US Government Shuts Down... Again

[iNow]

Republicans... who control the White House, the legislature... senate and House... every branch... couldn’t keep the government open. 

They needed votes from Democrats on the other side of the aisle, but refused to offer any compromises to obtain them. Their “my way or the highway” approach failed.

So much for the quote unquote deal artist. His history of bankruptcy has now extended beyond his businesses and morals into the realm of governance and his ability to merely keep the lights on.  

Edited January 20, 2018 by iNow

[rangerx]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

They needed votes from Democrats on the other side of the aisle, but refused to offer any compromises to obtain them. Their “my way or the highway” approach failed.

The heart of the matter.

[Alex_Krycek]

7 hours ago, rangerx said:

The heart of the matter.

That's been their approach for the last 10 years.  Even when they were a minority without a Republican president it was an "all or nothing" approach with them. 

[EdEarl]

The democrats ask for too little, they should have said they wanted lunches for school children, and several other things. Then they might get a few things in compromise. Even if the republicans shut down the government, the dems would appear to be stronger. ATM it seems like the dems are helping the republicans.

[Ten oz]

Republicans are not interested in governing and have no idea how to. Most elected Republicans got elected campaign against government in the first place. When we put people in office who complain that government doesn't work and private business is preferred for everything this is what we end up with. For many of the House Republicans creating chaos and disorder while threatening numerous federal agency responsible for the health and well being of our infrastructure  and lives is just them keeping their campaign promises. 

[Phi for All]

12 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

That's been their approach for the last 10 years.  Even when they were a minority without a Republican president it was an "all or nothing" approach with them. 

And at what point does this approach uphold our democracy, and their pledges to represent it? With only two major parties, when one of them is intractable it's like trying to ride a bike with one wheel frozen. And with the GOP in control of everything, it's the front wheel that won't move, and wants us to think the back wheel is to blame because it's spinning uselessly.

[Ten oz]

8 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

And at what point does this approach uphold our democracy, and their pledges to represent it? With only two major parties, when one of them is intractable it's like trying to ride a bike with one wheel frozen. And with the GOP in control of everything, it's the front wheel that won't move, and wants us to think the back wheel is to blame because it's spinning uselessly.

Republicans seem to feel that this U.S. is a White Christian nation. They only see whites as legitimate voters. Democrats who are elected with heavy percentages of Black, Latino, and Asian support are not legitimate in their eyes. How many times during Obama's tenure did you hear or read a conservative dismiss Obama legitimacy as President by say he only won because black people voted for him?  The bike you reference should be a unicycle far as conservatives are concerned. Many honestly believe Democrats are propped up by illegal immigrant votes and other undesirables; people who have no right to be participating in our democracy. 

[rangerx]

4 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The bike you reference should be a unicycle far as conservatives are concerned.

When Mitch McConnell decreed Obama must be a one term president and "no" must be the answer to every bill by default, America ceased to be democratic.

Republicans should have thrown his authoritarian ass out, but instead doubled down.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and we witness hypocrisy at it's height.

 

[Ten oz]

5 minutes ago, rangerx said:

When Mitch McConnell decreed Obama must be a one term president and "no" must be the answer to every bill by default, America ceased to be democratic.

Republicans should have thrown his authoritarian ass out, but instead doubled down.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and we witness hypocrisy at it's height.

 

Yeah but Obama wasn't legitimate. Trump won the biggest electoral college win since Reagan and would have won the popular by several millions if not for California and illegal voters.

*Sarcasm

[rangerx]

2 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Yeah but Obama wasn't legitimate.

*Sarcasm

Being born in Kenya and all and parroted ad nauseam by Trump. /sarcasm

Why is it republicans freak out at things that affect them the least, like gay marriage or marijuana? Things like mass shootings, healthcare and Russian insurgency... not so much?

My greatest mentor was my grandmother, who was a  staunch conservative. She married an atheist union leader and renounced Catholicism, sang soprano in the choir of the United Church. She took in immigrants. She accepted gays in the family. She was pro-choice. She insisted I respect and listen to my educators in a public school. She advised me in science and technology in simple terms in casual conversation. She despised pollution, eschewed crass commercialism and actively advocated conservation and preservation of sensitive systems. She loved the arts and encouraged expression in physical and creative ways. She taught me to walk a mile in other shoes and words must never be used to cause pain.

The conservatives of today have truly lost their way.

[Phi for All]

20 minutes ago, rangerx said:

My greatest mentor was my grandmother, who was a  staunch conservative.

Because of the ensuing description, I assume you're using "staunch conservative" to mean "don't be stupid and wasteful", the way it was originally intended. Today's "staunch conservative" is marked by conflicting principles, such as wasting resources on fighting abortion (which has been and always will be necessary), insisting on "small" government that's allowed to dictate bodily functions and lifestyles, and cryptically demanding a "free" market approach that underhandedly favors some over others.

[rangerx]

40 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Because of the ensuing description, I assume you're using "staunch conservative" to mean "don't be stupid and wasteful", the way it was originally intended.

Exactly. "Pull up your boots, when you can" was her favorite saying when I failed to take responsibility or got poor marks in school. However, she always suffixed it with "but lend a hand when others can't".

The last part is lost on today's conservative. Selfishness and individualism are the prerequisite traits to be "conservative enough" nowadays. Even the most juvenile lessons of "sticks and stones" or "if little Johnny jumped off a bridge" have gone out the window to the modern neocon.

Edited January 20, 2018 by rangerx

[Phi for All]

17 minutes ago, rangerx said:

The last part is lost on today's conservative. Selfishness and individualism are the prerequisite traits to be "conservative enough" nowadays.

I don't think it's selfishness. Self-centeredness, perhaps. But I think the average person who identifies as "conservative" feels that everyone else but them is getting more of everything. The wealthy have more money, the poor get welfare checks, the minorities get special consideration, and here sits the "conservative" person who did everything the way you're supposed to, but got left behind. I get it. 

The problem is, I think they've been manipulated by powerful agendas. The good parts of their conservatism have been hijacked to serve the agenda. That's why you have small government "conservatives" arguing to let the government decide what we can put in our own bodies. It makes no sense, but they've been told it's "conservative" to act this way.

[iNow]

We’ll see what happens now that a compromise must be found to reopen services and ensure veterans get paid and elderly can get medical treatment.

[EdEarl]

I am concerned for the near future. So many things are being done with greedy intent, including the assaults on freedom of speech and reality of reporting.

 

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, rangerx said:

Why is it republicans freak out at things that affect them the least, like gay marriage or marijuana? Things like mass shootings, healthcare and Russian insurgency... not so much?

Because they see White Christians(evangelicals) are the rightful heirs to U.S. heritage and success. Evangelicals Whites believe being gay is a sin and like marijuana laws because it empowers law enforcement to get after minorities. If whites went to prison for marijuana conservatives would feel very different about it.  Whites are the majority of those overdosing on opioids  which is why it is a national health crisis rather than a national scourge like Crack Cocaine was. The Opioid crisis is being dealt with compassionately while other drug epidemics have been dealt with by increasing minimum sentencing and giving local Police Departments military equipment. Mass Shooters and most Mass gun hoarders are white. So Conservatives ignore mass shootings and an ineffective cost of freedom. It is very simple they see things as being either pro their advantage or con. They do not ethically take any true position beyond their perceived collect benefit towards keeping them in the drivers seat. They do not care where the car is headed; only that they are driving because it is there place to drive. It is akin to chauvinistic men who insist on driving, controlling the remote, women be the ones to vacuuming, or etc based on their own strange internal ideology about a mans place in the world. 

Just now, EdEarl said:

I am concerned for the near future. So many things are being done with greedy intent, including the assaults on freedom of speech and reality of reporting.

 

Yeah, even if the Democrats take control of Congress in 2018 and win the White House in 2020 a lot of damage is already done. Deficits are climbing and raising taxes has proven to be impossible over the last 40yrs. We had Reagan's rounds of tax cuts, Bush's rounds of tax cuts, and now Trump's tax cut without any significant push in the opposite direction. I guess that is the GOP's long term plan; starve the beast. It is really hard to imagine Democrats successfully being able to negotiate any type of single payer healthcare system, free community college, govt assisted child daycare, or etc when it is running multi trillion dollar annual deficits. 

[EdEarl]

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Yeah, even if the Democrats take control of Congress in 2018 and win the White House in 2020 a lot of damage is already done. Deficits are climbing and raising taxes has proven to be impossible over the last 40yrs. We had Reagan's rounds of tax cuts, Bush's rounds of tax cuts, and now Trump's tax cut without any significant push in the opposite direction. I guess that is the GOP's long term plan; starve the beast. It is really hard to imagine Democrats successfully being able to negotiate any type of single payer healthcare system, free community college, govt assisted child daycare, or etc when it is running multi trillion dollar annual deficits. 

Time for another party.

[iNow]

1 minute ago, EdEarl said:

Time for another party.

This sounds great as a bumper sticker, but how do you make it a reality?

If folks hadn’t voted for completely unviable 3rd party candidates in the last election, we wouldn’t be in this mess. 

Lets strive for the ideal you describe, but let’s act practically until it’s achieved. 

[EdEarl]

Depends on pain and tolerance. At some point people riot and riots sometimes become revolutions. I hope things don't get that bad, but current policies seem to assure that end.

 

[rangerx]

40 minutes ago, iNow said:

If folks hadn’t voted for completely unviable 3rd party candidates in the last election, we wouldn’t be in this mess. 

Lets strive for the ideal you describe, but let’s act practically until it’s achieved. 

In protest of the British parliamentary system, America forwent the non-confidence motion and coalition government.

Here in Canada, two weaker parties can combine their seats to vote against the current Prime Minister. An affirmative vote cannot remove the PM, but causes them to call an election within a time frame.

In America, a fixed term of four years gives rise to the likelihood of tyranny or extreme polarization. In an attempt to invoke some protection from that, the founding fathers and subsequent governments authored the 2nd Amendment, impeachment procedures and the 24th Amendment. I'm not sure if Americans have never used the 2nd to oust a president, insomuch as favoring it to kill each other or play political football. The standard of impeachment or mental stability is almost insurmountable, no less in the absence of willingness from career politicians or sycophants.

Despite it's shortcomings, history shows us parliamentary systems withstood the test of democracy, even after colonization failed. The American plan has not. If anything, it may (shudder to think) end up repeating the fall of the Roman Empire or embroiled in civil war. We all know, those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, rangerx said:

I'm not sure if Americans have never used the 2nd to oust a president

Well, they did with Lincoln and JFK, anyway.

 

DISCLAIMER: I’m not advocating such a path now, just objectively commenting on history given the comment you made 

[StringJunky]

This banner is on the NCBI site today:

Quote

Because of a lapse in government funding, the information on this website may not be up to date, transactions submitted via the website may not be processed, and the agency may not be able to respond to inquiries until appropriations are enacted.
The NIH Clinical Center (the research hospital of NIH) is open. For more details about its operating status, please visit cc.nih.gov.
Updates regarding government operating status and resumption of normal operations can be found at USA.gov.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20662421

 

Edited January 21, 2018 by StringJunky

[Ten oz]

9 hours ago, EdEarl said:

Time for another party.

There could be another 3 parties it doesn't erase the the multi trillion dollar annual debt we'll be faced with. Party aside to dig out of this whole a lot of very unpopular things will need to happen. We need large increases in taxes among wealthier citizens (by wealthy I don't strictly mean billionaires), massive changes to bank regulations to protect consumers, changes to capital gains taxes, corporate taxes, massive defense spending cuts, and etc. Doing those things will certainly have immediate (but short term) negative impacts on the economy. For example I think we all agree Defense spending needs to shrink. Military Defense jobs makes up over 10% of all manufacturing jobs in the country. The Defense industry employs 4 million people. Cuts to Defense spending will result in the loss of a lot of jobs and problem shrink national GDP for a couple years. I can't imagine any party being able to sell purposely creating a recession for the long term good.

[StringJunky]

4 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

There could be another 3 parties it doesn't erase the the multi trillion dollar annual debt we'll be faced with. Party aside to dig out of this whole a lot of very unpopular things will need to happen. We need large increases in taxes among wealthier citizens (by wealthy I don't strictly mean billionaires), massive changes to bank regulations to protect consumers, changes to capital gains taxes, corporate taxes, massive defense spending cuts, and etc. Doing those things will certainly have immediate (but short term) negative impacts on the economy. For example I think we all agree Defense spending needs to shrink. Military Defense jobs makes up over 10% of all manufacturing jobs in the country. The Defense industry employs 4 million people. Cuts to Defense spending will result in the loss of a lot of jobs and problem shrink national GDP for a couple years. I can't imagine any party being able to sell purposely creating a recession for the long term good.

Perhaps defence spending is an important part of America's modus operandi.

[Ten oz]

9 hours ago, iNow said:

If folks hadn’t voted for completely unviable 3rd party candidates in the last election, we wouldn’t be in this mess. 

I think a lot of people wish we could hit a reset button; liberal and conservative alike. That makes 3rd parties appealing as they represent a new direction or fresh start. Reality is that a reset is impossible. Doesn't matter who we elect we already have the laws, agencies, debts, and etc we have. Businesses can go bankrupt, sell off sections, hire in new management and start over but our govt cannot. Whomever is elected into office (any elected office) has to directly take on the current state of affairs. It is an unbroken chain. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars didn't end just because Bush wasn't POTUS anymore.