sorry, pace. I laid out the comparative similarities - real big tiocket items - four posts ago. Tank the US economy? Embarrass an American President? Totally stress us all out? All there, and all goals shared with Bin Laden. I'll add another one. To shut the US government down. ???? The Tea Party pursues the same goals as Bin Laden did. They just don't wear the same costumes.
on October 2,2013 | 06:58PM
Maipono wrote:
The House presented several budgets, that Harry Reid, Obama and the Democrats refused to even look at. What was so bad about the budgets? The House asked that the president delay implementation of Obamacare for one year, like he already has for Big Business and Big Labor, stop the incredibly bad Medical Device Tax, an excise tax that will increase the cost of medical equipment made with American labor and raise the cost of healtcare, and make the Congress, the Justices, and the Obama himself all abide with Obamacare. The barking dogs are already trying to blame this on the Tea Party Patriots, but they have to calm down and look at the real "Fool on the Hill".
on October 2,2013 | 02:38PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Common sense has left the building. Barry knows most will blame this on the GOP, even though it's obviously not their fault. He'd rather score political points than lead this nation.
on October 2,2013 | 03:54PM
EightOEight wrote:
Obviously...cough. Common sense hasn't left the building, it's left the minds of Tpubs.
on October 2,2013 | 04:40PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Brilliant rebuttal.
on October 2,2013 | 06:05PM
EightOEight wrote:
Unlike yours.
on October 2,2013 | 06:31PM
CriticalReader wrote:
HK, you crack me up (so I like you). You're the poster child for the GOP inability to read either Tea Leaves or polls correctly, as well as the mistake of believing it's own talking points are reality. Remember our conversations leading up to the 2012 General elections? When you predicted the Romney landslide? Not trying to rub anything in your face, but to point out that the GOP rhetoric was exactly the same back then.
on October 2,2013 | 06:35PM
hawaiikone wrote:
If there indeed is a "poster child" in the room perhaps a mirror might help you identify him. As I recall, weren't you the one claiming there was no deficit? There will never be any demand to repay China? Once the extent of your economic savvy became apparent, further serious conversation became pointless. Carry on....
on October 3,2013 | 07:59AM
frontman wrote:
Democrats want a government shutdown, even if Michelle loses he 18, yes 18, assistants.
on October 2,2013 | 03:37PM
CriticalReader wrote:
The House needs to reorganize in a coalition of Democrats and moderate Republicans. Dems need to take a backseat to reasonable, moderate GOP initiatives, while GOP moderates need to eradicate completely the neo-conservative approaches of the Tea Party. That House configuration will most accurately reflect America. Time for a new House leader to emerge. Boehner's credibility and reliability as a National leader has come and gone.
on October 2,2013 | 03:42PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Very touching this free advice from Camp Obama on how the GOP should be configured.
on October 2,2013 | 05:36PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Nope, an independent drawing the line on domestic terrorism.
on October 2,2013 | 06:19PM
Pacej001 wrote:
How can you not get it? Calling a political opponent acting within constitutional bounds a terrorists is BAD, UNHINGED, BEYOND THE PALE, and POOR MANNERS.
on October 2,2013 | 06:35PM
CriticalReader wrote:
You saying the Tea Party Terrorists might be offended? Prove it. Wait, you're not one of them, are you?
on October 2,2013 | 06:42PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
This is all growing to see who will blink first and it's all because of partisan politics and if the stock market tanks like it did in 1987 and in 1929, we have our government to blame for the demise of its own country. Not Obama, not Reid, not Boehner, however our system of government which allowed for all this to happen. Think of the unassuming Ant in its short lived life underground somewhere who is not even aware of all of this. I think u guys in Washington, D.C. need to buckle down otherwise all 300 million of us will plunge into poverty. I take that back, only 299,999,999 of us will plunge into poverty because I will be looking out for number one. As u may know if this happens and it's every person for themselves and we forgo teamwork, someone will itch to throw the switch to begin World War III. Come on man.
on October 2,2013 | 04:26PM
CriticalReader wrote:
That's probably overboard analysis, but in doing it, you make an important point. The drivers of Tea Party type thought are those who are "looking out for number one" on a whole host of economic and social issues (and, that's actually the money having and REALLY deluded Tea Party types who have no money but believe by aligning themselves with the movement they will - HAHAHAHAHAHA - sorry, had to laugh at that, again). the rest are sheep brought into the herd by playing on their religious zealotry, real fundamental ignorance, or, the worst one - misplaced xenophobic racism. That's the problem. The direction and point they push the needle to is toward precisely what you claim as your safe haven, "looking out for number one". That's the sentiment that kills, time and time throughout history.
on October 2,2013 | 04:37PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
There is no real need to negotiate. Boehner knows that if he puts a clean Continuing Resolution up to a vote in the House there would be enough votes to pass it. The shutdown can end today if Boehner just lets the entire House vote. Everyone accusing the President of not wanting to "negotiate" should realize there are enough votes in the House to end the shutdown now if Boehner has the guts to defy the tea party nuts and let the vote take place.
on October 2,2013 | 04:28PM
honokai wrote:
Nothing illegal here. If the tables were turned and the Speaker (was your guy) and he was holding an issue really, really important to you (pick one that is non-negotiable for you), than you would support him.
on October 2,2013 | 05:34PM
CriticalReader wrote:
The problem is that you're trying to justify completely outrageous, disconnected behavior that amounts to extortion at a minimum, and looks one heck of a lot like domestic terrorism. The ACTUAL question is, would someone on the other side of the fence from the Tea Party EVER shut down the government in order to leverage the abolition of a single law passed in due course, found constitutional by the Supreme Court, supported and committed to by the prerogative of 5/6ths of the government". I don't think so. It's stupid to do so. It's dangerous to do so. And, what would happen is, well, what has happened, and the perpetrators would create a situation where it happened again, and again, and again if permitted to prevail.
on October 2,2013 | 05:51PM
honokai wrote:
I am not trying to justify anything. My statement is descriptive of the situation and takes no position on the issue. Congress is charged with funding government. If they refused to fund something that you thought was terribly wrong, then you would be on their side. They won the last election. That is the reality. Get used to it.
on October 2,2013 | 06:05PM
CriticalReader wrote:
They didn't win "the last election". That's the problem. That's why the best they can do is shut down the government using a series of procedural maneuvers but not amend or abolish this law they so hate. Had they "won the last election", then it would have been within their discretion, power and authority to get rid of "Obamacare". But, they didn't win, so they can't. They can just batter everyone economically and psychologically. Obama and the Democrats are making a stand to prevent them from doing so medically any longer.
on October 2,2013 | 06:13PM
honokai wrote:
Don't be blinded by false narratives. They won and control the House of Representatives. Talking points do not change. They are charged with funding government. Many were put into office with a mandate to take on the mainstream of Washington. You can bad mouth them, belittle them, try to narrate them out of the way --- but they won. You got to deal with them.
on October 2,2013 | 06:19PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Oh wow. So, Obamacare is abolished?
on October 2,2013 | 06:25PM
CriticalReader wrote:
This is what the Tea Party does when they "win"? Shut down the government? OK. No wonder everyone voted for them and the candidates they back.
on October 2,2013 | 06:27PM
honokai wrote:
They refused to fund the Affordable Care Act (or required a one year delay). The Senate disagreed and refused to sign off on any continuing resolution that was not all inclusive.. It is as simple as that and that is where we are at and were we sit.
on October 2,2013 | 06:37PM
CriticalReader wrote:
They DIDN'T HAVE A SAY OVER WHETHER OR NOT THE ACA WOULD BE FUNDED. Funding is MANDATORY. Wait, you have no idea what you're talking about, do you? OK. Good luck.
on October 2,2013 | 06:41PM
honokai wrote:
You don't need to yell. If funding was mandatory, then it would be funded.
on October 2,2013 | 06:43PM
EightOEight wrote:
Hooray, honokai, you finally got it!
on October 2,2013 | 06:50PM
CriticalReader wrote:
I do need to yell. This whole episode is becoming proof positive America is crossing the line over into an IDIOCRACY!
on October 2,2013 | 06:51PM
kahuku01 wrote:
CriticalReader: I read you yelling and I don't blame you. Common sense is not a gift. It's a punishment, because you have to deal with anyone who doesn't have it.
on October 3,2013 | 05:04AM
atilter wrote:
i have said this before - ALL OF CONGRESS - our elected "representatives", "leaders", etc, - DO NOT WALK IN THE SHOES OF THE MAIN STREET PEDESTRIAN! they do not live under the same set of parameters the average citizen does. they do not feel the same pain, eat the same food, live in the same neighborhoods, feel the constraints of the same economic rules, have the same benefit packages and benefits!!! until that is changed, there is no reason for them to feel any sense of urgency in making decisions like this. they hold themselves out as being "essential" and "elite" thereby receiving none of the negative effects of dragging their feet in decision making!!! they just DO NOT GET THIS BASIC PREMISE!!! to be of or for the common people, they must BE the common people - and they aren't.
on October 2,2013 | 06:08PM
sailfish1 wrote:
This is another opportunity to find out which employees and which positions are actually needed. If the feds were smart, they would study this to cut the fat out of the bloated government bureaucracy.
on October 2,2013 | 06:41PM
BigErn wrote:
Obama is a pile of excrement.
on October 2,2013 | 07:20PM
EightOEight wrote:
You really do belong to the House of Turds, loser.
on October 2,2013 | 07:51PM
BigErn wrote:
You're another democrat loser sucking at the teat of welfare. You want things given to you, you don't want to work for them. Join Obama in the sewer.
on October 2,2013 | 08:57PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Why do all you GOP types inevitably start talking about stages of female's reproductive processes when you get backed into a corner? Aside from being so perverted, it's ultimately disrespectful to your mommas. '
on October 2,2013 | 09:18PM
EightOEight wrote:
Ooh, I'm so scared...LOSER.
on October 2,2013 | 09:22PM
312guy wrote:
how much more cuts will be made, the budget is now at what Ryan had proposed. It makes no sense to me that today the republicans were out opening war memorials and hiring their own security, instead of fixing the problem all they were doing was trying to do damag control. i will be changing parties
on October 2,2013 | 07:39PM
sumoroach wrote:
Pass a budget not a CR. I thank you for a LWOP vacation. No budget in 5 years does congress know how to do their jobs. 2010, 2011 no budget from all DEM congress and senate and the POTUS. DO YOUR JOB.
on October 2,2013 | 08:36PM
EightOEight wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 09:20PM
hauula1 wrote:
I thought Presidents of the United States were leaders who work with both parties to accomplish great things on the behalf of the people. Do we currently have a leader of a great country or just the Democratic party?
on October 2,2013 | 08:46PM
EightOEight wrote:
Today, after the White House meeting: House Republicans are continuing to play hardball in negotiations over the spending bill that precipitated the government shutdown on Oct. 1, apparently out of fear that compromise would weaken their power. "We're not going to be disrespected," Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) told The Washington Examiner. "We have to get something out of this. And I don't know what that even is." It's hard to work with stoopid.
on October 2,2013 | 09:12PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Cut/paste. Fingers work. Mind out of order.
on October 2,2013 | 10:17PM
EightOEight wrote:
Oh how cute, what creativity.
on October 2,2013 | 10:33PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Kinda bites, yeah?
on October 3,2013 | 08:00AM
jussayin wrote:
I agree; true leaders have the courage and skill to discuss and reach compromise with those that have differing views. Unfortunately Obama has not shown this skill. He seems to forget that he is the President of the nation first; and a Democrat second. It's common sense that if you're a leader and you really want things to move along, you bring in both sides to discuss the differences in the beginning of the process. You don't go on TV to blast the party that differs from your view, then meet with them afterward. Well, having said this, this has been Obama's style from the start.
on October 2,2013 | 09:55PM
kahuku01 wrote:
IRT: hauula1: Here's the scenario: As Jesse Ventura (I) (former governor of Minn) said on Piers Morgan show the other night, "this whole shutdown that is affecting the nation and federal employees (taxpayers) is a personal dispute between the Republican gang and Democrat gang". "If this nation did away with the party system, and ran as Independent candidates, everyone elected would vote by what their constituents would want, instead of being a follower and voting along with the party they belong to, rather than voting at what they truly believed in." You would be an outcast and a rebel rouser and booted out of the party if you voted for what you believe to be true and went against the party. If he did run for the office of president, "the parties would not allow him to all the debates, because he would be running as an Independent." These young, rookie, yakking politicians are also the cause of many media attention non-sense. It will be a never ending political game by both parties that will always have an affect on the taxpayers who are actually paying their salaries and are the very ones that are getting screwed.
on October 3,2013 | 04:54AM
hikine wrote:
Are people aware that if you don't buy the Obamacare health insurance you'll be fined? Not only you get fined but you're still not covered medically. Obamacare seems like a mandatory health insurance even if you're unemployed! How will the unemployed pay for their insurance? Government assistance to put the money directly to the insurance company's deep pockets! Obamacare is misleading and I wonder how it became into law. Obama wants to lift the debt limit so he can fund his plan. He wants a carte blanche to spend on whatever we wishes. Some people's existing health insurance will increase.
on October 3,2013 | 12:12AM
EightOEight wrote:
It's called the individual mandate. Yes, you will be assessed a fine if you don't sign up for a health plan and will not be insured, so sign up! Please go to http://kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/health-coverage-for-the-unemployed/ for more info on the subsidies available and other things being done to help the unemployed get health coverage. Currently, the uninsured who go to the ER raise medical costs for everyone. If you have a catastrophic illness you could go bankrupt. Some premiums may go up initially because the health providers are not sure how they will be impacted under the ACA, but over time through competition the prices should go down or the plans get better. The costs of health CARE have already started trending downward. Funding for the ACA is mandatory and not affected by the debt ceiling so it makes no sense to tie the two together in negotiations. Please do your homework, there's a lot of information out there.
on October 3,2013 | 06:11AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News