The shutdown was good, I wish it would've lasted longer. Epa agents were out of work along with many other "non essential" jobs. Now everythings is as it was out of controld borrowing/spending and the lazy welfare reciepiants out numbering hard working decent folks. The turnicate is off and the country is back bleeding to death. Stay armed, you might have to defend yourself against people that vote for democrats.
-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
White House Blaming the Shutdown on....
- Thread starter Outcast
- Start date
Nova_C
New member
This is my feel good post of the day.
Outcast
ATPSS
It happened because Obama and the rest of the Democrats in the Senate refused to delay the individual mandate for the ACA while they discussed funding for it.
Which is funny, because after the website failed miserably, Obama delayed the mandate...
Which is another funny thing, because it is a "law of the land" now, it is not within his abilities to delay mandates and such as he see's fit... Because, we live in a system of checks and balances. The delay wasn't even sent through the correct channels... Though I guess he would rather "play at dictator", than actually do things the legal way.
tsst
Deuce is watching!
Yep. He has arbitrarily delayed and waivered whatever didn't work for him in "the law of the land". Funny how it was somehow blasphemous to question delaying it for the people during budget talks.
Lennycorn
Just see the truth
Lennyspeak?? turn a cake. :wavey:
Heck, nearly everyone knew they wouldn't keep the government shut down for long. They couldn't afford people to take notice that there are a lot of things they are sucking us dry with taxes for that we can really get along just fine without.
Nova_C
New member
Yep. You can look at all the countries around the world that have barely functioning governments. Utopias and paradises, all of them.
And how much of that is from corrupt governments that are taking taxes from the people, as well as foreign aid, and just using it to line their own pockets instead of providing for the actual welfare of their citizens?
Sorry, but some of us would rather not see the USA follow in those footsteps. Anyone who cannot see the potential, if not it already being put into practice, is being purposely blind and ignorant of the evidence.
Personally I would like to see some REAL reporters do REAL investigative reporting and do a comparison of the personal fortunes of members in Congress as well as any and all of the POTUS before and after they were in office to see how much that changed. I think that would be rather interesting.
Does anyone with a functioning brain really believe that those people want to get into office simply because they want to help people? Sometimes digging deep into their own personal fortunes to that effect? :laugh: And do you REALLY believe major contributors are being 100 percent altruistic? That there are no strings attached to those contributions? Seriously. Does anyone TRULY think that?
And now the SCOTUS has ruled that they can accept UNLIMITED amounts in campaign contributions? Which will most certainly produce bidding wars in $$ for votes. Now ain't that just DUCKY for them? :laugh:
Nova_C
New member
I think that there are plenty of people that get into politics to make a difference and help people. No one elects those people, though. You can look in this very thread for exactly why that is.
As soon as someone wants to help people, so many freak out about the deficit and bootstraps and got mine, screw everyone else. So anyone that doesn't fall strictly on the self-absorbed side of things has to sell their convictions out one at a time hoping that at least one of the altruistic ideals they hold close will survive to when they get elected. Food stamps were just reduced. FOOD STAMPS.
Really, they're just doing what their constituents want.
As soon as someone wants to help people, so many freak out about the deficit and bootstraps and got mine, screw everyone else. So anyone that doesn't fall strictly on the self-absorbed side of things has to sell their convictions out one at a time hoping that at least one of the altruistic ideals they hold close will survive to when they get elected. Food stamps were just reduced. FOOD STAMPS.
Really, they're just doing what their constituents want.
HerpsOfNM
My name's Blurryface...
I see no problem with this....
I'll play my own violin here.
6 y.o. I don't remember what I did to deserve such, but I do remember my father backhanding me. His ring caught my right eye which resulted in bleeding within the eye itself. I remember the ambulance ride off-base. I'm sure both my mother and father made up some lame-*** excuse about how it happened so that the Air Force wouldn't bring repercussions upon my father. This same individual whom was already under a magnifying lens from a couple years prior where he was domestically violent upon my mother, had a shotgun (unloaded) in hand prancing about the front yard on base while SPs had M-16s trained on him (at almost 32, I still vividly remember that!). The backhanding resulted in permanent damage to my right eye, I have a cataract in it just outside my field of vision...thank an imaginary deity!
Fast forward to 1997 (I'm 15 now). My father (if you want to dignify him with such title) finally flies off the deep end. Still active duty Air Force and making pennies on the dollar compared to current pay bands, my mother has now taken on not 1 but 2 jobs as a bartender to help pay off various bills...and little to my father's knowledge to save up for a lawyer. Father, highly drunk, flies off deep end, beating the daylights out of mother, and threatens to go after the things she loves the most. I'm wide awake at this point contemplating what to do as I hear them coming up stairs. My wooden baseball bat in hands, waiting on my bed for what I thought was coming. No, he goes into my mom's "sewing" room and throws her $3000 sewing machine down stairs into the living room. More fighting ensues. I come out my room, bat in hand and quietly make my way to the sewing room. My mother sees me, but doesn't acknowledge me....I should have swung, but instead I went back to my room, jumped down off the roof and got my neighbor, a fellow Air Force peer of my father. Long story short at this point, cops are called, "dad" doesn't leave as suggested by neighbor, cops arrive and dad arrested. Air Force slaps him on the wrist. Parents divorced.
At this point mom is now working 3 jobs and has full custody of my sister and I. My sister is too young to have the right to deny visitation rights, I on the other hand am old enough. Visitation rights are eventually pulled due to his behavior. Mom still working 3 jobs, plus collecting wage garnishment, child support (which deadbeat dad is way behind on), and gets 50% of his military retirement when he eventually retires.
By 1999, mom is working 2 jobs, 1 as head bartender for the new Applebees. Her GM told her he'd pay her minimum wage plus tips if within the first 3 months she wasn't making at Applebees what she made at 2 other bartending jobs. Mom's also going back to college AND working as a substitute teacher. Out of her hard work, even though she was making what she made at other 2 jobs, GM at Applebees brings her to minimum wage ($5something/hr then), plus tips.
Out of all of this, not once did mom apply for food stamps or any other aid (outside of what was financially obligated from my father per divorce terms).
I don't view myself above anyone, we all make our own choices, but I do view myself above anyone that thinks they need to LIVE, not get a helping hand, but LIVE, off the government teets. Due to her hard work I was able to go to college, obtaining a Bachelor of Science in Biology. My family has a history of not accepting or applying for hand outs. You tighten the belt and keep heading for greener pastures.
Some of your comments within this thread are complete slaps and spitting to my face. I could go on and on in just situations where I and my now wife could have applied for aid. Instead we do what we need to do to make ends meet. Above all, I EARN what I have and that includes medical care! It's not mine or anyone else's fault that someone else doesn't have medical coverage. Outside of a couple liberal programs (Medicaid and SS), I sure as hell don't want to subsidize from my hard worked for pay check someone else's medical because they were too lazy to work for it themselves.
Now that I've aired my dirty laundry, I'll go back to lurking on this topic. I probably won't offer any reply or rebuttal to whatever you choose to reply with Nova.
EDIT...
another link found in passing about current subject.
http://news.msn.com/us/sticker-shock-often-follows-insurance-cancellation/
Nova_C
New member
This is such a load. Congratulations, your mom was an amazing woman. She was also fortunate, yes, fortunate that things didn't get worse for her. For some people, they do, and yet you would deny them help because you're too self absorbed to see that what you think you earned is still a gift. Imagine for just a moment that your mom was in an accident and couldn't work for several weeks? What then?
And I don't believe that the number of people that live on subsistence support solely because they can is significant. It's dog whistle politics with no basis in reality. You said you've never had to live on welfare.
Well guess what? My mom does, in a country that has way more support for her than your own and she barely gets by. She collects her old age pension, lives in subsidized housing and is unable to work because of her heart. She can barely leave the house and qualifies for AISH, the program to support disabled people. And she often cannot even purchase groceries. I give her what I can so she doesn't have to go more than a day without food. Don't you dare judge her as lazy or wanting to live off the government teet. Don't you dare. You have no idea who she is or what she's had to do. And yet your politics is to strip her of even more. I am so glad I don't have to contend with your point of view in any significant way in Canada.
Also:
This is a contradiction.
Nova_C
New member
This seems appropriate:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/opinion/krugman-a-war-on-the-poor.html?_r=1&
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/opinion/krugman-a-war-on-the-poor.html?_r=1&
Nova_C
New member
Every government establishes a minimum standard of living in a country. We're disagreeing on where that minimum standard lies. I say it includes the necessities of life. You say it does not. Charity is something different.
Unless you're an anarchist, I guess, but I don't think anyone here qualifies.
Nova_C
New member
If not the populace that is governed, then who? There is no one else.