So... The Government is Shut Down...

I have four friends who now are going without a paycheck because of the shutdown. It is hitting them very hard.

According to Fox news.....it's not doing much of anything. Why? Because it doesn't affect them, nor do they care about anybody else.


Jon Stewart To Fox Hosts: F*ck You For Mocking The Poor | Video Cafe (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/jon-stewart-rips-fox-hannity-making-light)

According to Fox news.....it's not doing much of anything. Why? Because it doesn't affect them, nor do they care about anybody else.


Jon Stewart To Fox Hosts: F*ck You For Mocking The Poor | Video Cafe (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/jon-stewart-rips-fox-hannity-making-light)

Fox "News": Forever Unfair and Unbalanced.

Actually my friend, Congress includes both House and Senate, and despite 40 plus attempts the ACA has not been overturned. That is democracy at work.

The House is charged to fund initiatives which have become law. The ACA is one of those initiatives. It is a law. So Congress can overturn the law (which has not happened) or Congress can fund the government, including the ACA. By shutting things down, a small group of representatives are (a) not doing what they are charged to do, and (b) undemocratically holding the country hostage.

The shutdown was enacted not by the will of the people but by 80 representatives. That is not democracy. In terms of process, it is actually closer to oligarchic fascism.

I am no great fan of the ACA. But the will of the people is expressed through more than just some members of the House.



Bravo , well said ! You hit it right on the head !

Actually my friend, Congress includes both House and Senate, and despite 40 plus attempts the ACA has not been overturned. That is democracy at work.

The House is charged to fund initiatives which have become law. The ACA is one of those initiatives. It is a law. So Congress can overturn the law (which has not happened) or Congress can fund the government, including the ACA. By shutting things down, a small group of representatives are (a) not doing what they are charged to do, and (b) undemocratically holding the country hostage.

The shutdown was enacted not by the will of the people but by 80 representatives. That is not democracy. In terms of process, it is actually closer to oligarchic fascism.

I am no great fan of the ACA. But the will of the people is expressed through more than just some members of the House.

Ok, so the law was passed why does the president now have the choice to delay parts of the law as he feels fit? Seems they want it both ways. Funny he delayed the employer mandate until after the next elections. Also the Rep. said they would sign off on the budget if congress and federal employess where also included under Obama Care. What's good for me and you should also be good for them. How about the unions and the 100's of large corporations they excluded from Obama Care?

Actually my friend, Congress includes both House and Senate, and despite 40 plus attempts the ACA has not been overturned. That is democracy at work.

The House is charged to fund initiatives which have become law. The ACA is one of those initiatives. It is a law. So Congress can overturn the law (which has not happened) or Congress can fund the government, including the ACA. By shutting things down, a small group of representatives are (a) not doing what they are charged to do, and (b) undemocratically holding the country hostage.

The shutdown was enacted not by the will of the people but by 80 representatives. That is not democracy. In terms of process, it is actually closer to oligarchic fascism.

I am no great fan of the ACA. But the will of the people is expressed through more than just some members of the House.
You know that the Senate only turns over at a snails pace of 6 years, and add in members on both sides of the aisle that have been in their spot for nearly 30+ years, and that part of the Congress is reflective more of the "protectorate" of the Congress.

The House of Representatives turns over every two years, if they aren't expressing what their constituents want, they are gone. It obviously leads to more extreme responses, but it also reflects the divide of the nation. A big part of my feelings on this are tied up in my distrust for government overall, and the more gridlock they have the happier I am, but even with that, it doesn't seem like a major effort on the President's part to recognize that the ACA is not something that is wanted by a strong majority in the nation, and that maybe delaying it, and seeing if there are other ways to resolve the differences might work.

I certainly would be more willing to agree if something like 70% (or a super majority) in polling data was in favor of it, but most everything I see is about a 50% split, which means that you are forcing half the country to abide by something they don't want. That seems wrong.

Health Care Law - Rasmussen Reports™ (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law)

Ok, so the law was passed why does the president now have the choice to delay parts of the law as he feels fit? Seems they want it both ways. Funny he delayed the employer mandate until after the next elections. Also the Rep. said they would sign off on the budget if congress and federal employess where also included under Obama Care. What's good for me and you should also be good for them. How about the unions and the 100's of large corporations they excluded from Obama Care?

Absolutely 100% correct. And the Senate could have left Obamacare separated from government funding, and they didn't. Obama could have said lets delay the ACA by a year for everyone because of all the issues, and he didn't. Democrats have had many options to work with Republicans and they decided not to.

What the hell is a non-essential government job anyway? Theres no such thing as a non-essential private sector job. I have to believe at least half of the furlong jobs are ones that should be eliminated anyway.

I always feel bad for people who lose their jobs or their incomes but that's life for everyone, not just life for the private industry. There are risks in life. If you take a job in a non-essential department of a company that's $16 trillion in debt then you shouldn't be surprised when theres a disruption in your income. You shouldn't be surprised if you get laid off. You should expect that those things are likely to happen, and you should be trying to find another job and attempting to shield yourself as much as possible from needing and expecting an income from an unstable employer.

here is a cnn "fact check" about the law,

Fact Check: Is Obamacare unpopular? – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/27/fact-check-is-obamacare-unpopular/?iref=obinsite)

and mostly to the point that I am saying is that this isn't a law which has high percentage buy in, and while, yes it has passed the process, there are alot of US citizens who feel that this law is not what they want, and the president should acknowledge that nearly half the country has issues with this law. To me, a president who started by saying he was going to unite the country, ought to give credence to that, and resolve to find a way that brings unity, not division to the country. (and that does go for the republican side who refuses to see a need for some reform to be done when nearly 50% support this law)

Make it hurt:

NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/02/nps-orders-closure-park-that-receives-no-federal-funding/)

Make It Hurt? Republicans accuse administration of inflicting added budget pain | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/02/make-it-hurt-republicans-accuse-administration-inflicting-budget-pain/)

Why should I care? Every man for himself!

Also, should I expect a tax refund for each day the gov is shutdown?

Ok, so the law was passed why does the president now have the choice to delay parts of the law as he feels fit? Seems they want it both ways. Funny he delayed the employer mandate until after the next elections. Also the Rep. said they would sign off on the budget if congress and federal employess where also included under Obama Care. What's good for me and you should also be good for them. How about the unions and the 100's of large corporations they excluded from Obama Care?

Congress could have stood up to Obama on the delays and forced him to enact the ACA more quickly. It didn't.