Quantcast
  

Thursday, April 24, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 184 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

No end in sight for shutdown as debt-limit fight looms

By Jim Kuhnhenn

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 05:01 p.m. HST, Oct 03, 2013


WASHINGTON >> Three days into a government shutdown, President Barack Obama pointedly blamed House Speaker John Boehner today for keeping federal agencies closed, while the bitter budget dispute moved closer to a more critical showdown over the nation's line of credit. The Treasury warned of calamitous results if Congress fails to raise the debt limit.

Answering Obama, Boehner complained that the president was "steamrolling ahead" with the implementation of the nation's new health care law. As the government operated sporadically, the stock market sank to its lowest level in nearly a month.

The shutdown was clearly leaving its mark. The National Transportation Safety Board wasn't sending investigators to Tennessee to probe a deadly church bus crash that killed eight people and sent 14 others to the hospital. The Labor Department said it wouldn't release the highly anticipated September jobs report on Friday because the government remains shuttered.

Outside the Capitol, shots rang out at midafternoon bringing an already tense Congress under lockdown, a nerve-wracking moment in a city still recovering from a Sept. 16 mass shooting at the Navy Yard. Authorities and witnesses said a woman tried to ram her car through a White House barricade then led police on a chase that ended in gunfire and her death outside the Capitol more than 1 mile away.

Despite the heated political rhetoric, some signs of a possible way out of the shutdown emerged. But the state of play remained in flux.

Two House Republicans said Boehner told them he would allow a House vote on restarting the entire government -- but only if conservative GOP lawmakers assured him they would not attack it for failing to contain curbs on the health care law. So far they have been unwilling to give that commitment. The two spoke on condition of anonymity to reveal details of private discussions.

The shutdown and the approaching debt ceiling were merging into one confrontation, raising the stakes for the president and Congress as well as for the economy.

Obama and his Treasury Department said that failure to raise the nation's borrowing limit, expected to hit its $16.7 trillion cap in mid-October, could precipitate an economic nosedive worse than the Great Recession. A default could cause the nation's credit markets to freeze, the value of the dollar to plummet and U.S. interest rates to skyrocket, according to the Treasury report.

Obama catalogued a litany of troubles that could be caused by the failure to raise the debt ceiling, from delayed Social Security and disability checks to worldwide economic repercussions. "If we screw up, everybody gets screwed up," he said.

The speaker's office reiterated Boehner's past assertion that he would not let the United States default on its debt.  "But if we're going to raise the debt limit, we need to deal with the drivers of our debt and deficits," his spokesman, Michael Steel, said. "That's why we need a bill with cuts and reforms to get our economy moving again."

Conservatives have insisted that either reopening the government or increasing the debt ceiling must be accompanied by a measure that either delays or defunds the nation's new health care law. Absent those concessions, Republicans want cuts in spending, savings in major benefit programs and an overhaul of the tax system.

Obama, for his part, firmly restated his opposition to a negotiation.

"You don't get to demand some ransom in exchange for keeping the government running," he said tartly. "You don't get to demand ransom in exchange for keeping the economy running."

Looking to deflect the Democratic finger-pointing on the shutdown, the Republican-controlled House pushed a pair of bills through the House today restoring money to veterans' programs and to pay National Guard and Reserve members. House leaders also have scheduled a vote on legislation backed by some of the chamber's top Democrats to give federal workers furloughed in the ongoing partial shutdown their missed pay when the government reopens. 

That vote could come as early as Friday or over the weekend.

Senate Democrats made clear they will not agree to reopening the government on a piecemeal basis. "You can't fall for that legislative blackmail or it will get worse and worse and worse," said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York.

Speaking at a construction company in Washington's Maryland suburbs today, Obama cast Boehner as a captive of a tight group of conservative Republicans who want to extract concessions in exchange for passing a short-term spending bill that would restart the partially shuttered government.

"The only thing preventing people from going back to work and basic research starting back up and farmers and small business owners getting their loans, the only thing that is preventing all that from happening right now, today, in the next five minutes is that Speaker John Boehner won't even let the bill get a yes or no vote because he doesn't want to anger the extremists in his party," Obama said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was even more pointed in singling Boehner out.

"We can't perform the most basic functions of government because he doesn't have the courage to stand up to that small band of anarchists," he said.

Moderate Republicans have said they think they could provide enough votes to join with minority Democrats and push a bill through the House reopening the government with no restrictions on the health care law. But under pressure from House GOP leaders, they failed to join Democratic efforts on Wednesday aimed at forcing the chamber to consider such legislation.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., who is close to Boehner, said he doesn't think the speaker is ready to push any measure that would fail to win the backing of most of his 232 House Republicans. But some Democratic votes eventually will be needed in the 435-seat chamber, Cole said, because some hard-core conservative Republicans are unlikely to vote to end the shutdown or raise the debt ceiling without major concessions from Obama.

"You can't ask those Republicans to just put their political life on the line for nothing," he said. "They've got to be able to go home and say 'These are the things that I was able to do."'

Even the Senate chaplain got drawn into the rising intensity of the partisan battle, opening today's session with an unusually pointed prayer.

"Deliver us from the hypocrisy of attempting to sound reasonable while being unreasonable," said Dr. Barry Black. "Remove the burdens of those who are the collateral damage of this government shutdown."

And in a bit of sardonic understatement, Obama's motorcade passed workers outside an office building holding up a sign that simply asked, "Rough week?"

------

Associated Press writers Charles Babington, Alan Fram, Nedra Pickler, Connie Cass, Andrew Taylor and Julie Pace contributed to this report.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 184 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(184)
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.
Bdpapa wrote:
Can't the smartest man in the room figure this out? We just need a leader.
on October 3,2013 | 05:52AM
OldDiver wrote:
It has been widely reported there are enough votes between Republicans and Democrats in the House to passed a clean bill to end this shutdown. Republican House Speaker John Boehner refuses to hold an up or down vote in an effort to please the forty or so Republican Tea Party crazies who want to destroy the American economy.
on October 3,2013 | 06:19AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The Tea Party ransom ......Shut down Obamacare, or, the government will be kept shut down.
on October 3,2013 | 06:43AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, to be accurate, if you're interested in that, it would be delay Obamacare by a year like Obama did for Big Business and make Congressmen and their employees pay the same as others. Seems like the Fair™ thing to do. Why won't democrats even talk with Republicans about Fairness for the American public. So sad, really, this democrat hatred for Fairness.
on October 3,2013 | 07:50AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Ransom by the Tea Party is accurate, and Obamacare is now, and it is here to stay. And the millions who are now signing on to Obamacare, agrees with that.
on October 3,2013 | 08:05AM
false wrote:
As per the law ObamaCare has phased in for the past three years. It is already in effect. Time to stop the Fox News nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 08:18AM
Pacej001 wrote:
The Fox News slur is a crutch for a lame argument. Passage of the law doesn't mandate full or even partial funding if the program if it is bad and Obamacare is very bad. You don't need to look very far to find the number of Federal programs which have been modified,delayed, or flat out cancelled after they became "law".
on October 3,2013 | 09:18AM
hanalei395 wrote:
If you don't have health insurance, you have until March 31, 2014 to sign on. After that, deadbeats who depend on the ER for their health care, will be fined.
on October 3,2013 | 09:57AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Love to see a reference to the "millions now signing on". I'll admit to 168 in Connecticut yesterday.
on October 3,2013 | 09:15AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Admit to "168" crashing the whole system.
on October 3,2013 | 09:30AM
false wrote:
My guess is that millions of youngsters will voluntarily decline, fine or no fine. Most 20-30 year olds don't have the need for such medical care. Ask yourself "did I" as a youngster. And the premiums will be so high as to discourage many. Nope, This is just another plan for the youngsters to pay to support older bozos.
on October 3,2013 | 01:20PM
hanalei395 wrote:
And who pays for the deadbeat "youngsters" who depend on the ER for their health care.
on October 3,2013 | 01:30PM
SteveToo wrote:
How come Obama give Big Business a break, and Congressmen and their employees a break on Obama Care but not the rest of the nation? Something to do w/donations?????? HRH Obama will bring this country to it's knees.
on October 3,2013 | 10:26AM
nalogirl wrote:
Yup, that is the question that he will not answer.
on October 3,2013 | 10:41AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Steve ... Obamacare are for people who now have NO HEALTH CARE. Got it?
on October 3,2013 | 10:47AM
SteveToo wrote:
hanlei -Not true. It's for EVERYONE. Just wait it will take over the whole medical insurance system for this nation.
on October 3,2013 | 01:42PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Steve ...to make it SIMPLE for you ....my health plan is Kaiser Permanente. I will ALWAYS have Kaiser Permanente. I will ALWAYS keep my same doctor. Is that simple enough?
on October 3,2013 | 01:58PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Hanalei, I have a union subsidized health plan that rose 18% in one year due to the effects of obamacare. Since preceding years were around 2%, the trustees sent an explanation with the increase notice. Obamacare may be targeting the uninsured, but it's effects are being felt by us all. Is that simple enough for you?
on October 3,2013 | 03:39PM
DAGR81 wrote:
hanalei, you need to think more deeply...things are often not as simple as they seem.
on October 3,2013 | 03:45PM
hanalei395 wrote:
It's effects are NOT being felt by us all. Look for another health plan. Simple enough? (Obamacare is here to stay).
on October 3,2013 | 03:52PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Hanalei, maybe you could share the details of your health coverage? Since everyone else's is rising you'd be doing us a favor.
on October 3,2013 | 08:36PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Kaiser rates rose BEFORE Obamacare. But I'm not complaining. The Kaiser Permanente health plan is great.
on October 3,2013 | 09:45PM
nalogirl wrote:
Exactly Pacej001. It's ridiculous that people can't see that. If Obamacare is so great, why is congress exempt, why are big corporations exempt or getting to delay for a year. Obama the great divider.?
on October 3,2013 | 10:39AM
false wrote:
Nonsense. Members of Congress are not exempt from ObamaCare. They have the same plan as all federal employees. Time to stop the Fox News nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 11:44AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, here are the facts: The Congress and their staffers are required by the Affordable Care Act to purchase health insurance on the Obamacare health insurance exchanges, just like ordinary citizens. The intent of this part of the law is that our governing elite have to submit to the same law that you and I do. But no, was the president OK with this? Senate democrats. No. Inspired by Harry Reid, the Office of Personnel Management (works for the President) will continue to subsidize congress person's Obamacare medical insurance costs by 75%, thus defeating the intent of the law by giving Congress and their highly paid staff members a big fat benefit that neither you or I could have. It amounts to an exemption. Meanwhile, the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program for regular Federal employees will continue, but probably with much higher rates.
on October 3,2013 | 12:46PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Pace has the facts. Hahaha.
on October 3,2013 | 01:38PM
hanalei395 wrote:
When I saw that "here are the facts"........next.
on October 3,2013 | 02:33PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Are you and hanalei saying that congress in not receiving their subsidy? Either they are or they're not.
on October 3,2013 | 03:43PM
OldDiver wrote:
Pace, you made that up just like Fox News makes things up.
on October 3,2013 | 06:26PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Well, now that all of you have verified that congress is indeed receiving the subsidy perhaps an apology to pace would be in order? He's holding his breath.....
on October 3,2013 | 08:41PM
sailfish1 wrote:
What "fairness"? Obamacare has been in works for at least 3 years and enrollment was started a few days ago. They've already spent tons of money and manhours on this and it is too late for elimination or delay.
on October 3,2013 | 10:17PM
sluggah wrote:
It's the same bill that the senate sent in the first place. The Fascist dems are just parroting their master, the Great Divider.
on October 3,2013 | 06:46AM
hanalei395 wrote:
"The Great Divider" ... causing ...Republicans vs. Tea Party Republicans.
on October 3,2013 | 07:02AM
false wrote:
Nope, the House sent over a bill to the Senate demanding over $700 billion in cuts. The Senate compromised and sent back to the House a bill in the same amount the House demanded. Tea Party House Republicans are now rejecting the budget number they proposed in the first place and are complaining the Democrats won't compromise. Time to stop the Fox News nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 08:23AM
nalogirl wrote:
Time to stop your tunnelvision. My friend recieved a letter from her doctor saying he can't treat her any longer because of Obamacare he is closing shop.
on October 3,2013 | 10:42AM
hanalei395 wrote:
"Closing shop"? What is this, a quack in a one-man operation who is afraid of legit health care exchanges?
on October 3,2013 | 10:59AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Nalo girl actually has "friends" that tried to sign for Obamacare? Hahaha. Friends of Fox nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 01:40PM
honokai wrote:
It has also been (less widely) reported that this type of House rule-making has been around since Tip O'Neil. The Republican's won the House of Representatives. Your narrative is one of invective ("tea party crazies") but it fails to recognize that there is an entire new paradigm in the fifth estate. Hardly anyone listens to the news media any more and the ones that do --- listen to their own. You wouldn't turn on a media outlet that attacked you now, would you?
on October 3,2013 | 06:53AM
control wrote:
So now they are using facebook and twitter to perpetuate the fear mongering and fake news stories, but only after someone tells them what to say.
on October 3,2013 | 08:13AM
false wrote:
The rule you are referring to is the Hastert rule, named after former Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. Time to stop the Fox News nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 08:28AM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Do you have proof that the republican representatives are not representing their constituency? If they are doing their job then you need to blame who they represent - the majority of the American public....
on October 3,2013 | 07:38AM
primowarrior wrote:
In the last election, Democratic congressional candidates won 1.17 million more votes than Republican candidates. In several states where Obama either won the majority vote outright, or came close, Republicans won 2-3 times as many seats as Democrats. They don't necessarily represent the majority of American people. They have more seats due to gerrymandering by state legislatures.
on October 3,2013 | 09:22AM
nalogirl wrote:
All the people getting free stuff voted democrat so they could keep their free meal ticket.
on October 3,2013 | 10:44AM
primowarrior wrote:
Still a majority, which is what Democracy is all about.
on October 3,2013 | 10:56AM
AhiPoke wrote:
You are correct and that's the problem. Eventually, as more and more people live on public assistance, there are less people to pay the bills. That is exactly what happened in Detroit and look at what's happening to that city.
on October 3,2013 | 11:30AM
South76 wrote:
That 1.17 million votes you are referring to are those LEGAL VOTES or double, triple votes or ILLEGAL votes? Since many of the blue states are pushing for NO ID to vote, I wonder how many of that figure you are talking are legitimate votes.....hmmmm.
on October 3,2013 | 11:19AM
hawaiikone wrote:
As the ranks of government dependent voters continue to swell democrats will enjoy their advantage over republicans. There's a train of thought that suggests it might be less painful in the long run to simply allow democrats to have their way. The inevitable economic meltdown would arrive far sooner, prompting exodus rather than immigration. A couple of generations will bear the brunt, but if indeed there's any remnant of the American spirit left, a new generation will emerge.
on October 3,2013 | 04:02PM
nalogirl wrote:
Agree, livinginhawaii.
on October 3,2013 | 10:43AM
Pacej001 wrote:
It has also been widely reported that republicans have offered numerous bills to avoid shutdown of various government services and functions, but the democrat Senate has refused to allow a vote on them.-------------- In truth, the republicans have dropped their demand that Obamacare be repealed and are now asking for simple fairness (you understand simple fairness, right?) that Obamacare mandates on individuals be delayed a year like Obama did for Big Business (which I'm pretty sure included Big Oil companies and Big Wall Street firms), so why not protect the Middle Class people who are having their insurance premium double? (What is it you guys have against the middle class?)--------------- The other fairness issue is Mr. Obama and Mr. Reid's (note that I didn't call them "terrorists" or "arsonists") determination that congressmen and their employees receive a whopping 75% subsidy to buy their Obamacare insurance while the average joe, at the same salary level, gets a subsidy of ZERO! ------ What in the world happened to you democrats? I thought you were the party of fairness, protecting the little guy.
on October 3,2013 | 07:46AM
primowarrior wrote:
It wasn't Obama and Reid who decided to attach demands to a piece of "must pass" legislation to try to force concessions from the other side. This is a dangerous practice that results in stalemate that can hurt the country. The Republicans pledged they would not do this, then violated their own pledge. Giving in on any level only encourages more of this dangerous behavior, and with the debt ceiling coming up soon, I think the Democrats are right to not compromise. If Republicans want fairness, they should be fair to the American people and get the government up and running first, then bring the other issues up separately.
on October 3,2013 | 09:32AM
Pacej001 wrote:
This "dangerous practice" has happened many, many times, initiated by both parties. Stalemate is the president's choice. The Republican demand for delay is reasonable and rational given the many problems with obamacare and the clear unreadiness of the administration for implementing the law. The train wreck descriptor by a democrat seems to be coming true.---In a world where reason ruled, the republicans could just roll over with a promise from the president to negotiate later. Never happen. Meanwhile, the republicans have offered bill after bill to keep the key functions of government working, all refused by the democrats rather than sit down and negotiate a delay in this flawed program. Note: the House is fully within its constitutional right to reduce, delay, or flat out deny funding to bad programs. The public revolt against Obamacare is why the House was elected. They are doing what they were sent there to do, finally. As to fairness, Obama's refusal to negotiate has shutdown the government, period. Obama's determination to unfairly subsidize congressional persons Obamacare insurance by 75% has shut down the government. The democrat party's arrogance in ramming this law through without national consensus has shut down the government. -------- Face the facts, obamacare represents a massive, transformative change for the country. Forcing its passage along partisan lines was a massive blunder on the part of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. That is the root cause of this shutdown.
on October 3,2013 | 10:01AM
primowarrior wrote:
I don't think that the fact this has happened before justifies it happening again. When do we learn from our mistakes? The Republicans know this is a dangerous path to follow; they pledged not to follow it. This stalemate would not have occurred if they had not violated their pledge to not attach a provision, that they knew beforehand the Democrats would not agree to, to the CR. I think the stalemate is Boehner's choice. Members of his own party have publicly stated that they will vote for the clean CR to reopen the government if he just brings the bill to the floor for a vote, but he refuses. The root cause of this shutdown is that, yes, the Democrats did force it through, but the Republicans can't get over it and are willing to put the economic health of the country on the line for the sake of spite. If the GOP really thinks Obamacare will fail miserably, let it proceed and when it does, the American people will force the government to dismantle it, and the GOP will have a win in their column.
on October 3,2013 | 10:55AM
primowarrior wrote:
I don't think that the fact this has happened before justifies it happening again. When do we learn from our mistakes? The Republicans know this is a dangerous path to follow; they pledged not to follow it. This stalemate would not have occurred if they had not violated their pledge to not attach a provision, that they knew beforehand the Democrats would not agree to, to the CR. I think the stalemate is Boehner's choice. Members of his own party have publicly stated that they will vote for the clean CR to reopen the government if he just brings the bill to the floor for a vote, but he refuses. The root cause of this shutdown is that, yes, the Democrats did force it through, but the Republicans can't get over it and are willing to put the economic health of the country on the line for the sake of spite. If the GOP really thinks Obamacare will fail miserably, let it proceed and when it does, the American people will force the government to dismantle it, and the GOP will have a win in their column.
on October 3,2013 | 10:57AM
Pacej001 wrote:
I just don't agree with you. In a negotiation, one side saying they won't negotiate is not a reason for the other side to just fold. That's not the way it works in real life. Do you not agree that the House has the authority to make an independent judgement on what programs should be funded and by how much? The only answer is yes. This is a fundamental component of our form of government with divided powers and two legislative houses. The House isn't asking for an indefinite delay. They aren't asking for repeal. They are merely asking for a delay, a thing the president has done, along with many other changes/waivers to the law, without any coordination with congress. In a nutshell, one legislative branch is saying that Obamacare isn't ready for prime time. The other is ignoring implementation problems. Time for the democrats to negotiate. Otherwise they are the ones choosing government shutdown.
on October 3,2013 | 11:20AM
primowarrior wrote:
PaceJ001: I have to reply to my own comment because I don't seem to have a reply button showing for yours. My bottom line is that one side should not try to use "must pass" legislation as leverage to try to force concessions from the other side, regardless of what they are, because the resulting impasse can hurt the country. As far as I am concerned, it is like hostage taking (and forgive me if that offends anyone, but this is what it looks like to me). If the GOP had passed a clean CR with no strings attached, and the Democrats had attached provisions to raise taxes or increase spending, would Boehner and the GOP be willing to negotiate? No way. If Obama and the Democrats had said "OK, we'll cut it down to just raising taxes on the top 1%. That's reasonable, so let's negotiate", would Boehner and the Tea Party folks then agree to do so? Absolutely not. If this were the case, I would be standing squarely behind Boehner and the Republicans on this issue, and blaming Obama and the Democrats for the shutdown, for having created this situation in the first place. The House has the authority to witthold funding, but if Boehner is so confident that he is on the right side of this issue, why won't he give the House a chance to vote on the clean CR, as many in his own party are asking him to do?
on October 3,2013 | 03:09PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Primo: Every budget is must pass legislation, otherwise, no Federal budget. There is horse trading and negotiation every single time. This time is no different. Let's turn this thing around. Why must the entire Federal budget depend on the full funding of a single program.
on October 3,2013 | 07:58PM
goinglobal wrote:
So why is it that John Boehner is evil because he wont bring something to a vote but it is ok for Harry Reid to not bring a budget to the floor of the senate for 4 years? It is ok for Harry Reid to say everything is dead on arrival for 4 years? Why is Obama now out of washington campaigning again instead of sitting down with congressional members and solving this problem??
on October 3,2013 | 07:47AM
false wrote:
Six months ago the Senate sent over a budget to John Boehner. So far Boehner has refused to meet with the Senate conference committee. Time to stop the Fox News nonsense.
on October 3,2013 | 08:26AM
Denominator wrote:
More MSNBC tripe!
on October 3,2013 | 09:44AM
haroldwah wrote:
Because he's not a leader, just a blamer
on October 3,2013 | 11:46AM
serious wrote:
OD, this whole thing is a facade for the bigger problem that neither party wants to address---entitlements. The Democrats don't want to touch it since that's their voter base, but they know down deep that this his has got to end. Anybody know of someone getting welfare or food stamp checks that doesn't deserve it?? Do as they do on base closings, get an impartial group and, as Obama said in his initial campaign go through every item and get rid of the overspending.
on October 3,2013 | 09:27AM
nalogirl wrote:
So true serious, check out you tude where they have people cheering when Obama won again saying "I don't have to work." It's true, but the democrats will tell you otherwise.
on October 3,2013 | 11:06AM
poipoo wrote:
If that's true, do your civic duty and report them. Giving them a pass isn't helping the people who truly need help, nor is it helping the country. Don't expect government to do everything for you.
on October 3,2013 | 11:24AM
Denominator wrote:
More MSNBC tripe!
on October 3,2013 | 09:43AM
Kuniarr wrote:
Obamacare was enacted by dictatorship - by Obama and 59 Democrat Senators.

Not by Congress. But by 59 Democrat Senators and Obama.


on October 3,2013 | 10:04AM
hanalei395 wrote:
And by the Supreme Court, the election and the re-election of President Obams ....and the millions now signing on to Obamacare.
on October 3,2013 | 10:12AM
poipoo wrote:
Can't sign on in Hawaii cuz the website is junk -got another idea?
on October 3,2013 | 11:26AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Don't worry about it. You got 6 months to sign on.
on October 3,2013 | 11:37AM
South76 wrote:
The Supreme Court said that the law was pretty much a tax and Congress can enact such a law....as you know tax can increase at any time but getting rid of it is hill climb battle.....as more private companies are catching on how much this monster is going to cost their business many are getting rid of their current plan...so much for the pledge of "you can keep your doctor, you can keep your current insurance." Just look at UPS, a unionized work force and now the company is going to cut the spouse of an employee who is also working.
on October 3,2013 | 11:26AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Losers have 6 months to cry in their beer.
on October 3,2013 | 11:44AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Kunarr is a dict.
on October 3,2013 | 01:43PM
kuroiwaj wrote:
Sorry OldDiver, my reports say there were some 18 R's who may give in, but there are 6 D's who will switch their vote on a clean bill. Net 12 votes does not cut it. They need 218 votes out of 435 members in the House. Oh, 232 House members are R's and 200 are D's, with 3 vacancies. The 18 R's come from East Coast states as PA, NY, NJ, CT, etc so very difficult to say. After the WWII Memorial fiasco caused by the WH votes have changed, and the R's seem to have regained by the momentum for now.
on October 3,2013 | 02:27PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
The irony in this whole charade is that the House is hurting their true constituents (i.e., Wall Street bankers, Big Pharma, The Big Five:Health Insurance Companies), as well as their supposed constituents (e.g., ordinary Americans) if this shutdown is prolonged. Why else would the American Bankers Association as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce be panicking if this wasn't the case? The Tea Party is shooting itself in the foot by delaying this any further--in my humble opinion. Who's interest are they really serving if they don't seem to have the best interest of the average Joe or the special interest groups they represent/lobby for?
on October 3,2013 | 06:56PM
Grimbold wrote:
Bdpapa, we need an end to the insane spiraling out of control debt . We demand too much from government and the political parties, especially the Democrats are bribing their voters with money they do not have. That can only work for them because we are : 1.Selfish, 2.stupid.
on October 3,2013 | 03:04PM
BluesBreaker wrote:
Here's hoping Obama sticks to his guns, for once, and doesn't enter into a grand bargain with the House Republicans, rewarding them for holding the government hostage when they can't pass legislation only they want or repeal laws (Obamacare) they don't like.
on October 3,2013 | 06:11AM
soundofreason wrote:
WHO, in society, DOES like it? WHY are all the exemptions being granted to the powerful entities?

"When added together, the healthcare waivers excuse about 4 million people, or about 3 percent of the population, from having to participate, HHS said. However, what’s slightly unsettling is the fact that the majority of the waivers were handed out to labor unions."

I guess there's a lot more than just Republicans who "don't like"


on October 3,2013 | 06:47AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The millions who are now signing on to Obamacare ....like it.
on October 3,2013 | 06:55AM
carolm wrote:
haha.. they can't even get on the system.
on October 3,2013 | 07:25AM
hanalei395 wrote:
And carolm is saying ...."ha ha, that means Obamacare is not working".
on October 3,2013 | 07:34AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Because of the system being overloaded, people have 6 months to sign on.
on October 3,2013 | 07:40AM
poipoo wrote:
It isn't overloaded - it's junk.
on October 3,2013 | 11:33AM
carolm wrote:
...and it still won't be working 6 months from now.
on October 3,2013 | 11:59AM
hanalei395 wrote:
poipoo ...You're screwed up with the Hawai'i Health Connector and not the nation-wide website. The nation-wide website is overloaded.
on October 3,2013 | 12:20PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
They can't get into the system because it's overwhelm by millions who need healthcare. Also the hackers the Koc brothers hired.
on October 3,2013 | 01:44PM
goinglobal wrote:
they had 3 year to set up the exchanges and seems to me nobody going there can actually sign up because it does not work.... Even the IRS which is supposed to enforce this stupid law lost 67 Million dollars that was supposed to implement the law... Maybe they spent it on discrimination programs to help keep conservative groups from being able to campaign during the last election while helping Obama...
on October 3,2013 | 07:57AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Yes global, they had three years of Fox and tea party resistance.
on October 3,2013 | 01:46PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Millions: Are you including the 168 that signed up in Connecticut yesterday. Man, this thing is like the California gold rush (without the gold.)
on October 3,2013 | 07:57AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Yeah, "168" crashed the whole system.
on October 3,2013 | 08:15AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Web searches, are not the same as numbers signing up. The 168 number has been reported by the news.
on October 3,2013 | 09:20AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Fox "News".
on October 3,2013 | 09:45AM
bsdetection wrote:
One year waivers were sought by critics of the ACA to provide flexibility for plans that might face unique factors that would create hardships or adverse impacts when the ACA went into effect. As soon as the Obama administration agreed to providing those waivers, the critics of the ACA did an about face and said that the law was unfair because there are waivers. The majority did not go to unions. States, like Maine, got waivers. Businesses got waivers. Insurers, like Aetna, got waivers. In fact, the Obama administration took a lot a criticism from some of the biggest unions for denying a waiver for Taft-Hartley multi-employer plans.
on October 3,2013 | 07:04AM
pcman wrote:
IRT Blues on Obama. Obama says he won't negotiate, so there will be no compromise. If this shutdown continues, Obama can take some of the blame. This is Obama's administration, he can take all of the blame for what happens when he is at the lead. He is leading us to another downfall like the economic recession he had for 4 years in his first term. His second term will be a disaster unless he takes the lead to move the country ahead. That is not the Congress' job. Obama never needed a budget before so why does he need one now? It's all shibai by Obama.
on October 3,2013 | 06:49AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Boehner says Obama "will not negotiate", ..... which means, ....Obama will not postpone Obamacare for a year.
on October 3,2013 | 07:08AM
goinglobal wrote:
Obama said the ACA will save all taxpayers 2500 per year... Not true... Obama said it is not a tax... Not true... Obama said it will not increase the deficit... Not true... Obama said if you like the insurance you have you can keep it... Not true... Obama said it will create jobs... Not true only creating part time jobs from previoiusly full time jobs... Obama hold a meeting to day he will not negotiate with republicans yet he is calling Iran to talk with them go figure...
on October 3,2013 | 07:54AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Obamacare is here to stay .....True
on October 3,2013 | 08:25AM
Denominator wrote:
So would it seem is cancer!
on October 3,2013 | 09:45AM
hanalei395 wrote:
If you have cancer, you need Obamacare. Don't depend on the ER for your health care.
on October 3,2013 | 10:17AM
TLehel wrote:
This is truth. Obamacare will bankrupt the people. Hell, it's DESIGNED to. Who do you think wrote the policies? The big insurance companies and foreign investments, who are looking to cut down your financial pegs and get you on the teet of government support. F/T to P/T jobs, skyrocketed premiums, death panels. . . . .hmmm. . . .yeah Obamacare is working alright. Working just as the people who made it want it to.
on October 3,2013 | 10:52AM
hanalei395 wrote:
You forgot ....Obamacare, DESIGNED with death panels.
on October 3,2013 | 12:28PM
TLehel wrote:
I had death panels in there :/. So are you for or against Obamacare? Cause your comments contradict eachother.
on October 3,2013 | 02:24PM
hanalei395 wrote:
I stopped reading when I saw "will bankrupt the people". Especially with that "DESIGNED". Am I for or against Obamacare? ... If you don't even know that, ... after my comments.....I'll tell you later. ... I like to keep a... holes in suspense.
on October 3,2013 | 03:04PM
Pacej001 wrote:
You would be right, except for the fact that Mr. Obama HAS postponed Obamacare for a year, for Big Business. And here I thought the democrats were the party of the little guy, the party of Fairness. What happened?
on October 3,2013 | 08:02AM
Wonderful_World wrote:
They are for the little guy only when they're using someone else's money & not their own
on October 3,2013 | 10:52AM
South76 wrote:
And only for the little guy during election time.
on October 3,2013 | 11:33AM
hanalei395 wrote:
Deadbeat little guys need health care. And not by going to the ER.
on October 3,2013 | 02:09PM
nalogirl wrote:
And that's okay. What a hypocrit.
on October 3,2013 | 11:08AM
bsdetection wrote:
The Bachmann-Cruz wing of the Republican proudly takes credit for the shutdown and, without detecting a whiff of the hypocrisy they're spewing, turns around and blames Obama. The ACA was passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President (that's how democracy works). It was upheld by the Supreme Court, and in the 2012 Presidential election, which was largely a referendum on the ACA, Obama won resoundingly. A small minority (which likes to wave the Constitution but not read it) has engaged in hostage taking to overturn that democratic process. There is nothing to negotiate. It would be like negotiating with kidnappers who say, "You can have your baby back after we cut off one of its legs."
on October 3,2013 | 07:16AM
XML808 wrote:
Agree. Also, anyone notice something buried in the bottom of the article? "The House has approved legislation keeping the entire government funded through Dec. 15. It also would impose a one-year delay in the health care law's requirement that individuals buy health insurance, which would threaten to cripple the program, and block federal subsidies for health coverage bought by lawmakers and their staff." Gee, I guess they don't want to lose their subsidies, which none of us receive, unless of course you purchase health insurance through the exchanges (which they want to shut down or at least stall for one year). Also, let's keep in mind that Congress continues to receive a paycheck through this mess they created.
on October 3,2013 | 07:48AM
Maipono wrote:
Let's take a look at bsdetection's analysis: "The ACA was passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President (that's how democracy works)." Truth: Democrats passed Obamacare without any input from the GOP using a special exception, never before used for bills other than budget negotiations. In other words, they used "trickeration" to get Obamacare through, not the way the Republic is supposed to work. "It was upheld by the Supreme Court..." Truth: At first Obama said it wasn't a tax, but when his administration argued the legality of Obamacare in the Supreme Court, they said it was a tax, and Justice Roberts said that because it is a tax it is legal. "Presidential election, which was largely a referendum on the ACA..." Truth: Americans do not know exactly what is Obamacare is, let alone base their vote on that issue. That's the way I see it, this is on both parties, but history will blame Obama for this one.
on October 3,2013 | 07:54AM
primowarrior wrote:
I will agree on your last statement that Americans don't fully understand Obamacare. I think most people have an opinion based on ideology, or on the selective reporting and rhetoric they hear from the media, pundits, and politicians. I think the only way to accurately measure it's impact is to allow implementation to proceed. If it's as bad as some predict it will be, the American people will make sure it is dismantled, and the GOP will benefit. If it turns out to be good, the country, and the Democrats, win, and that, frankly, is what I think the GOP is afraid of, and why they are resorting to these extreme tactics.
on October 3,2013 | 09:58AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Problem: once the government freebies begin to flow they are almost impossible to get rid of even if they drive up costs. Can't speak for the entire GOP, but I see a massive new entitlement being created when we can't afford the ones we already have. Obamacare's claimed cost savings, which the CBO says aren't actually going to materialize, will depend on rationing and price control. This is a recipe for two things: scarcity of medical care and lower quality. We can do better. We have to do better. With $70 trillion in unfunded federal liability and deficits set to sky rocket within the decade we are in deep fiscal trouble, facing a debt ceiling, in our lifespans, that can't be avoided. Given that every federal entitlement, SS , Medicare, has cost at least an order of magnitude more than expected, continuing with Obamacare will just be the icing on the disaster cake.
on October 3,2013 | 10:16AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Obama has no responsibility? Doesn't he own the National Park Service, the agency that put up barricades around the "formerly" open air memorials in DC, the WWII and Lincoln memorials? I think that's an executive branch agency. They also forced scores of privately run parks to shutdown even though no Federal money is required to operate them. Even the turn offs and over looks off the PUBLIC highway through Great Smoky Mtn. National Park have been barricaded. (Wow the barricade business must be hot, so hot they're starting to call them "Barrycades", get it.)---------- More seriously, your analogy has a couple of tiny flaws. The authority of the House over what to fund or not fund is absolutely equal to that of the Senate (Constitution). The president recommends spending, but doesn't control it, other than by veto (constitution). The majority of the American people (51% to 39%) oppose Obamacare (Realclear politics average of 7 polls). The percentage disapproving will grow as this train wreck of a law metastasizes. Finally, the chopping off of the baby's legs: Here's a more accurate one: By prematurely inducing labor, Dr. Obama risk damage to the fetus, while Dr. Boehner us just asking for a delay so that this wonderful law can have a natural birth next year.
on October 3,2013 | 08:14AM
Wonderful_World wrote:
The bill that was originally signed has morphed into something that is totally different
on October 3,2013 | 10:59AM
South76 wrote:
Obama has never lead country, when you look at all his speeches, he is always blaming for his ineptness on someone else.
on October 3,2013 | 11:31AM
goinglobal wrote:
OH you mean laws like defense of marriage act? Dont ask dont tell? You seem to forget this is a two way street.
on October 3,2013 | 07:49AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Please cease the violent rhetoric! This gun talk is very insensitive especially when referring to an aleged hostage situation. -------- Oh yes, a news bulletin for you: The GOP isn't asking for a repeal of the wonderful Obamacare law. They're asking for a delay of one year, similar to the delay that Obama just granted Big Business. Seems only fair to give the little guy the same break, especially since this carefully legislated, carefully thought out program seems to be something of a train wreck.
on October 3,2013 | 07:56AM
AhiPoke wrote:
Really??? Who does that help? I'm neither a republican nor democrat and I don't care about obamacare. What I do care about is the future of this country. That includes my concern about the ever increasing debt that even senator obama said was "a leadership failure". IMO, "sticking to his guns" is a political position. Isn't it about time that these elected people start to do what's best for all ciitizens not just their party?
on October 3,2013 | 11:40AM
Grimbold wrote:
What Obamacare will cost: Health cost per person in USA: $8233 in Germany $4386 per year per person. Mainly because the services in US are more expensive. Present mandatory health insurance in Germany: 15.5% of your income. Since the health cost in US are almost double and wages about the same you can expect about 30% of your income going to Obamacare in the long run.
on October 3,2013 | 03:18PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Unconscionable profits pouring into the pharmaceutical and medical device industries are at the core of this high cost. All other industry is regulated by the free market, while our individual health always demands the best available, regardless of the subsequent price tag. As much as I dislike government, having it take over those industries might drive down overall cost.
on October 3,2013 | 04:25PM
fbg wrote:
This isn't just about health care or total debt. It is about the promise made to the American people that both parties would come to a joint solution on the budget and end the sequestration. Absolutely nothing has been accomplished on this front and instead the only addition to the mix is one more program that creates confusion and discord. Come January, in less than 90 days this state will be facing more serious cuts than currently imagined over this debt ceiling fight and yet no one is yet addressing this more serious problem. How sensible are the members of congress? Well, they closed all the money making national parks and sent workers home without pay. And yet we expect these same politicians to run every other important area of our lives.
on October 3,2013 | 06:48AM
honokai wrote:
Nobody is fighting for the children of the 2040s, 2050s, 2060s, 2070s. It takes a village to consider were it will be in the decades ahead.
on October 3,2013 | 07:11AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Interesting comment I'm lovin' it.
on October 3,2013 | 08:29AM
Mana07 wrote:
It's obvious by reading the posts of the sheople that our society is broken. The divide is too great. Some of the post make me say Yeah! While others infuriate me....not healthy. NO WAY can we survive going down this path. And NO, going along with everything BHO wants isn't the answer. Throw all of the bums out..on both sides.
on October 3,2013 | 07:25AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Where is Mana06?
on October 3,2013 | 08:25AM
control wrote:
Boehner said: "All we're asking for here is a discussion and fairness for the American people under Obamacare."....gosh....where has Boehner aka Bonehead been for the past 6 years??? Did he just wake up from his nap?
on October 3,2013 | 08:10AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Boehner could not do it before Republicans took over the House.
on October 3,2013 | 08:26AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Shooting on Capitol Hill. Now gun control is going to come into play.
on October 3,2013 | 08:37AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Either vote on a bill u guys in Congress or give a directive Barry, it's as simple as that, the only two options there are. It's like two kids fighting over marbles lol. I couldn't use bumbuchas because they were too big for my tiny hand. Eggets we called them, drawing lines in the sand and placing the marble between the thumb and first finger and firing away. Eventually cooler heads will prevail and alls well will end well. Barry controls the purse strings because he is in The White House and he knows the details of the US Treasury. So ultimately if Barry does not aquicese then it's Barry's fault if we go into a Depression and not even a thousand prescriptions of Prozac won't help us get out of this depression, as we would need a worldwide miracle, such as Russia and/or China bailing us out, and we would not want to be owned by The Russians and/or The Chinese do we, President Barack Hussein Obama?
on October 3,2013 | 08:23AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Or we can look at it from a fictitious point of view: suppose Cayetano got into office as Mayor and he began a crusade to stop TheRail. Ben himself could not stop it, as he would need to deal with The City Council. Suppose there was an ideological spat between Ben and The City Council, and nothing got done because of TheRail. Similar to what's happening in Washington, D.C. except would City services be shutdown just to prove a point? I would hope not. Hey u guys in Washington, D.C. please come to a solution as I want to watch our University of Hawaii Rainbow Wahine Volleyball team win their 5th National Title, which we cannot do if we become The United States of China.
on October 3,2013 | 08:37AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Shooting on Capitol Hill.
on October 3,2013 | 08:38AM
kainalu wrote:
The Affordable Care Act was a pillar of the President's campaign - both times. The American-voter elected the President to POTUS - twice! Save me the BS that "Americans" are opposed to the ACA. Only the poisoned-tea guzzlers are opposed.
on October 3,2013 | 08:34AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Shooting on Capitol Hill.
on October 3,2013 | 08:38AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Shooting of a mother with a child in the car. I bet the child needs critical health care! The mom was just fighting for her child. More news to come. She was not armed.
on October 3,2013 | 01:50PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Now Gun Control is on the table.
on October 3,2013 | 08:41AM
DAGR81 wrote:
Obama got reelected because of his deceit, cover-ups and outright lies to the American people.
on October 3,2013 | 09:04AM
DAGR81 wrote:
Why can't Obama accept responsibility for his shortcomings and failures, and work cooperatively with others to resolve our many problems?
on October 3,2013 | 09:00AM
HD36 wrote:
When you come from the premise that the government is the solution to all problems, you're like an alcoholic who doesn't think he has a drinking problem to begin with.
on October 3,2013 | 02:53PM
Ewasohappy wrote:
Let's see now, the president says "no negotiations", sen. reid says " a clean CR only". Yep, it's the republicans fault.
on October 3,2013 | 09:15AM
Denominator wrote:
This is absolutely the worst President our country has ever had!
on October 3,2013 | 09:43AM
llpof wrote:
How quickly you forget the previous president.
on October 3,2013 | 10:12AM
pakeheat wrote:
How about previous Presidents?
on October 3,2013 | 12:24PM
DAGR81 wrote:
We have not forgotten, but apparently you have.
on October 3,2013 | 12:58PM
Bdpapa wrote:
I kinda liked GW. Given a choice of having a beer with him or Obama, I'd take GW any day. He's more genuine and not so condencending.
on October 3,2013 | 01:45PM
HD36 wrote:
Well, as far as debt he's created more debt than all other presidents combined, so in that respect there's no denying it.
on October 3,2013 | 02:55PM
yskeulb wrote:
Give Obamacare money to last one year with the stipulation that it must be self funding after that. Otherwise, with Social Security, we will have two bankrupt programs (maybe three if you count the Postal Service) to contend with.
on October 3,2013 | 09:49AM
primowarrior wrote:
Let them negotiate this AFTER they get the government up and running.
on October 3,2013 | 10:21AM
AhiPoke wrote:
I've worked in the private business sector for a long time. Based on my experience, I would never chose the course the president has taken if my goal was to resolve a problem. Publically airing my disagreement and calling the opposition names is exactly what I wouldn't do. That only causes people to dig in. Obama has shown himself to be a politican first and only and not the leader we need. While Bill Clinton was also a politician he was able to tone down his ego enough to reach compromise. Obama doesn't have the skill to do so.
on October 3,2013 | 10:04AM
nalogirl wrote:
Exactly, Obama is basically telling 1/2 of the USA that it's their fault. not eveyone in the nation is a democrat, so he has demonized half of our country. Obama the great divider.
on October 3,2013 | 11:16AM
primowarrior wrote:
I feel pretty bad for all of those who are being negatively affected by this shutdown, but what really worries me more is that Boehner and the GOP have said that they plan to do the same thing with the upcoming debt ceiling - attach a list of demands as a condition for raising it. Geez, here we go again.
on October 3,2013 | 10:12AM
Denominator wrote:
Uh? Really crazy to vote to unconditionally raise the debt ceiling (as Demos are DEMANDING). The Government is OUT OF MONEY! They are only spending borrowed money. And you are worried because some people want to put conditions on raising the debt ceiling? Anything else in this world worry you? Have you ever worried about the whole country going upside down financially? Have you ever worried about your money becoming worthless?
on October 3,2013 | 01:18PM
primowarrior wrote:
The government has been spending borrowed money since the Revolutionary War. If they don't raise the debt ceiling, then the whole country will most certainly go upside down economically and financially, and probably take the whole world with it. If the Republicans want to cut spending, as Obama has already done, then discuss it without threatening to destroy the U.S. and world economies.
on October 3,2013 | 02:30PM
Denominator wrote:
MSNBC talking points. Harry Reid already approved some spending, like for military. Then he says "no piece meal." He's so arbitrary it stinks! Why shouldn't they be talking. They go nothing else to do and they're still being paid!
on October 3,2013 | 04:48PM
primowarrior wrote:
What part of it is "MSNBC talking points?" Were you around when just the threat of not raising the debt ceiling cause a downgrade in our credit rating and cost this country billions of $ in additional interest?
on October 3,2013 | 06:02PM
Denominator wrote:
The country is already upside down. Don't you get it? When you have no money that is not a good sign! Are you saying that if we have been going further and further in debt for 100 years then it must be a good idea and we should escalate our borrowing and take down the whole world with us?
on October 3,2013 | 04:53PM
SteveToo wrote:
Why is it that it's the Republican's fault because they won't give a little? Why is it not the Democrat's fault because they won't give a little?
on October 3,2013 | 10:24AM
DAGR81 wrote:
You really mean that the democrats won't give ANYTHLING.
on October 3,2013 | 01:00PM
nalogirl wrote:
Obama never takes the blame for anything, he is as much a part of the shutdown as is all of congress, The Senate and Obama are saying that unless the House does what they want they won't pass it. Open your eyes people, it's not just the republicans.
on October 3,2013 | 10:37AM
Bumby wrote:
This is a symptom and not the major problem as far as closure of the U.S. Gov't. The illness we have is the debt that is forever escalating and the interest that is being paid on this debt by the U.S. Gov't. Without the ever increasing debt and foreign and defense spending ObamaCare would not be a problem. The savings on all this expenses can easily help the American people all have health care. The U.S. Gov't needs to have a plan to get us out of debt forever. Never again be in debt. Each family and individual think about it, if you had no debt and had housing and health coverage would you be able to have a less stressful financial life. We are being a slave to our personal debt as well as our country's debt. The filthy rich excluded.
on October 3,2013 | 11:55AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Big Q results of today: House Republicans to blame for shutdown 48%, Equally the House Republicans, Senate Democrats and President Obama 27%, Senate Democrats and President Obama 25%. Runs in line with the 2008 Presidential Results in Hawaii, where 75% of us voted for Obama (48% plus 27% equals 75%).
on October 3,2013 | 01:03PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Big Q results of today: House Republicans to blame for shutdown 48%, Equally the House Republicans, Senate Democrats and President Obama 27%, Senate Democrats and President Obama 25%. Runs in line with the 2008 Presidential Results in Hawaii, where 75% of us voted for Obama (48% plus 27% equals 75%).
on October 3,2013 | 01:03PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The debt is a result of our country surviving, nothing more nothing less.

The Federal Government has taken on the responsibility to be the lender of last resort. The Feds kept on borrowing so that General Motors, Citibank, AIG, and a host of others would survive, including the long ago bailout of Chrysler, so the debt issue goes way way back, although it has really gone up due to the housing led crisis of 2007, which coincidentally happened during The GWBush Administration, a Republican, while Barack Obama was aiming for the White House in 2008.

We are very happy that Obama, a Hawaii born quasi Kamaaina got into The White House, however The Housing Crisis was created by another Democrat, namely Bill Clinton, who as some of us may know, crafted the doctrine of a dream of having more and more Americans own their own homes. This dream began to flourish during the early 2000s when Wall Street created those elaborate Mortgage Backed Securities that allowed for home ownership with nothing down.

So when the crises hit Wall Street in 2007 with Lehman Brothers going down for the count, it was a perfect storm for a newly minted Senator from Illinois, namely Barack Hussein Obama, class of 1980 Punahou, to become the 44th President of The United States of America.

If we want to repay the debt, we need to cut spending like never seen before and raise taxes like never seen before.

Personal and Business debt is a totally different animal. If one cannot pay their bills they must declare bankruptcy.

Will the US Government declare bankruptcy?


on October 3,2013 | 01:29PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
What's wrong?
on October 3,2013 | 01:26PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Not yet?
on October 3,2013 | 01:27PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The debt is a result of our country surviving, nothing more nothing less.

The Federal Government has taken on the responsibility to be the lender of last resort. The Feds kept on borrowing so that General Motors, Citibank, AIG, and a host of others would survive, including the long ago bailout of Chrysler, so the debt issue goes way way back, although it has really gone up due to the housing led crisis of 2007, which coincidentally happened during The GWBush Administration, a Republican, while Barack Obama was aiming for the White House in 2008.

We are very happy that Obama, a Hawaii born quasi Kamaaina got into The White House, however The Housing Crisis was created by another Democrat, namely Bill Clinton, who as some of us may know, crafted the doctrine of a dream of having more and more Americans own their own homes. This dream began to flourish during the early 2000s when Wall Street created those elaborate Mortgage Backed Securities that allowed for home ownership with nothing down.

So when the crises hit Wall Street in 2007 with Lehman Brothers going down for the count, it was a perfect storm for a newly minted Senator from Illinois, namely Barack Hussein Obama, class of 1980 Punahou, to become the 44th President of The United States of America.

If we want to repay the debt, we need to cut spending like never seen before and raise taxes like never seen before.


on October 3,2013 | 01:29PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The debt is a result of our country surviving, nothing more nothing less.

The Federal Government has taken on the responsibility to be the lender of last resort. The Feds kept on borrowing so that General Motors, Citibank, AIG, and a host of others would survive, including the long ago bailout of Chrysler, so the debt issue goes way way back, although it has really gone up due to the housing led crisis of 2007, which coincidentally happened during The GWBush Administration, a Republican, while Barack Obama was aiming for the White House in 2008.

We are very happy that Obama, a Hawaii born quasi Kamaaina got into The White House, however The Housing Crisis was created by another Democrat, namely Bill Clinton, who as some of us may know, crafted the doctrine of a dream of having more and more Americans own their own homes. This dream began to flourish during the early 2000s when Wall Street created those elaborate Mortgage Backed Securities that allowed for home ownership with nothing down.


on October 3,2013 | 01:30PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Man u guys must have The IBM Watson computer on Jeopardy doing the job for u if it's this sophisticated.
on October 3,2013 | 01:32PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Barry stop being so stubborn, u too Harry and so u too also John.
on October 3,2013 | 01:34PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The China words got to u right?
on October 3,2013 | 01:35PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Don't worry I got it pasted on my notes App in my iPhone 5, so it's not going to waste. I may try it again later.
on October 3,2013 | 01:37PM
HD36 wrote:
The debt is a result of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 which created a private corporation known as the Federal Reserve Bank and gave them the power to issue US currency and create a debt based system The true owners of the Federal Rserve, which is neither Federal nor has reserves, are a cartel of private banks like JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, etc. The government would not even be able to pay the interest payments on the debt if interest rates weren't being artificially manipulated to all time lows by the Federal Reserve's buying $45 billion a month in US Treasuiries, and $40 billion a month in mortgage backed securities. When interest rates rise to normal historical averages of about 6.5 % on the 10 yr, the government payments on the interest on the $17 trillion debt will exceed the entire militar budget! With the government running annual trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, it's clear there is no way it can be paid back.
on October 3,2013 | 03:11PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Thanks man !!! I know when a person is talking with knowledge. I myself am learned in the Sciences and I was especially good at math as my seventh grade teacher at Kalakaua Middle School noticed it and placed me in a special 7th grade math class called SMSG. I took Geometry, Algebra, Trigonometry and Analytic Geometry at Kalakaua and Farrington, then Math 205, 206, 231, 232, 311 and 405 at UHM. In the 1990s I was a self taught bookkeeper as I attempted to learn debit and credit and I also dabbled in The Stock Market, which led me to try to understand concepts like A Balance Sheet and Income Statement. What u say here is new and I appreciate your comment as I will remember what u have said.
on October 3,2013 | 03:38PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Obama catalogued a litany of troubles that could be caused by the failure to raise the debt ceiling, from delayed Social Security and disability checks to worldwide economic repercussions. "If we screw up, everybody gets screwed up," he said. Why do u say we, Mr. President, when it's mostly on u?
on October 3,2013 | 02:43PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
k den I go have my lunch.
on October 3,2013 | 02:43PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Mr. Obama uses the word "screww", which is interesting, considering that he's probably had a lot of private discussions with Biden, who we know utters words not acceptable to the FCC.
on October 3,2013 | 02:46PM
sukebesan wrote:
IMHO, the present federal government shutdown, except for essential services and military manpower requirements, is a very positive event and I hope it lasts until President Obama's term expires in January 2017. The federal government's cost savings may amount to over a trillion dollars and the Obamacare controversy may be a moot by then.
on October 3,2013 | 02:44PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The shutdown will not last until 2017 because by then, if this shutdown continues, we will me owned by China among other entities because debt investors get first choice in any liquidation.
on October 3,2013 | 02:48PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
lol we will BE owned by China, dammmnn small keyboard on this iPhone made in China lol.
on October 3,2013 | 02:50PM
BigErn wrote:
Stay strong Republicans! Don't let that pile of excrement named barry impose his will with a plan that is doomed to fail.
on October 3,2013 | 03:11PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Although I would benefit from ObamaCare due to my age and my circumstances, I am glad ObamaCare is not getting off the ground for now, including the software glitch locally, because it's simply wrong for Government to become Socialistic, as learned through the recent history of the failure of The Third Reich in April 1945.
on October 3,2013 | 03:27PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
So are you implying that all the other advanced nations who have universal health care, socialistic? Please elaborate.
on October 3,2013 | 07:03PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
I am implying nothing.
on October 3,2013 | 08:34PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Somebody just got to admit that they made a mistake.
on October 3,2013 | 05:49PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Somebody just got to admit that they made a mistake.
on October 3,2013 | 05:49PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The headline story in today's New York Times, "State Medicaid Decisions Leave Millions Uninsured", with sub-headline "Failure to Expand Health Program for Poor Undercuts Reach of the New Law", states that ObamaCare will leave out two-thirds of the poor blacks and single mothers and more than half of the low-wage workers who do not have insurance, the very kinds of people that the program was intended to help, according to an analysis of census data by the NY Times.
on October 3,2013 | 05:56PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Political Radar
Phased in

Political Radar
Palolo v. Pauoa

Political Radar
Palolo v. Pauoa

Career Changers
Must Sea TV

Political Radar
HB 1700 — Day 4

Political Radar
Pass

Warrior Beat
Hammer time