Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on October 14, 2013, 12:16:28 PM
-
He is absolutely right.
Thomas Sowell: Who shut down the government?
Oct. 12, 2013
Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.
There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for Obamacare.
This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.
Whether Obamacare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
Obamacare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its constitutionality.
But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.
The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer Obamacare.
Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for Obamacare.
The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for Obamacare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?
If Sen. Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run Obamacare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.
You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.
When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.
Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.
Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.
Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.
None of this is rocket science. But unless the Republicans get their side of the story out — and articulation has never been their strong suit — the lies will win. More important, the whole country will lose.
Thomas Sowell, a native of North Carolina, is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com. Representations of fact and opinions are solely those of the author.
http://www.hpe.com/opinion/x559273386/Thomas-Sowell-Who-shut-down-the-government
-
Weird how Sowell forgot to mention that Congress can't defund Obamacare
Tom Coburn tried to explain this to the dunces in his party a few months ago
The reason, Coburn argued, is that most of the spending in Obamacare is mandatory, and the spending cannot be touched, even if the GOP were to shut down the rest of the government. He cited a new Congressional Research Service report that found as much.
"There's not a legislative method that we have that is capable of defunding it short of 67 votes in the U.S. Senate, short of two-thirds [of the] votes in the U.S. House," Coburn said, referring to the number of votes needed to override the presidential veto that would be sure to block any attempt to defund the law.
So the dipshit Repubs shut down the government and still can't stop Obamacare but now they are stuck with their shutdown and don't know how to "save face" and get out of it. They feel they need to get something but they don't even know what that is but they do know (hopefully) that it's not going to be defunding Obamacare
Here an example of the idiocy of the Republican Party
“We’re not going to be disrespected,” said Congressman Stutzman during an interview with the Washington Examiner on Tuesday. “We have to get something out of this. And I don’t know what that even is.”
Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/02/congressman-stutzman-he-has-no-idea-what-the-gop-wants/#ixzz2hj5AfJI5
-
The party of personal responsibility are once again not taking responsibility for the mess they created.
-
How is a moderator posting this screed? this reads like a retard wrote it.
-
He is absolutely right.
Thomas Sowell: Who shut down the government?
Oct. 12, 2013
Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.
There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for Obamacare.
This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.
Whether Obamacare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
Obamacare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its constitutionality.
But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.
The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer Obamacare.
Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for Obamacare.
The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for Obamacare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?
If Sen. Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run Obamacare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.
You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.
When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.
Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.
Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.
Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.
None of this is rocket science. But unless the Republicans get their side of the story out — and articulation has never been their strong suit — the lies will win. More important, the whole country will lose.
Thomas Sowell, a native of North Carolina, is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com. Representations of fact and opinions are solely those of the author.
http://www.hpe.com/opinion/x559273386/Thomas-Sowell-Who-shut-down-the-government
you didn't see the video of them admitting the GOP are at fault and they actually took steps to ensure it would remain shutdown. What alternate reality do you live in?
-
The House tried to fund the gov. The dems shot it down. What is so hard for you to understand?
-
The House tried to fund the gov. The dems shot it down. What is so hard for you to understand?
No they didn't. They have never sent over a clean resolution. it was defund obamacare and various poison pills.
What is so hard for you to understand? they changed the rules to ensure a shutdown, they have been planning it for months, there own party is imploding and attacking each other.
The goal of defunding Obamacare was impossible, yet they shut the government down.
There is no debate,it's all GOP and the public know it, hence the atrocious congressional ratings. Keep telling yourself it's those damn democrats not willing to open the government (they can't due to the rule change) and defund obamacare. 41 TIMES THEY ATTEMTPED REPEAL.
this is hilarious. Watching the fucking morons burning the house down around them.
-
The dems could pass funding for the gov, but they don't because they are stubborn. How is it anyone else's fault?
-
The dems could pass funding for the gov, but they don't because they are stubborn. How is it anyone else's fault?
How could they do that?
-
By accepting the provisions which do not include obamacare at least. There are certainly ways for obama to lessen the effects of the shutdown. the problem is that they WANT it to hurt.
-
By accepting the provisions which do not include obamacare at least. There are certainly ways for obama to lessen the effects of the shutdown. the problem is that they WANT it to hurt.
Like what? and why should they? what debate is there? what are the dems asking for? as a counter offer?
Oh ya nothing, because this is extortion by definition.
How do you reconcile the idea that dems want it to hurt, when they want to pass a clear CR and have now been amputated from doing anything due to Eric Cantor (the majority leader) being the only one who can call for a vote. Sounds like the GOP want it to hurt, by making sure it continues. They even said as much, they changed the rules to ensure a conversation, does that sound like democracy?
-
Why would the GOP want it to hurt? According to you they are the ones getting killed in the polls over it. Furthermore, are you denying that the dems want it to hurt?
-
:-\
you didn't see the video of them admitting the GOP are at fault and they actually took steps to ensure it would remain shutdown. What alternate reality do you live in?
No I didn't see the video you're talking about.
Sowell is incredibly smart. And he's absolutely right (so to speak). The House voted to fund the government, except for Obamacare. The House has the Constitutional right to vote on funding legislation. The president is refusing to sign a bill that will fund the government, except for Obamacare.
But if you actually read his opinion piece, you would already know that.
-
:-\
No I didn't see the video you're talking about.
Sowell is incredibly smart. And he's absolutely right (so to speak). The House voted to fund the government, except for Obamacare. The House has the Constitutional right to vote on funding legislation. The president is refusing to sign a bill that will fund the government, except for Obamacare.
But if you actually read his opinion piece, you would already know that.
Beach Bum, >:(. He's right? so apparently the majority in congress can just negate years of judicial process and elections and repeals and simply side step it and the person to blame is the president? So say the dems are in the house come 2014 or later, they refuse to fund the government unless there is a national gun registry, or funding/defunding for the war etc.
It is not democratic, it is not the proper way to conduct discourse. The president is refusing to be extorted. They attempted to defund obamacare 41 times and failed, then failed to get Romney through. So then they say the day before the shutdown let's change the rules so only Eric Cantor can bring a bill to the floor for a vote, never in history has this been the case. Then, they say the only way we are funding the government is if you defund obamacare, something that is impossible in this manner ( only the idiots think it's possible). McCain tried to tell this to the morons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
If he allows this to happen, democracy will end. Everyone can grind things to a halt because they don't agree with the majority. Elections will mean nothing.
I bumped the thread of the video's. I would love a cogent response from one of the GOP supporters. Tomy, just talked about something else.
-
Beach Bum, >:(. He's right? so apparently the majority in congress can just negate years of judicial process and elections and repeals and simply side step it and the person to blame is the president? So say the dems are in the house come 2014 or later, they refuse to fund the government unless there is a national gun registry, or funding/defunding for the war etc.
It is not democratic, it is not the proper way to conduct discourse. The president is refusing to be extorted. They attempted to defund obamacare 41 times and failed, then failed to get Romney through. So then they say the day before the shutdown let's change the rules so only Eric Cantor can bring a bill to the floor for a vote, never in history has this been the case. Then, they say the only way we are funding the government is if you defund obamacare, something that is impossible in this manner ( only the idiots think it's possible). McCain tried to tell this to the morons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
If he allows this to happen, democracy will end. Everyone can grind things to a halt because they don't agree with the majority. Elections will mean nothing.
I bumped the thread of the video's. I would love a cogent response from one of the GOP supporters. Tomy, just talked about something else.
Yes he's right. What specifically did he say that is factually incorrect?
Congress refusing to fund certain aspects of the government isn't new. It's neither unconstitutional nor undemocratic. It's how the system works. It's what the Constitution allows. Both the president and Congress have used the threat of refusal to provide federal funding for years.
-
Yes he's right. What specifically did he say that is factually incorrect?
Congress refusing to fund certain aspects of the government isn't new. It's neither unconstitutional nor undemocratic. It's how the system works. It's what the Constitution allows. Both the president and Congress have used the threat of refusal to provide federal funding for years.
It's undemocratic to it's core, it eliminates one side of the debate. It's also unheard of that a government shutdown occurs over a law passed and upheld as constituational.
Oh the it's how the system works huh? let's not change it or point out the shortcomings of it.
-
Shit I also forgot, that this moron doesn't realize what he is proposing is impossible.
This is not a negotiation, there aren't two sides, nor is the government running a concession to Obama. Imagine if Obama was doing this but for tax increases, wonder what the talk would be.
-
It's undemocratic to it's core, it eliminates one side of the debate. It's also unheard of that a government shutdown occurs over a law passed and upheld as constituational.
Oh the it's how the system works huh? let's not change it or point out the shortcomings of it.
It doesn't eliminate debate. It's the party with the majority of the votes dicitating what will and will not pass. That's how democracy works. If you want a bill to pass, convince enough people to agree and vote with you and make it happen.
No, I don't want to change the system that gives the House control of the purse strings. It has worked for over 200 years.
-
It doesn't eliminate debate. It's the party with the majority of the votes dicitating what will and will not pass. That's how democracy works. If you want a bill to pass, convince enough people to agree and vote with you and make it happen.
No, I don't want to change the system that gives the House control of the purse strings. It has worked for over 200 years.
So you're fine if the House takes the entire country hostage to try to achieve by extortion what they could not achieve by legislation or elections
Supposedly the House has enough Repubs (and has for awhile) to pass a clean CR except Repubs changed the rules so that the speaker could prevent a vote
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
-
It doesn't eliminate debate. It's the party with the majority of the votes dicitating what will and will not pass. That's how democracy works. If you want a bill to pass, convince enough people to agree and vote with you and make it happen.
No, I don't want to change the system that gives the House control of the purse strings. It has worked for over 200 years.
Of course it does, there is nothing democratic about extortion. What you outline has occurred and ACA was passed, they can't convince enough people so they change the rules and risk everything collapsing unless they get their desires.
-
Of course it does, there is nothing democratic about extortion. What you outline has occurred and ACA was passed, they can't convince enough people so they change the rules and risk everything collapsing unless they get their desires.
if the situation were reversed and the Dems were trying to use this to prevent a tax cut from going into effect Bum and the rest of the right wingers would be screaming bloody murder about how this is treason
-
Of course it does, there is nothing democratic about extortion. What you outline has occurred and ACA was passed, they can't convince enough people so they change the rules and risk everything collapsing unless they get
Extortion is a crime. No crime has been committed. That's absurd.
Democrats cannot convice Republicans to agree with them, and Republicans have the majority. They either need to negotiate or win enough seats to take back the majority. That's how the system works.
-
Of course it does, there is nothing democratic about extortion. What you outline has occurred and ACA was passed, they can't convince enough people so they change the rules and risk everything collapsing unless they get
Extortion is a crime. No crime has been committed. That's absurd.
Democrats cannot convice Republicans to agree with them, and Republicans have the majority. They either need to negotiate or win enough seats to take back the majority. That's how the system works.
Extortion is occurring. They, the GOP are saying unless you do what we want(they are proposing the additions) we will not fund the government (as if this is a concession to Obama). Also, since when are absurd claims outlandish to you? your whole belief system is based on absurd claims, they are absurd by definition. You also live by faith, the system by which evidence is arbitrary.
Also, to the last claim. The Democrats must negotiate in order to keep the government running? I didn't know one side could offer ultimatums without even so much as a vote first. Why has there been no vote for a CR you ask? well only Eric Cantor could do that and he knows that the CR would get passed, thus avoiding democracy and becoming a dictator.
You are living in a fantasy world dude, seriously, open your eyes.
-
Extortion is occurring. They, the GOP are saying unless you do what we want(they are proposing the additions) we will not fund the government (as if this is a concession to Obama). Also, since when are absurd claims outlandish to you? your whole belief system is based on absurd claims, they are absurd by definition. You also live by faith, the system by which evidence is arbitrary.
Also, to the last claim. The Democrats must negotiate in order to keep the government running? I didn't know one side could offer ultimatums without even so much as a vote first. Why has there been no vote for a CR you ask? well only Eric Cantor could do that and he knows that the CR would get passed, thus avoiding democracy and becoming a dictator.
You are living in a fantasy world dude, seriously, open your eyes.
Your use of the word extortion is pure hyperbole. That’s what is silly.
It’s simply incorrect to say the GOP is refusing to fund the government. The majority in the House has agreed to fund the government, except for Obamacare. They have the right to do that.
Obama is refusing to sign a bill funding the government, unless it includes funding for Obamacare. He has that right as well. What Obama could do is agree to fund the government, as a majority in the House offered to do, and negotiate Obamacare funding separately.
Yes, Democrats must negotiate if they want to pass bills they support. That’s how our democratic system works. Just look at how Obamacare was passed in the first place: party line vote. Not a single Republican vote in the House. Democrats prevailed because they had a majority and Republicans could only convince thirty-four Democrats to vote against the bill.
So, if Democrats want a resolution that includes funding for the law that the majority of the country doesn’t want, they need to convince their colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
I’m glad Republicans are showing some backbone. I doubt it will last.
-
if the situation were reversed and the Dems were trying to use this to prevent a tax cut from going into effect Bum and the rest of the right wingers would be screaming bloody murder about how this is treason
The situation was reversed in the recent past. There were laws passed to build a border fence between the US and Mexico. The Dems didn't like the idea so they chose not to fund it. We ended up with a fraction of the fence that was intended even though it was "the law of the land".
Obeezy and his people want everything their way. They are the ones that will not accept a budget that doesn't include Obamacare. It's not even a real shutdown either. They are picking and choosing what they wan to keep open and what they want to close. This whole crisis is a sham.
-
The situation was reversed in the recent past. There were laws passed to build a border fence between the US and Mexico. The Dems didn't like the idea so they chose not to fund it. We ended up with a fraction of the fence that was intended even though it was "the law of the land".
Obeezy and his people want everything their way. They are the ones that will not accept a budget that doesn't include Obamacare. It's not even a real shutdown either. They are picking and choosing what they wan to keep open and what they want to close. This whole crisis is a sham.
THIS!!
-
Your use of the word extortion is pure hyperbole. That’s what is silly.
It’s simply incorrect to say the GOP is refusing to fund the government. The majority in the House has agreed to fund the government, except for Obamacare. They have the right to do that.
Sure, it's impossible though, so you support lost causes that cause undue suffering to your fellow man? check
Obama is refusing to sign a bill funding the government, unless it includes funding for Obamacare. He has that right as well. What Obama could do is agree to fund the government, as a majority in the House offered to do, and negotiate Obamacare funding separately.
No he is not, he is refusing to overturn a law that has been upheld. You are acting as if they haven't attempted the actual means of repealing Obamacare, they did, they lost 41 times, this is a last ditch effort which is impossible, what about that don't you understand?
Yes, Democrats must negotiate if they want to pass bills they support. That’s how our democratic system works. Just look at how Obamacare was passed in the first place: party line vote. Not a single Republican vote in the House. Democrats prevailed because they had a majority and Republicans could only convince thirty-four Democrats to vote against the bill.
Oh yes the bills they want passed.. wait, what fucking bills? you mean the law already voted and upheld? that bill? wasn't it passed already? why the fuck do they have to concede in order to fund something already passed?
So, if Democrats want a resolution that includes funding for the law that the majority of the country doesn’t want, they need to convince their colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
The majority of country voted the person running on it twice and the person opposing it lost.
I’m glad Republicans are showing some backbone. I doubt it will last.
Backbone? they are attempting something that can't be done and are hurting millions of people, great fucking job.
-
The situation was reversed in the recent past. There were laws passed to build a border fence between the US and Mexico. The Dems didn't like the idea so they chose not to fund it. We ended up with a fraction of the fence that was intended even though it was "the law of the land".
Two things:
1) Did the Democrats shut down the government, and hold the entire nation world hostage?
So they didn't like the idea, so they didn't fund it even though it was law, ...but did they bring everything to a grinding stop in an effort to get their way? The situation is dire enough as it is, ...but these self-inflicted wounds are really too much. ::)
2) You should be grateful, the fence is only a fraction of what it could have been. A few months / years from now, it might become the very thing that the Gov't may use to try to keep you IN the USA.
Obeezy and his people want everything their way. They are the ones that will not accept a budget that doesn't include Obamacare. It's not even a real shutdown either. They are picking and choosing what they wan to keep open and what they want to close. This whole crisis is a sham.
Wholeheartedly agree. Nothing more than a piece of badly acted theatre.
-
According to 67% (last count) of the nation, the Republicans were to blame for shutting down the gov't. Yeah, that worked out very well for them didn't it? When they came out waving the white flag 16 days later what exactly had they accomplished and gained? Absolutely nothing.
-
LMFAO - and yet today - that ghetto street skell has to go out and blame everyone else for the failures of garbageCare
-
According to 67% (last count) of the nation, the Republicans were to blame for shutting down the gov't. Yeah, that worked out very well for them didn't it? When they came out waving the white flag 16 days later what exactly had they accomplished and gained? Absolutely nothing.
No surprise considering 90% of the MSM told them what to think and 'who to blame'.
-
According to 67% (last count) of the nation, the Republicans were to blame for shutting down the gov't. Yeah, that worked out very well for them didn't it? When they came out waving the white flag 16 days later what exactly had they accomplished and gained? Absolutely nothing.
Pay attention, retardo. Most of the nation is as stupid as you. They are so stupid that a lot of them blame Bush for the shutdown eventhough he hasn't been in office for over 5 years.
So to cite that figure means nothing.
-
Pay attention, retardo. Most of the nation is as stupid as you. They are so stupid that a lot of them blame Bush for the shutdown eventhough he hasn't been in office for over 5 years.
So to cite that figure means nothing.
Actually it does mean something. If most of the nation is "as stupid as me" then that means they are still 100x smarter than your idiot ass.
"HEHEHEHEH" ::) Congratulations for being FAUX NEWS smart.