You disagree with my point of view, so you tell me to “blow it out my ear.” You disagree with members of the Tea Party, so you denigrate them by referring to them with a sexually derogatory pejorative. Thank you for presenting a fine example of the typical liberal version of “civil discourse”.
You are correct that this is no different than the last “government shut-down” in the Fall of last year. Last year the Democrats blocked the funding bill and shut down the government, and just now they have done the same thing. This time, however, the Republicans acquiesced before the actual shut-down.
Let’s clarify something. The Constitution gives the House of Representatives the authority and responsibility to initiate and then accept or reject all spending bills. The Constitution also gives the Senate the authority and responsibility to then accept, reject, or amend these spending bills; or let them languish with no action. One of the primary powers of the Congress is the control of spending. Congress “holds the purse strings”. If they want something done, they can provide funds so that it can be done. If they do not want something done, they can defund it so that it cannot be accomplished (at least not with federal government funding).
Further, per long standing rules of procedure in the Senate, a minority of Senators can block legislation (including spending bills) for coming up for a vote. This is part of the design of the Senate to be a slow and deliberative body, to prevent the federal government from acting (spending) on things on a whim, if there is not a significant level of agreement to proceed.
In this case (and also last Fall), did the House Republicans initiate and approve a funding bill for federal government operations? YES.Would a majority of Senators have approved this spending bill if it had come to a vote? YESWas a vote on this funding bill blocked by the filibuster action of a minority of Senators? YESWho lead the action to block the vote on the spending bill? DEMOCRATS
How could it be more clear that it was the deliberate action of the Democrats that blocked funding and threatened to “shut down the government”? IT COULD NOT BE MORE CLEAR
Please understand, I am not blaming or castigating the Democrats for this. They were acting within their Constitutional authority, and within the long standing rules of the Senate. This is the way things work. If there is not significant agreement on spending, then there should be no spending. This is the way it is supposed to work.
What is disgustingly hypocritical is the absurd blame game posed and repeated by the Democrats that, somehow, the Republicans should be blamed or castigated for “shutting down the government”, when it was clearly the action of the Democrats themselves blocking the funding and causing the “shut-down”. What mindless morons could possibly buy-in to this line of Democrat BS, NoBS??
October 1, 2015 at 9:29 p.m.
So once again the DEMOCRATS get their way by taking deliberate action to block spending to shut down the government.
October 1, 2015 at 6:35 a.m.
So one can get a four year degree for $50,000; and I would argue that it can be done for even less.
If one lives at home, works to help pay, and obtains financial assistance, the debt (if any) should be substantially less than $50,000. There are many options available. Make the "higher learning" institutions work and compete for the education dollars.
Why should I feel sympathy for the moron who deliberately borrowed and frittered away $250,000. That would be his problem.
September 27, 2015 at 9:36 a.m.
cambridge - I think I understand. You don't really care if the government is shut down, as long as the Democrats can blame the Republicans; and you're hoping if you repeat the mantra that it is the Republican's fault enough, no matter how absurd that is, most clueless people will believe it.
How, exactly, are the Democrats not doing exactly the same things to "pander (to) the mindless sheep that follow them"??
September 26, 2015 at 11:53 p.m.
Cambridge - Can I find a quote from a Democrat indicating they are in favor of shutting down the government? No, probably not and I'm not going to make an effort to satisfy you. That’s sort of a hallmark of the leftist, they never actually tell us what they intend to really do. It is clear in this case, however, that it is the Democrats leading the effort to block the funding and taking the action that will result in a government shut-down.
How deliberately obtuse does one have to be to be incapable of admitting that the very people who are currently in the process of deliberate action to block the funding of the government are the people who are “shutting the government down”…..…..and to profess instead, somehow, it’s really the other guys (who are in fact proposing funding for the government) that are at fault??
Please don’t confuse me with a Republican. I just call things as they are, and I’m not going to let hypocrisy slide when I see it.
September 26, 2015 at 2:52 p.m.
Cambridge - Every Senator participating in the filibuster and refusing to allow the vote on the spending bill.....no, I don't know their names, and don't need to.
September 26, 2015 at 1:27 p.m.
Cambridge - Regardless of your personal opinion regarding funding for Planned Parenthood, the facts are that a majority of the Congress of the USA have proposed a spending bill that funds all other government functions but that does not provide funding for PP. It is now a minority of DEMOCRATS in the Senate that are blocking the funding of the government. It could not be more clear that it is these DEMOCRATS that are causing the threat of a shut-down by throwing a temper tantrum to get their way.
September 26, 2015 at 12:46 p.m.
So cambridge....then the real question is, why are the DEMOCRATS trying to shut down the government over Planned Parenthood funding? The funding bill has been presented. Why are a minority of DEMOCRAT Senators filibustering to block it??
September 26, 2015 at 11:17 a.m.
"........Daraprim is an old drug whose patent has expired..........."
@NoBS - Why don't you run right out and invest all YOUR money to start up a drug manufacturing company so you can make Daraprim and sell it for $13.50 per pill??? I can pretty much imagine that the liability insurance and complying with government regulations on something like this will probably cost you several hundred dollars per pill, but that shouldn't stop you because you're not "greedy".
September 26, 2015 at 9:41 a.m.
I wonder......if Kentucky declared itself a "sanctuary state" and decided to allow Kim Davis (and anyone else) to get away with not complying with the federal Supreme Court ruling regarding same-sex marriage, would Elizabeth Allen also agree that Kentucky was playing a "venerable role".
September 23, 2015 at 7:57 p.m.