Late-night talks at the White House failed to produce an agreement on a 2011 budget yesterday, but it did produce a new folk hero, a guy named J.T. Henderson. President Obama had this to say last night:
There was a interview that was done tonight on one of the nightly news networks — a man from Kentucky named J.T. Henderson. He said he’s counting on his tax rebate because his family has been scraping by, and he might not get it if the government shuts down. So J.T. said if he could speak directly to all of us in Washington he’d tell us that all of this political grandstanding has effects as it trickles down to normal, everyday Americans.
I could not have said it better myself. A shutdown could have real effects on everyday Americans. That means that small business owners who are counting on that loan to open their business, to make payroll, to expand, suddenly they can’t do it. It means folks who are potentially processing a mortgage, they may not be able to get it. It means that hundreds of thousands of workers across the country suddenly are without a paycheck. Their families are counting on them being able to go to work and do a good job.
J.T. clearly doesn’t understand that his children and grandchildren will thank him later for having to delay his tax rebate so a fraction of the non-security discretionary budget could be chopped so the Speaker of the House can prove to his fellow Republicans that he’s a good negotiator. Clearly if it was simply explained to him that way he’d understand.
Both sides expressed more optimism that a resolution could be reached, but time is short. One sign that a deal may be near is that the House waived its three-day rule for legislation, allowing a deal – or a short stopgap while a deal is being written – to move expeditiously through Congress without a 72-hour delay. This doesn’t mean a deal is going to happen, but it’s the clearest sign that Republicans may actually want one, mindful of what might happen to their favorability in a government shutdown.
If a deal does get reached, it looks like Boehner will get more than the $33 billion he initially agreed to just a week ago, and at least some of the policy riders that House Republicans have demanded. So any deal is going to look incredibly ugly. A government shutdown won’t be pretty either.




114 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Maybe the royal class could agree on a bill that would authorize them to pass continuing resolutions until 2012, to automatically take effect the 1st of every month and save them that pesky debating time.
The stare down continues.
David Dayden you bring up a great point!
Why is OBAMA using J.T. Henderson point of view to shape his arguement? this says it all.
A real Dem would use the view of someone a lot more educated,
FDL Henderson would have ask President Obama why did you cut taxes on the Rich? Me thinks that was stupid OBAMA!
and why are you cutting services for the Poor OBAMA? this is not fair to the middle class OBAMA.
JT Henderson sounds like a tea party follower compared to FDL Henderson.
FDL Henderson would ask Obama, why do you always cave to the Moronic GOP?
FDL Henderson would ask OBAMA does any of these cuts help Main Street?
Next FDL Henderson would tell OBAMA that guy Bernie Sanders sounds like a real democrat, I am going to go drink a beer with him.
Where are the cuts to TAX ENTITLEMENTS? The R’s want to cut social programs, well I say cut the same amount of money from TAX ENTITLEMENTS. Where is the reciprocity? Where?
If you are serious about the budget, then you must cut TAX ENTITLEMENTS. The R’s must stop protecting the TAX ENTITLEMENTS for their base.
I saw this morning that the military will not be paid if the government shuts down. Makes me rather hope it does. Mightn’t they all just fold up their tents in the night and tiptoe home?
Now, that would be worth a few weeks of hardship for the rest of us.
I remember whenever bush’s “budget” was rejected he would come back with something even further right wing and corporate and in the end wound up with a further right wing budget then he originally proposed
the same was true for law
the same was true for scotus
obama…man oh man is this guy bad for our country,
I don’t know anything about J.T. Henderson beyond what’s in this post, but the more important point is that there are millions of people like J.T. Henderson who need this lesson in why government matters.
Unfortunately, it’s not enough anymore for them to learn that they shouldn’t have supported Republicans. Obama uses people like J.T. Henderson to play the “good” cop in this bullshit dance that both parties are playing at the behest of their Wall Street masters.
I am thinking if obama knew what he was doing or if he even wanted his budget he would simply say;
“if the budget shuts down we will use the assets at hand to bring back our military personel and resources so they can go home since they can’t be paid and heaven help this country if there is an attack because of the republicans”
bing
done
Obama would be countered by Congress which is already considering a separate resolution to pay the troops. Which politician would want to commit career suicide by voting against it?
The Republicans in the House are determined to march off this cliff. No matter how they try to spin it, it is their base that has been outside the Capitol all week waving signs that say things like “Shut ‘er Down” and so forth. I know it will suck for a whole lot of people but I say stop trying to save them from themselves.
Reid and Boner having another budget meeting with Obama today at 1pm eastern.
Got a link?
Given the choices, I say a government shutdown is better. The system is breaking as a result of excessive abuse. The puppet politicians cannot lead their way out of a paper bag. Time to wake up to these realities.
Spot on all.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52508.html
Operative word.
A) Politico is the FOX “News” of the print world
B) That piece doesn’t say what you claim it does. It is the same old bit about funding the Pentagon to the end of the year as part of a one week continuing resolution. Did you actually read it? Try again.
“if” obama had any sense or disposition, he would simply take that money and re-direct it to government services in the interest of national security
bing again
done again
In Europe the public see the government as an instrument for improving the lives of it’s citizens. In the U.S. the government is seen as the enemy of the people. It’s the difference between a civil society and an ant-social society. “Rugged individualism” will be seen by future historians as contributing to the decline and fall of the U.S. “experiment.”
Obama does not care about Mr. Henderson. Comfy Shoes Obama is a phony and liar.
If Obama cared about Mr. Henderson, he would:
have let the Tax Cuts for the rich expire.
end the wars.
Close Gitmo,
stop tapping Mr. Hederson’s phone and reading his mail.
Not have given all of Mr. Henderson’s money to the banks. Mr. Henderson’s house has lost most of it’s value in the “free MArket”. Mr. H must wait until the banks deplete their bottmless inventory of real estate. Obama allowed the bankers to steal Mr. henderson’s neighbors’ homes. Obama gave the bankers carte blanche. All the banks get kickbacks on foreclosures and short sales. Mr. Henderson gets a kick in the ass from Obama.
Mr. Obama has destroyed Mr. Henderson’s construction job and the entire construction industry.
Mr. Obama has ruined Mrs. Henderson’s real estate job.
Obama loves the banks and Tim Geithner.
Mr. Obama hates Mr. Henderson.
When tough decisions/votes happened during Obama’s tenure in the Senate (US and IL) didn’t he abstain or just vote “present?” That’s what he does as President.
Then there’s the debt ceiling we are going to slam into us next month. The teabaggers are determined to destroy this country and the Republican Party want to follow them right off the cliff, dragging the rest of us with them. This has got to stop. If the Vichycrats are so ineffective, then it’s time to create a party with a spine.
absolutely positively, great post
by not letting bush’s depraved redistribution plan to expire, obama caused the problem he claims he is trying to solve
he now looks like the good guy somehow
man, we have a hen loose in the chicken coup and we are getting skuh rewed
Ummm….Okay…. ;)
Is that worse than a cow in a china shop?
How did I know you would condemn Politico as an illegitimate source, how oh how did I know? ROFL. Who pays the troops, the DOE? As you can see, defense spending would be funded separately. Here are some additional links though I have a feeling FoxNews has conspired to control them all, so take them with a grain of salt:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/153917-house-gop-freshman-ask-reid-to-pass-spending-bill-or-resign?sms_ss=facebook
http://www.silobreaker.com/gop-bill-fund-pentagon-for-year-govt-for-week-5_2264477334151102536
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=47503
http://nationaljournal.com/congress/house-gop-to-offer-one-week-cr-to-avoid-shutdown-20110404
Who are these angels of society who will improve my life for me, name them, I’d like to know exactly who can decide what is best for me since apparently I’m not capable of doing it myself.
Or a lamb in sheep’s clothing.
I need my tax refund, too, for some important dental work. I sent a nasty email to Pat Toomey yesterday, blaming him and those like him, for this impasse.
Uhhh…folks; lest we forget:
Without Obama’s bipartisan cheek-spreading for the first two years of what I hope is his only term, the mid-term voters wouldn’t have started the job of handing his nads to John Boehner & Co. for them to have a good game of marbles.
If he’d fought the good fight, it’s very likely that we could have held on to the House, and then we wouldn’t be having this little Obama-kvetch…one of many, with, I fear, the worst to come, as the spinning plates that he inherited, and to which he added some, begin to crash on his political head.
This aint rocket science: Obama, with those big majorities and that REAL mandate, wanted jackshit to do with mounting a real salvage operation. The cave is a done deal, and the idea that we now have to fight both the real republicans and the fake democrat who fooled us, is ludicrous. Also, pissing and moaning about the specifics of the democratic collapse that Obama has engineered, now is a waste of breath, and if it’s hasn’t become clear to progressives AND the rest of the party that if we go to the voters in 2012 with this cowardly hack as our nominee, what happened in the mid-terms will be like a voter glute-rub, by comparison, then we’ll deserve the political obliteration that we’ll get.
meh
tried to change it up a bit, didn’t work did it
x2
Since 1946 we have spent $ 17/18 Trillion on “MIC, aka defense”, while never on any of those days past has there been a declared war.
What’s the deficit hole we’re in for, less than $ 17/ 18 Trillion ?
Maybe we’re paying to much for our ” protection”.
We all do it.
Because it’s not a legitimate source and even if it was, it doesn’t say what you claimed it does, just like all of the other links you provided. Or did you just skip the B part of my comment? Congress isn’t considering a “separate resolution” and it’s not just to “pay the troops”.
Why don’t the dems don’t just give them the 100 Billion and stop pretending to give a shit. Do they really think they’re fooling anyone?
Shouldn’t that showdown been set for “High Noon” ?
BONER‘s from Ohio and Obama came from Chicago most recently. To them it is high noon.
Nah, I expect that their lunches are far more important than the nation’s needs. They might get upset tummies!
“Rugged“Rigged individualism” that’s more like it.Maybe not for you personally in mind, but for the greater good. I think you missed the drift of the comment with its sense of contrast.
You can follow links, right, because Politico provides them. Jeebus what is with that hat of yours?
Yes, it’s to continue to fund the defense department which pays the troops. Sorry about the ambiguity in the wording, but let’s face it, you would tear into me no matter what I wrote so I might as well save my carpals and type sparingly.
If Rafe was interested in reality, s/he wouldn’t be lying about things like “separate resolutions” and so forth.
Doesn’t matter if it’s for me personally or for the “greater good” since I would still be a member of the “greater”.
Government isn’t a factory product, it’s composed of individuals, and I’d like to know exactly which individuals are going to comprise this government which will decide on behalf of me and everyone else. I’m not looking to Europe for the answer, mainly because Europe isn’t any better at this game than we are.
Maybe you should save your tarsals. Seems to me like you’re typing with your feet. Your comment wasn’t “ambiguous” it was fictitious. There’s a difference you see. There’s no “separate resolution to pay the troops” like you said. I could have supported that.
I love being right. See #40.
ROFL
It’s the same old story: Rafe misleads, gets called out and then whines about being a victim of the mean ol’ liberals. Goddamn it gets old.
The US has had some individuals who were quite effective at working for a greater good that, yes, would have included you. If your point of view is to deny this history, we haven’t even a starting point.
ROFL, you care to deny that you follow me around like a dog every time I comment? Talk about old. ROFL
Rafe clearly doesn’t understand the difference between individuals each advancing his or her own self interests and leaders who advance the common good.
Why bother arguing with it?
The Republicans are screwed. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of their lives. They’re riding the tiger, and that never ends well.
Their base consists of bigots that won’t allow Hispanics into the party and libertarians who want to burn the government down.
Demographically, they can’t afford to lose any of those voters.
A government shutdown will make them heroes to the libertarians. Unfortunately, they all vote already and it won’t get them any new votes.
I’m guessing they think somehow they can make the Democrats take the blame for this. It didn’t work last time, it won’t work this time.
The ones most hurt by hitting the debt ceiling are the wealthy, since it will play hell with the markets. The Aristocrats won’t let that happen. Any bluffs about not raising the ceiling are just that.
Every way the Republicans turn there’s another brick wall.
If only the Establishment Democrats weren’t still stuck in the Nineties, trying to convince Republicans to vote for them, they could sweep this next election.
Down with the Establishment! Power to the People!
Who are they NOW, not yesteryear, now? If you want to form this caring government working for the greater good, I’d like to know who will be staffing it. Surely you can name a dozen or so people, because it’s a big job.
Our elected representatives are either wolves (Republicans) or wolves in sheep’s clothing (Democrats).
Who cares which one’s on top today?
They both want to enhance the wealth of the wealthy, and they’re succeeding while the system collapses.
Rafe, your confusion is perfectly understandable. None of us has seen a real leader in this country for decades.
Yeah, you can’t argue with someone who redefines words in order to be “right” in it’s own mind at any cost.
Yesteryear demonstrates the possibility. Your comment led me to believe (so I inquired) that you deny that the possibility exists.
No confusion, just consternation about the belief that a government composed of individuals will somehow provide altruistic oversight for the greater good. History is replete with people who proclaimed in one way or another, “Don’t worry, this is for your greater good.”
Alright, I’ll bite: Who are the past government leaders who altruistically and virtuously provided for the greater good?
We’re watching a three-ring-circus with a ring master who was hired to run the thing and is only proving to us that he lied on his resume.
In the mean time, the Tea Party wanna-bees, who are only interested in proving to the world that they count because they shut down the government of the most powerful nation on the planet (arguable, to say the least.)
And lining the Midway is the side-show of self-absorbed, full-of-themselves, media hounds (Trump, Bachman and Palin) whose only interest is notoriety, any kind will do.
I totally agree with you!
After looking at how Gov. Walker and other GOP Governors ignore Dems, why are Democrats still following OBAMA? Why?
Gov. Walker and his type are not reaching across any aisle to debate with Dems.
the DEM BASE in Wisconsin has showed us all the way!
the best way to deal with GOP idiots is to Recall them! Period
the days of Dems like Obama are numbered, no one is going to follow a Dem like Obama that thinks working with nuts is cool. it is not.
Well, you didn’t decide to educate yourself. I assume you attended a public school or a private one with government subsidies (not home schooled). You didn’t decide to have cops patrol your neighborhood or a military to “defend” your shores. I doubt you built the roads you drive on, or made sure the car you drive conforms to some safety standard. If you have children you probably don’t do a meticulous chemical analysis of their toys to determine if they were hazardous. And if they are, you’ll no doubt rely on the rest of us to support you in finding resolution. Just as you rely for us on everything else in your life. Like providing this venue to communicate with your fellow man.
So the answer to your question is (drum roll).. Everyone. You’ve gotten where you are with the help of hundreds of thousands of people. The angels are all around you. Providing for your safety and comfort, day after day, year after year. You may not like them, they don’t all like you, but you need them. If you don’t recognize that then your subsidized education was wasted.
Just because someone wants to expand the ways in which the rest of us help you (and themselves) doesn’t make them bad. So what if we help you more with your healthcare? We already provide for research and development into what ails you. Do you complain at the pharmacy because your medications are too cheap? I’ll suppose you would complain at the sea food isle in your local supermarket if the fish wasn’t poisoned.. (good news, there’s plenty of cheap seafood you can get from the gulf now and a great chance to show everyone why government regulations are a complete waste of money, the market will regulate itself after all!).
If you ever decide to make the plunge and stop living off the rest of us be sure and let us know. I’m sure there are some lawyers here who could provide a contract saying you will not use any government services or benefits or live by any but your own means. I’ll even donate $100 to your cause to help you out getting started. Good luck.
How do you tiptoe home from Afghanistan or Iraq? It isn’t just around the block?
No, all delaying payment to military folks is going to do is mess up the economy more. Their families won’t be able to pay electric, or mortgages. They’ll have to go to a food bank to be able to feed their children.
That the shutdown would continue to pay Congress and not pay the men and women fighting that have famikies and depend on that income is a travesty.
I’m out….you totally ignored a question about your presuppositions, which you now reveal by the tone of the question you’ve put to me while ignoring my question to you. Have fun.
All I asked for is a list of people who have or will now work for the “greater good”, surely if history is our guide there is a list of names you can provide. Why is that so hard? Not one name, just one?
Couldn’t Obama pick a better, more powerful example of the damage of a government shutdown than a fucking tax rebate? Good grief.
All the stupid Democrats have to do is remind everyone how little the Republicans cared about balancing the budget when it came to rich folks and their tax breaks and it will piss the 80% of us who don’t own much off all over again.
Frankly if it weren’t for the innocent government workers they could shut it down ad nauseum. If the rich folks who are playing the rich man’s lottery(investors) lose money so be it.
You are hysterical….name one for you to shoot down….Hahahah….You don’t understand the word OUT! So long, farewell, …..
So, if we can’t have Plato’s philosopher kings, you say let’s descend into Hobbes’s war of all against all?
You seem to be pretty good at spinning bullshit in an effort to tear down others’ ideas without offering any better alternatives.
Do you have a little Ayn Rand altar in your home? Like her, you clearly have no idea what leadership is or why we need it.
Dude, your question was answered back at 60. You keep asking the same thing over and over like people here know each and every good and hard working government worker that makes sure your mail gets to you, or serves in the military to protect folks from harm, or any other of the millions of services our government provides for the common good of it’s citizens.
Apparently you don’t understand the word either, since you responded to me.
Yes, I wanted a name for me to shoot down. Why, because you can’t provide a single name that cannot be shot down, that’s why.
Where did I say I didn’t want ANY government? The original post referred to European governments as models for Americans to emulate, and I’m not exactly in any hurry to embrace their systems.
As little government as possible should be the goal, and yes that includes policing and roads and certain commerce activities; after that get out of the way.
Rafe’s not looking for answers. It’s not interested in understanding problems or finding solutions. And it sure has no clue what the common good is.
Not sure why it’s wasting its time here.
Shouldn’t it be out pursuing its own wannabeÜbermensch interests, unconcerned about whether its actions are causing the world to crumble down around it?
I recall Margaret claiming that liberals were good at nuance, why did my effort here suddenly became an either/or choice?
I’d agree with you 100% if it weren’t for the fact that the people who are convincing you that we need a smaller government that stays out of the way are the very same people who are simultaneously building up the power of government in order to abuse it for the enhancement of their own wealth at the expense of everyone else. George W. Bush, for example.
You’re too deluded to see that you’re being deceived.
You also can’t simultaneously argue that human nature sucks too bad to count on any humans to act as leaders and that human nature is so good that we really don’t need very much regulation at all.
Exactly, you’ve been – apparently unwittingly – presenting an either/or choice. That’s one of many problems with your weak arguments.
So we are left with the choice of whether we would like more or less of our fellow citizens crafting laws, rules, regulations, and making decisions on our behalf.
I choose less, why, because it is impossible to create a just social order and power corrupts; the more people involved with the power to rule the more corruption there will be.
Again, where did I say it was either massive government or autonomous individualism devoid of any government whatsoever? Crafting a smaller government is by itself a quite complex problem, especially in our society where people have come to expect certain benefits without the willingness to pay for them.
Here’s a name Hubert Humphrey. Feel free to bash away at the guy who came up with WIC, who didn’t believe in segregation and fought to get a plank of the party that would fight for minority rights, who initially came up with the idea of a peace corps, and a myriad of other good things.
Was he perfect? No. Did he create a better country for it’s citizens with the policies passed. From my point of view, certainly. Then again I’m not a big fan of starving the children under 5 set.
Your points have no bearing on reality whatsoever. For starters, you might want to go back and read my comment @ 73 in full. Then you might want to ask yourself whether the problem in this country is how many of our fellow citizens are crafting laws, rules, regulations, and making decisions on our behalf, or whether the real problem in this country is how many people are excessively influencing those lawmakers and regulators in order to ensure that laws are not enforced fairly and to ensure that markets are not free at all, all for the benefit of a very small percent of a$$holes who are more wealthy than God and still f’ing want more.
Your weak arguments aren’t even particularly good academic arguments, much less useful in a debate among citizens about how to make government work better for society in the real world.
You mean as little government as possible for business and as much government as possible for the rest of us. A government that can tells you who you can marry, when you must have a child(regardless of the risks), what religion or belief set is acceptable (Judeo Christians need only apply), and when you can decide to end life.
Doesn’t strike me as overwhelmingly “small government” to me.
Okay–I don’t consider myself a “poll” person really, and so I offer this only FWIW. But the latest WSJ/NBC News poll shows that:
56 percent of Republicans and 68 percent of teabaggers believe that the Republicans should stick to their position on the budget battle and NOT compromise–even if it means a government shutdown.
And how does it look for Democrats?
68 percent of Democrats believe they SHOULD compromise to avoid a government shutdown.
And so–we see why the party can spit in our faces again and again and we thank them for it.
This is a party of compromisers.
The other one isn’t.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704101604576247100322182190.html
Crafting a smaller government is by itself a quite complex problem, especially in our society where
people have come to expect certain benefits without the willingness to pay for themthieving rich a$$holes act like gluttonous hyenas who privatize profits for themselves while socializing losses, i.e. make the rest of us pay dearly for their short-sightedness and total stupidity.Fixed it for ya.
I would trust the Wall Street Journal as far as I could throw them. They have an agenda and it ain’t for the majority of us.
I gave you a name Rafe. Where’s your condemnation of Humphrey? Don’t you want to bash the guy who created WIC? Surely you can find many examples of how “he abused his power?” No? Darn.
Nor me, of course that also includes restricting my food choices, forcing me to buy a product as a requirement of citizenship, or banning things that “they” don’t like.
Plenty of blame to go around here. Any government that can restrict what you don’t like today can also restrict what you do like tomorrow.
You really have no clue what the problems are in this country or just how bad they’ve gotten.
Well, I’ll take a turn at these nonsensical points:
If you have a problem with how food is regulated in this country, I recommend that you try to imagine just how bad it would be if it weren’t regulated at all.
Who’s threatened to take your citizenship away if you don’t buy a certain product? Nonsense. Anyway, if you’re talking about the individual mandate, just about everyone here agrees with you. The greedy a$$holes used their influence to get garbage enacted solely in order to enrich themselves at our expense, when what we need are real leaders who will reform the broken health care system.
Putting calories on a menu isn’t “restricting your food choices.” It’s informing you on what you’re eating. You have a right to be ignorant. You don’t have a right to force the rest of us to be ignorant right along with you. I like knowing before I consume something whether or not it covers half my calorie intake for the day. No one is forcing you to buy a product either. You are perfectly able to pay (a serving of lasagna at Olive Garden or a Whopper with Cheese)a fine so that when your body fails(as every single body does eventually) the rest of us don’t have to pick up the tab. You’d figure that would be a no brainer for anyone heckbent on putting whatever he wants into his body without the tools to actually weigh his decision.
The Happy Warrior? I remember as a child laying an Easter bunny on the HH memorial at Lakewood Cemetery(?). Come on, the man was seemingly good-hearted but still sought political power over personal morals, failing to object to the liberal holy grail of American-power projection abuse: The Vietnam War.
The mandate itself isn’t the problem. Everyone SHOULD have health care coverage. The problem in my opinion is that the government is requiring people to purchase a product from the private market and there is absolutely no guarantee that this private market will be regulated properly to ensure that citizens are getting what they pay for-health care vs. health insurance. I have absolutely no faith that a company that got caught dropping people to pad it’s bottom line isn’t going to continue to deny care to people paying with the understanding that when they get sick they will get care.
While government run care may have it’s problems( I was a hospital corpsman so trust me in saying there ARE problems) those problems dwarf allowing a business, which exists with the idea of creating profit, to “run” things.
I never said take away, jeebus.
The government requires that I buy health insurance coverage, a product, except in a case of financial hardship, using the power of the state to enforce it.
The government would and has restricted my ability to own or carry a firearm.
I wasn’t talking about food regulation, simply restricting access to certain foods or ingredients “for my own good”…hey, there’s that term again.
Yes, as a human being he had failings. We all do. That doesn’t mean that we stop trying though to create a “greater good” for our family, our neighbors and our country. It doesn’t negate the good he did. He’s just one example from history.
Ah, so NYC’s proposed salt ban in restaurants is no big deal. Sure I could decide whether or not I want to eat salt in the food I order, but better that the government decide for me. Of course I could just eat at home and dump a pound of salt on my fries with the end result to my health being exactly the same.
When do we start fining people for sitting on the couch too many hours per day, you know, so that their lack of exercise which leads to diabetes doesn’t have to be paid for by the rest of us?
You wrote: “forcing me to buy a product as a requirement of citizenship.” How is it a requirement of citizenship? Your citizenship won’t be taken away if you don’t buy it.
The government requires that you buy health insurance coverage because the profiteers/exploiters of the system/abusers of us all wanted it so.
If you’re blaming government in general and thinking that having fewer lawmakers and regulators is the answer, you’re wrong.
Regarding your serious concerns about the evil government restricting your access to certain foods or ingredients, cwaltz’s excellent comment @ 86 should help put your mind to rest. Which foods and ingredients in particular are you so worried about losing access to, anyway?
Actually they allow you to pay a fine if you don’t want coverage.
Additionally if you want to blame gun CONTROL on someone, blame it on the crazies that insist on taking lives with guns.
While I personally agree with your right to own a gun(my husband owns a number of them) I also think it’s well within MY right to ensure that when I send my children out to play that some nutball isn’t going to shoot them down and terminate any future they might enjoy.
Exactly my original point. HH was a good man but as you said, he still had his failings; enlarging the pool of deciders will exacerbate the number of personal “failings” which will intrude into policy and legislation.
I’m not against government, just having as little as possible. We can’t create a perfectly just society, no one can.
A point without a difference. The government requires me to purchase a product or I get punished using the power of the state to do it. If the government required you to purchase a gun or 2 or 10 would you accept it?
Ok I’ll blame the crazies with guns, and those with knives too because far too many people are stabbed to death every year in America. Time to restrict knives, they’re dangerous.
Why do we engage him? Just asking because to me it seems like a waste of time and energy. :)
You’re arguing smaller vs. larger government, while we’re arguing better government (for the American people) vs. worse government (one that allows a small minority of rich a$$holes to influence government in order to abuse the rest of us).
Until the abusers who are destroying true democracy and liberty in this country are shut down, your smaller vs. larger government argument is irrelevant.
They aren’t banning salt. They are restricting the levels. The average healthy consumption of salt for a human is 2300 mg. Wanna hazard a guess how much salt is in a breakfast at your local Burger King? The ultimate breakfast platter has 2490 mg of sodium. That’s right MORE than days worth of sodium. While you, who doesn’t want to pay for health care, might find that swell, I don’t. I applaud New York for addressing the health concerns of its citizenry. Particularly when society itself has to pick up the costs of health care more and more.
Domestic mental terriorism.
I know the feeling. Felt the same when when GM went bankrupt. Teachers, firefighters, farmers, Gov workers,etc., are all feeling it right now. Along with the elderly who fear losing their Social Security and medicare.
DOMESTIC MENTAL TERRIORISM!
Actually I think we’re arguing for the same thing, maybe just some differences on how to achieve it. I want better government too, having less of it, in my view, is one way to achieve that. Immediately holding politicians criminally liable for their actions would be another, not some lame ethics committee, drag them from office and put them in the dock.
We have several guns as I pointed out. They wouldn’t need to force me to purchase one. We see the advantage of owning one should the occasion rise to ever need it and we certainly have never abused the privilege by ignoring our responsibilities as gun owners.
Let me know when knives have the capacity to kill from miles away and then I may very well say we need better knife control(which by the way is already restricted in MY state, Virginia; switchblades and blades of certain length)at a federal level. As it stands right now 1 out of 5 of killed in drive by shootings were under 18. Most were in residences. Freuently, they were innocent bystanders caught in crossfire.
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/07/21-2
Got any drive by knifings?
Dragging the puppet politicians from office would just lead to new puppet politicians being put in office.
Now if you’d like to drag the puppet masters from their offices and treat them like the criminals that they are, count me in.
I don’t trust polls any more. They used to tell us how tell us how many were asked in the polls, I don’t see that much any more. Where do they get the people they ask. From my experience, working the old land line phones scew the results.
And out of the hand full of republicans I know here in MI, many of them are disgusted with the GOPer’s for trying to destroy unions.
Ooooooooohhh, it’s only a restriction, I wish I had known that because it makes all the difference. So instead of allowing me to decide whether I will have the salt-loaded Whopper, the caring government will simply “restrict” levels of certain Whopper ingredients and save me the effort of deciding for myself. Gotcha.
What happened to #86, putting caloric and ingredient information on the menu and allowing me to make my own decisions?
Great to hear, but the government has required not only you but everyone to own 10 guns and a bicycle, regardless of your need or ability to pay.
Haven’t seen too many drive-by knifings, but there was some poor kid in Chicago a few years back that got beaten to death with a 2×4. How many innocents will we see slaughtered before banning wooden boards? I need to start some sort of action committee.
They are still liable for their actions, we can’t allow them to yank out the “I was only a guard at the concentration camp” defense. If a pol allow themselves to be corrupted, they are still guilty.
We ALL oppose the sternly worded letter kabuki and studying stuff for years and years to put off making decisions.
I think where we differ is that I seem to think that government has a responsibility to its citizenry to provide a safe environment for it’s future citizens(as well as present) to grow and thrive.
My position is you do that through regulation when it comes to entities that exist to create a profit(companies). BK, if left to its own devices, would continue to make salty products that will eventually harm citizens health. BCBS if left to their own devices will continue to deny care even if you are paying a premium if it makes them money, BP will continue to cut corners and not bother to ensure safety standards are in place to ensure our oceans aren’t polluted, banks will continue to act like banks in order to ensure profit ad nauseaum.
I have absolutely no desire to regulate who Joe Schmoe marries, whether or not Jane Schmoe was irresponsible or a “sinner” when she had a medical procedure, or tell Jack Schmoe that his belief set makes him a terrorist on it’s face. As long as Joe, Jane or Jack don’t hurt anyone or get in the way of another living breathing and capable of functioning on thier own human being’s rights I say live and let live.
Hey, this has been a rousing conversation with everyone, thanks for the polite debate. I have an appointment with a smokin’ hot physical therapist and need to go :-).
Fine, but all you’d be doing is removing one puppet so another puppet can take his place.
The same a$$holes who would put shit – literally shit – in your taco and sell it to you if they could get away with it are the ones who are influencing our government, screwing us all, and destroying the US economy for their own profit.
They’re the cancer that needs to be dealt with.
I wouldn’t want to miss a minute of that appointment, either!
The health care fairy isn’t going to come along and save you Dude(since you’re the one arguing that you shouldn’t be required to get health care). As long as the rest of us are paying for health care then we have a right to get rid of “unsafe” products. And yes, consuming over a days worth of sodium in one meal is “unsafe.”
No problem. Good luck with that appointment.
I gotta head out myself. Hubby just got home from work and will be off for the next 48 hours. Woohoo!
There are 112 comments here, 70 of them attributed to “Rafe”. Seems like the attention quota has been achieved not only for today but for many days into the future.
See my @96