Democrats Shutdown The Government

Ahabstar
40 different times, House Republicans have tried to have discussion on the matter. Refusing to allow non-essential funding to continue until a dialogue takes place is not destroying the economy. 800,000 govt employees are consuming $1 billion in payroll a week and you all are okay with this?

All under the attempt to have fairness under the law by giving an exemption to people under the correct process of a bill to become law rather than presidential whim as was done with corporations...and the Dems have a problem with that.

Senate should have passed it and let Obama be the hero or the chump on his item merits rather than breaking Checks and Balances to protect his ego and image.

That is why we are in a shutdown and it is the Dems that hold the blame despite the shunt to the uninformed.

Hardly!

The House republicans have voted over 40 times to defund and/or repeal the ACA but they have not been open to fixing or amending it and this 1 yr. delay they want now is just to give them more time to take even more futile votes to repeal or defund. They've had over 3 yrs. to offer amendments yet none have been proposed, only defund and/or repeal.

If they're so against the personal mandate, (which was their idea to begin with) let them offer a replacement means by which we can insure the uninsured. Like uh, I don't know, how about "Medicare for all" or a "public option."

Lie to yourself if you want to but don't expect me to buy that line of garbage.

So I guess the voices of the people fined April under the law will be heard in November. Or worse, the ones that sign up for this debacle that later find they can afford those polices when their hours are cut and the State won't pick them up under Medicaid.

But it will be alright, I am sure Obama will ask for more money to be dumped into the states just like the 99 Weeks of unemployment versus the standard 36 Weeks.

reply to post by Ahabstar


You're definitely going to hear the voices of the voters come November 2014. This insane stunt being orchestrated by the Tea Party led Republicans almost certainly guarantees it.

Problem is, when they do speak up and demand an end to this Tea Party craziness and they will, I doubt you'll accept it.

There is a reason the Tea Party has an approval rating of only 22%. It's because they are as politically ignorant as the day is long and they're nuttier than a fruitcake.

reply to post by Ahabstar


I don't think it's as complicated as the facts you've pointed out indicate.
Obama is a democrat and he just took his ball and went home. Why ?
Because he kept fumbling. Now we have to go to his house,
kiss his ass, let him be quarterback and ruin the game for both
sides anyway.

What's the point ?

Game over

You can coat this Pig in as much perfume as you like.
And go right ahead, throw all the smoke
and mirrors you can muster at it....
It's still a Republican Sow.
And still the Republicans' doing.

reply to post by Flatfish


Do you honestly believe people will find comfort in having an insurance policy while unable to make rent, unable to put food on the table and unable to find a full job when their hours are cut? When they ask their boss why, he shrugs and says Obamacare, are they going to look at Boehner or Obama as the bad guy?

What people don't understand is this isn't a "my guy won"situation. What taxes will be paid by the unemployed and barely employed?

The first day of Obamacare and the online computers went down.

Obama claims its because so many people want to sign up for Obamacare.

What they are hiding is the massive denial of service attack on the health exchanges created by Obamacare in protest of obamacare.

The system is even under attack by hackers from china and other countries looking for personal information for ID thieft.
www.reuters.com...
insurancenewsnet.com...

Do not sign up for obamacare for at least two months till they get the security fixed on there Obamacare sites.

Then signup in person and not over the internet.

ANNED
The first day of Obamacare and the online computers went down.

Obama claims its because so many people want to sign up for Obamacare.

What they are hiding is the massive denial of service attack on the health exchanges created by Obamacare in protest of obamacare.

The system is even under attack by hackers from china and other countries looking for personal information for ID thieft.
www.reuters.com...
insurancenewsnet.com...

Do not sign up for obamacare for at least two months till they get the security fixed on there Obamacare sites.

Then signup in person and not over the internet.

I go a step further...

I say the dos attacks were all part of the plan.

What better way to claim *popularity*.

The whole thing is a ruse.

Ahabstar
reply to post by Flatfish

 

Do you honestly believe people will find comfort in having an insurance policy while unable to make rent, unable to put food on the table and unable to find a full job when their hours are cut? When they ask their boss why, he shrugs and says Obamacare, are they going to look at Boehner or Obama as the bad guy?

What people don't understand is this isn't a "my guy won"situation. What taxes will be paid by the unemployed and barely employed?

For starters, it won't be this new insurance policy that prevents them from buying food and/or making rent. There are subsidies set up to help people who are impoverished afford the insurance but if you really want to make sure it doesn't happen, write your congressman and tell him to remove the private, for-profit insurance companies from the picture and convert the ACA into a single payer universal healthcare system for all. Kinda like the one us democrats had envisioned to begin with.

Secondly, people who rely on their bosses for the answers to questions like this one are already doomed to a life of ignorance. More often than not, their bosses are the biggest liars on the planet.

And finally, you're right it's not a "my guy won" situation. It's the fact that everywhere in the world where they have adopted a not-for-profit universal healthcare system, they enjoy better health statistics for less money than we do here in the U.S.. The majority of americans voted to begin changing our healthcare system into something more universal in order to accomplish those same goals and the republican party is dead set on stopping us from doing so, instead choosing to protect the private health insurance interest. That coupled with the fact that the Tea Party faction of the Republican party are anarchist who just hate the government altogether.

It's more of a "The American People Spoke" situation and what the Tea Party is doing is a pathetic display of immaturity and extortion that the american people will not soon forget.

The subsidies only exist in some states. Ohio and several others do not expand the Medicaid programs. Some states do not have an exchange. So far none of the money paid on the premiums is tax deductible except perhaps on the Federal forms and for State purposes, any subsidy would be taxable income.

The question asked of the bosses would be "Why are my hours cut?" a valid question for anyone that is an employee. Forgive me, I was on a cell phone earlier today and editing is a chore once the text exceeds the window.

A Universal Health Care system would require an amendment to the Constitution (just as ACA should have) which is my main personal argument against this boondoggle as is many Republicans and TEA Party members. For a judge to rule a fine (punishment for breaking the law) as a tax, would have had that judge removed from the bench in any state if they were on a lower court. Calling non-compliance a tax because the IRS is enforcing it is asinine, when the IRS is already set up to deal with large volumes of correspondence with the People.

But follow this to the next step, what if you were compelled by law to vote in all elections? What if you were compelled by law to own a firearm and be prepared to use it? Or even better, what if you and a few investors decided you wanted to create an insurance company that provided better policies and a competitive price but did not want to be a part of the exchange or accept subsidies? Would your new insurance company have to overcome extraordinary odds to compete?

I'll be honest, there are many foods that I do not eat, many religions to do not subscribe to, many books I have no interest in reading. As a free person, I should not be forced into any particular thing or contractual agreement because a few people that I could not legally vote for because they do not represent my district decided I should become a part of my earned income. Even more so, that my ability to work for a single employer should be removed income reduced in order to skirt the law in which I will have less income to pay out for this mandatory compulsion.

The country was founded on the principles that no governing body should hold that kind of sway over the personal life on an individual. The tax on tea and the quartering of soldiers are really quite insignificant compared to edicts on what you must purchase and that your movements are monitored by electronic means. There comes a point were a line has to be drawn. Enough is enough and saying what I must buy with my labor is that line. That an agency will have card blanche to chase down my income and property in order to ensure that I have this dictated crap is no different than The Fugitive Slave Act both in spirit and principle.

Far too often I have heard the phrase "gun to our heads" out of Obama's mouth regarding the shutdown. Maybe he should take a long hard look at what he is doing to the people by placing this "gun to their heads". And I'll tell you what, I don't drink beer but I will sit down and have a Beer Summit with Obama to explain it to him if you can make the arrangements.

Ahabstar
The subsidies only exist in some states. Ohio and several others do not expand the Medicaid programs. Some states do not have an exchange. So far none of the money paid on the premiums is tax deductible except perhaps on the Federal forms and for State purposes, any subsidy would be taxable income.

The only states that have not set up their exchanges are those with republican led legislatures who believe that by refusing and/or delaying the establishment of these exchanges it will help delay and/or kill ObamaCare. So, if your state is not ready, it's by choice. The same could be said for Medicaid expansion. If your state opted out you can expect the uninsured to continue packing your emergency rooms for healthcare on the taxpayers dime.

Ahabstar
A Universal Health Care system would require an amendment to the Constitution (just as ACA should have) which is my main personal argument against this boondoggle as is many Republicans and TEA Party members. For a judge to rule a fine (punishment for breaking the law) as a tax, would have had that judge removed from the bench in any state if they were on a lower court. Calling non-compliance a tax because the IRS is enforcing it is asinine, when the IRS is already set up to deal with large volumes of correspondence with the People.

That's just not true. Why would a constitutional amendment be required? We didn't need one to enact Medicare or Social Security, so why do we need one for universal healthcare? Furthermore, as far as I know not a single state had to amend their constitution in order to mandate that everyone who owns a car has liability insurance.

Ahabstar
But follow this to the next step, what if you were compelled by law to vote in all elections? What if you were compelled by law to own a firearm and be prepared to use it? Or even better, what if you and a few investors decided you wanted to create an insurance company that provided better policies and a competitive price but did not want to be a part of the exchange or accept subsidies? Would your new insurance company have to overcome extraordinary odds to compete?

What if the sky was green and what if chickens laid square eggs? What if, what if , what if? If you want to create a new insurance company, you will follow the same rules as any other insurer or you'll choose another business to get into. I mean really, "What if" I wanted to start a new business but I didn't want to deduct social security and/or medicare taxes from my employees payroll? I suspect I would be getting a visit from the feds to insure that I comply with the same laws as any other business.

Ahabstar
I'll be honest, there are many foods that I do not eat, many religions to do not subscribe to, many books I have no interest in reading. As a free person, I should not be forced into any particular thing or contractual agreement because a few people that I could not legally vote for because they do not represent my district decided I should become a part of my earned income. Even more so, that my ability to work for a single employer should be removed income reduced in order to skirt the law in which I will have less income to pay out for this mandatory compulsion.

The country was founded on the principles that no governing body should hold that kind of sway over the personal life on an individual. The tax on tea and the quartering of soldiers are really quite insignificant compared to edicts on what you must purchase and that your movements are monitored by electronic means. There comes a point were a line has to be drawn. Enough is enough and saying what I must buy with my labor is that line. That an agency will have card blanche to chase down my income and property in order to ensure that I have this dictated crap is no different than The Fugitive Slave Act both in spirit and principle.

Far too often I have heard the phrase "gun to our heads" out of Obama's mouth regarding the shutdown. Maybe he should take a long hard look at what he is doing to the people by placing this "gun to their heads". And I'll tell you what, I don't drink beer but I will sit down and have a Beer Summit with Obama to explain it to him if you can make the arrangements.

It's the Tea Party who is holding a gun to our heads, not Obama and a dislike for the POTUS is not a valid argument for obstructing every single initiative he proposes, even those that were republican ideas to begin with. There's only one word to describe this phenomena and it's; "NUTS!"

reply to post by buster2010


If these corporate rights are to mean everyone that works for that corporation forfeits their individual rights to be a part of that corporation where they have the same exact rights as a collective individual then that should automatically mean that they have no say or vote so to speak as an individual citizen because the corporation is voting in their name, so each one of the individuals in the corporation is spoken for by the corporation , they should not have any voting rights as an individual because that would mean that each person in that corporation has two votes compared to everyone else's one vote, which from that premise would invalidate the corporations right to be considered an individual for the fact that it creates two votes for them one vote you, I could elaborate on this but the fact is I don't want to waste to much of my time talking about how a corporation is not an individual and should not have rights as an individual with no vote whatsoever in the governing of people.

Another thing that is being overlooked. Neither Obama nor Reid have to do anything to help in this matter. Neither one are ever running for any position again. After their terms are up, that's it. They get their full retirement benefits which include never having to worry about money to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table.

They get the biggest welfare checks of all. And neither one is going to share. They are not your friend, they don't care what you think of them and they don't care if you suffer under their actions.


Their only leverage point is their own ego. And being for over themselves is not part of the equation. If Americans are left hungry and homeless over Obamacare, tough luck. That is why we are in the Shutdown. The Democrats and their egos.

Ahabstar
Another thing that is being overlooked. Neither Obama nor Reid have to do anything to help in this matter. Neither one are ever running for any position again. After their terms are up, that's it. They get their full retirement benefits which include never having to worry about money to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table.

They get the biggest welfare checks of all. And neither one is going to share. They are not your friend, they don't care what you think of them and they don't care if you suffer under their actions.


Their only leverage point is their own ego. And being for over themselves is not part of the equation. If Americans are left hungry and homeless over Obamacare, tough luck. That is why we are in the Shutdown. The Democrats and their egos.

This has nothing to do with the democrats being egotistical. I'm not saying that they never are, but this has nothing to do with ego. What this has to do with is the republicans inability to accept the fact that they lost the last election and being the world's worst losers, here we are.

Have you seen the list of demands they are placing on the passage of an increased debt limit? You may want to take a look at it because if I didn't know better, I'd think they copied it straight from Romney's campaign platform.

www.nytimes.com...

Behind closed doors on Thursday, they laid out their demands for a debt ceiling increase that include the health law delay, fast-track authority to overhaul the tax code, construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, offshore oil and gas production and more permitting of energy exploration on federal lands.

They're actually holding the nation hostage over the very issues that defined the last Presidential election, which they lost. How would you like it if the democrats threatened to shut down the government if they didn't get the gun control legislation they want? It would be insane, now wouldn't it?