Why are the WW2 vets angry at the Obama Admin?

[JimC]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

The international community is just transfixed by the sight of a superpower apparently controlled by 3 year olds throwing tantrums. Your enemies are laughing and rubbing their hands together with glee, your friends are shaking their heads in despair...

It's either that, or rioting in the streets and another continental war. I'll take the blame game.

And the blame game turns out to be lose/lose...

[Seth]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

The international community is just transfixed by the sight of a superpower apparently controlled by 3 year olds throwing tantrums. Your enemies are laughing and rubbing their hands together with glee, your friends are shaking their heads in despair...

It's either that, or rioting in the streets and another continental war. I'll take the blame game.

And the blame game turns out to be lose/lose...

Hardly. The best outcome of all is for Congress to be impotent and paralyzed for as long as possible. The less Congress can do the better off we, the People ALWAYS are, because Congress always finds time to meddle in people's lives just because it can, and just because the bureaucrats and politicians need to make it look like they are actually doing something to earn their pay.

I'd take Texas' model further. I'd only allow Congress to convene to pass legislation for 30 days once every five years, except that a quorum can convene at any time for the sole purpose of REPEALING any federal law.

Short of that, gridlock is great, and "shutdown" is the best thing ever. Shows people we really DON'T need all those bureaucrats in the first place.

[piscator]

Short of that, gridlock is great, and "shutdown" is the best thing ever. Shows people we really DON'T need all those bureaucrats in the first place.

Ahh...the old Reverse Galt's Gulch, eh?

[pErvinalia]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

The international community is just transfixed by the sight of a superpower apparently controlled by 3 year olds throwing tantrums. Your enemies are laughing and rubbing their hands together with glee, your friends are shaking their heads in despair...

[Ian]

I agree. But as far as the "blame game" goes, only one side actually wanted the shutdown. Take it up with them. I'm embarrassed on behalf of the US, even if they aren't.

[pErvinalia]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

Interestingly, neither do most of us.

{snip}

That is WHY the Republicans took back the House...because the democrat party abused its majorities in the House, Senate and White House in passing Obamacare in the first place. The public took offense at that and gave control of the public purse to the Republican controlled house, and they did so for a reason...and a good one: The House can refuse to appropriate money to allow Obamacare to function. That's within its constitutionally mandated powers.

So its the democrat party that's shutting things down and people know that full well, and they will hold them accountable at the mid term elections.

Lol. You couldn't win a debate in primary school, Seth. How do you actually write this stuff? You are just a walking contradiction.

[Seth]

I agree. But as far as the "blame game" goes, only one side actually wanted the shutdown. Take it up with them. I'm embarrassed on behalf of the US, even if they aren't.

Well, that depends on what you mean by "wanted." Obama and the democrat party clearly "want" the shutdown because they are absolutely unwilling to negotiate or compromise on anything at all, despite repeated offers by the Republicans to both negotiate and fund important government services one at a time. Obama can say that the Republicans "shut down government" all he likes, but the simple fact is that his obstinate, arrogant and callous refusal to engage in the political process, which obviously involves give and take from both sides, is what's forced the Republicans to refuse to send an "extorted" CR to the Senate. It's Obama and the democrat party who are doing the extortion here. Obama is saying "do as I tell you or I'll shoot your baby." The Republicans are merely saying "We refuse to be intimidated and extorted and will not do your bidding until you become reasonable, rational and presidential."

Because the budget and the debt ceiling are the sole leverage that the Republicans have at this point with which to spur negotiations, they must perforce use them to good effect in order to represent their constituents as their constituents have demanded. For them to do otherwise is to abdicate their very purpose and mandate.

Once again, the abuses of the Obama administration and the democrat party when it was in full control is exactly why the power of the purse was taken away from them by the People. The clear intent of the People in giving the House majority to the Republicans was so that a rampant and despotic President and Congress could be brought to heel by withholding funding by the constitutionally-approved process of closing the public purse in the face of profligate, unwise, unlawful, immoral and constitutionally suspect actions by Obama and the democrat party.

That's how the system was intended to work by those who created it, and thank God for them and their careful wisdom in creating checks and balances that give the People protection against the excesses of partisan politics.

The democrat party knew this was coming the moment the House came under Republican control. They could have begun negotiating in good faith right then, but they refused to do so and therefore they are completely responsible for what's happening now. The Republicans are merely doing as we, the People, bid them do at the last mid-term elections. They have a moral, ethical and legal duty to continue to represent the OTHER HALF of the electorate and protect their interests too.

[Kristie]

I agree. But as far as the "blame game" goes, only one side actually wanted the shutdown. Take it up with them. I'm embarrassed on behalf of the US, even if they aren't.

Well, that depends on what you mean by "wanted." Obama and the democrat party clearly "want" the shutdown because they are absolutely unwilling to negotiate or compromise on anything at all, despite repeated offers by the Republicans to both negotiate and fund important government services one at a time. Obama can say that the Republicans "shut down government" all he likes, but the simple fact is that his obstinate, arrogant and callous refusal to engage in the political process, which obviously involves give and take from both sides, is what's forced the Republicans to refuse to send an "extorted" CR to the Senate. It's Obama and the democrat party who are doing the extortion here. Obama is saying "do as I tell you or I'll shoot your baby." The Republicans are merely saying "We refuse to be intimidated and extorted and will not do your bidding until you become reasonable, rational and presidential."

Because the budget and the debt ceiling are the sole leverage that the Republicans have at this point with which to spur negotiations, they must perforce use them to good effect in order to represent their constituents as their constituents have demanded. For them to do otherwise is to abdicate their very purpose and mandate.

Once again, the abuses of the Obama administration and the democrat party when it was in full control is exactly why the power of the purse was taken away from them by the People. The clear intent of the People in giving the House majority to the Republicans was so that a rampant and despotic President and Congress could be brought to heel by withholding funding by the constitutionally-approved process of closing the public purse in the face of profligate, unwise, unlawful, immoral and constitutionally suspect actions by Obama and the democrat party.

That's how the system was intended to work by those who created it, and thank God for them and their careful wisdom in creating checks and balances that give the People protection against the excesses of partisan politics.

The democrat party knew this was coming the moment the House came under Republican control. They could have begun negotiating in good faith right then, but they refused to do so and therefore they are completely responsible for what's happening now. The Republicans are merely doing as we, the People, bid them do at the last mid-term elections. They have a moral, ethical and legal duty to continue to represent the OTHER HALF of the electorate and protect their interests too.

If Obama and the Dems are so horrible, then why did 'the People' vote Obama for a second term?

[Seth]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

Interestingly, neither do most of us.

{snip}

That is WHY the Republicans took back the House...because the democrat party abused its majorities in the House, Senate and White House in passing Obamacare in the first place. The public took offense at that and gave control of the public purse to the Republican controlled house, and they did so for a reason...and a good one: The House can refuse to appropriate money to allow Obamacare to function. That's within its constitutionally mandated powers.

So its the democrat party that's shutting things down and people know that full well, and they will hold them accountable at the mid term elections.

Lol. You couldn't win a debate in primary school, Seth.

Which, if true, makes you less intelligent than a primary school student, given the fact that I've won every single debate I've ever had with you, and you've lost them all because you run out of brain power and resort to ad hom as a universal practice.

How do you actually write this stuff?

I engage my considerably-superior-top-your intellect and I rely on facts, reason and logic, which I then turn into rational, factual and logical arguments that completely blow your ad hom crap out of the water in every instance.

You are just a walking contradiction.

No, youngling, you're just confused. Now go back to sucking on your thumb and let the adults talk.

[Seth]

If Obama and the Dems are so horrible, then why did 'the People' vote Obama for a second term?

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

It's called "checks and balances," something we, the People, value greatly. You see, even democrats can see a train wreck coming at them...well, the smart ones can anyway. It was the idiot dependent class who elected Obama for a second term because they couldn't see how incredibly stupid and corrupt he actually is, and how ineffectual a leader he actually is. He won the first time on vague rhetoric and a national distaste of Bush. Then when the democrat party was in control of things they rammed through partisan Marxist Progressive laws that, in both the substance and method frightened even democrats, who wisely decided that giving the democrat party full control of the nation was not a good idea, so we elected a Republican majority to the house to put back in place one of the most important checks and balances we have in the system.

Why we elected Obama again is a mystery, but likely it's because liberals were caught up in the ecstasy of getting control and they couldn't stomach Mitt Romney at all (and frankly neither could I) and the Republicans simply committed political evisceration because as a party they lost their direction and drive and forgot their basic principles in favor of hot-button reactionism.

Obama didn't win the second election so much as Republicans gave it away by being unfocused and distracted. They were badly outplayed. It probably would have been better if they hadn't fielded a candidate at all and had let Rand Paul run as an independent unopposed.

But now everyone is seeing what an ineffectual, biased, bigoted, selfish, condescending, arrogant, heartless prick Obama really is. He's entirely unpresidential and entirely unworthy of the office and should be impeached. The real problem with that would be that we'd get Biden, who is the only person on earth other than perhaps Nancy Pelosi and Harry Ried, who are worse than Obama.

Wouldn't it be delicious irony if the Speaker of the House were somehow tapped to be President?

[klr]

If Obama and the Dems are so horrible, then why did 'the People' vote Obama for a second term?

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

It's called "checks and balances," something we, the People, value greatly.
...

Bunkum. You are implying that the electorate possess some sort of group conciousness. It would only have taken a swing of a few percentage points in some key battlegrounds for the Democrats to have full control. The "people" don't "decide" at all in situations like this. Did someone casting their votes in (say) Iowa have a full appreciation of how the national vote was likely to pan out, and vote accordingly? Of course not.

[Ian]

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

Gerrymandering, genius. Democrats got what, like five million more votes than Republicans did in 2012?

You must be feeling terrible frustration lately though, and I don't blame you. The GOP is in the midst of not only a civil war but a demographic death spiral. Either they'll have to change what they believe or they'll have to get used to permanent minority status. It'll be the former rather than the latter though - too bad for angry old white guys who cling to their guns and rant about Marxists everywhere.

[piscator]

Wouldn't it be delicious irony if the Speaker of the House were somehow tapped to be President?

A "President Boner" may sound delicious to you, but not to me.

[laklak]

Wouldn't it be delicious irony if the Speaker of the House were somehow tapped to be President?

2 heartbeats away from the Oval Orifice.

[piscator]

If he doesn't lose his next erection in Ohio.