Ohio Chatter DEV

BoatShoes

Con_Alma;1511245 wrote:...and yet this was not what was stated. His post was no more general than your exaggerated, general statement in criticism.

He changed his points. First he said there was too much unproductive work...then he switched to talking about efficiency. And obviously he never made that specific point about lawyers either Con_Alma but apparently you don't understand that I was using a more specific example lol.

queencitybuckeye

BoatShoes;1511248 wrote:He changed his points. First he said there was too much unproductive work...then he switched to talking about efficiency.

The two have a fairly high correlation.

Con_Alma

BoatShoes;1511247 wrote:Indeed...the President could acquiesce to all of the House Republican's totally unprecedented demands and fund the government. Even better...House Republicans should just demand that the President resign in order for them to pass a funding bill and Obama could certainly go along with that too! After all, it's in the best interest of the country for Obama not to be President and they couldn't make that in an election! : thumbup:

I don't suggest such an acquiencence but the House has the ability to not do the same when it comes to funding.

queencitybuckeye

BoatShoes;1511248 wrote:He changed his points. First he said there was too much unproductive work...then he switched to talking about efficiency.

You don't understand that the two have a very high correlation? That really isn't a tough concept.

Con_Alma

BoatShoes;1511248 wrote:He changed his points. First he said there was too much unproductive work...then he switched to talking about efficiency. And obviously he never made that specific point about lawyers either Con_Alma but apparently you don't understand that I was using a more specific example lol.

Just as you attempted to clarify your point, it appears as if he did also. It isn't a different point at all. I think it's important to magnify the fact that the point about lawyers was indeed yours and not his at all.

IggyPride00

My understanding is that 3 federal government funding bills were drafted by the Republican Party recently. I can't find how many have been drafted by the respective Democrats

Since funding bills have to start in the House, Democrats are unable to draft bills because the Hastert rule makes it impossible for them to get a vote if they aren't supported by the majority of the majority.

The clean CR would pass the house with probably 350 votes. Boehner just won't allow a vote on it.

That is largely why you have heard nothing about Democrat Party drafted bills, because they have no way to get Congress to vote on them.

Con_Alma

IggyPride00;1511257 wrote:Since funding bills have to start in the House, Democrats are unable to draft bills because the Hastert rule makes it impossible for them to get a vote if they aren't supported by the majority of the majority.

The clean CR would pass the house with probably 350 votes. Boehner just won't allow a vote on it.

That is largely why you have heard nothing about Democrat Party drafted bills, because they have no way to get Congress to vote on them.

Thank you for that explanation!!! It was very helpful. Maybe a budget submitted form the White House for House consideration would be helpful sometime soon.

IggyPride00

For all the guff Boehner takes from Conservatives, it is amazing to think he is the only thing standing between ending the shutdown, raising the debt ceiling, and amnesty for illegals.

If he allowed the House a vote on all 3 right now, all 3 would pass with comfortable margins.

Instead of tar and feathering him as I have seen on Red State, Conservatives should be praising him for being the only thing standing between them and the liberal barbarians at the gates.

He wields that much power right now that he could personally end the shutdown by allowing the vote, but is choosing not to to avoid Conservatives being sold out. That makes him a stand up guy.

I Wear Pants

No it makes him an idiot.

QuakerOats

IggyPride00;1511265 wrote:For all the guff Boehner takes from Conservatives, it is amazing to think he is the only thing standing between ending the shutdown, raising the debt ceiling, and amnesty for illegals.

If he allowed the House a vote on all 3 right now, all 3 would pass with comfortable margins.

Instead of tar and feathering him as I have seen on Red State, Conservatives should be praising him for being the only thing standing between them and the liberal barbarians at the gates.

He wields that much power right now that he could personally end the shutdown by allowing the vote, but is choosing not to to avoid Conservatives being sold out. That makes him a stand up guy.

Correct. And later we will list all the accomplishments garnered for The People, as he has blocked a complete takeover by the marxists.

QuakerOats

And now this ---- WWII vets face arrest during Honor Flights.

http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=953619#.UkuNqxbw6xJ

I'll tell you what, this Leftist government can go fuck itself.

Shut it down forever!!!!!!!!!!!!

jmog

BoatShoes;1511238 wrote:But let's recap anyways.

No Child Left Behind creates federal socialist intervention into local public schools, Medicare Part D creates massive unfunded expansion of largest socialist program in America, Creation of Department of Homeland Security massive expands federal, socialist control over citizens to the point of groping them at the airport.

What do the Constitutionalist, So-Called "Fiscal Conservatives" do??? "Well...you know Boat those things I didn't really support by Bush either...." Lip Service with nevertheless unquestioned support. No filibusters, No shut downs, no chicken with the so-called "debt ceiling".

Obama enacts RomneyCare/HeritageCare/NewtCare and provides tax credits for people to get individualized health insurance....partly moving health insurance away from being employer-based for workers who don't have access to group plans...a goal of conservatives for years and what do they do???

"Shut Down teh Gubmint!!! Socialism!!! End of Health Care as we know it!!!"

Your post would have some merit if and only if it was the republicans who were voting down CRs and threatenng vetoes of CRs. However, the Rs were the ones passing CRs while the Ds and POTUS were the ones blocking them from passing.

That fact gets in the way of your opinion.

queencitybuckeye

Has the subject come up of the Democrats putting something other than Obamacare on the table? Otherwise, aren't they currently the "party of no" they rail against?

QuakerOats

IRS has continued to collect taxes, but has stopped sending refunds. Surprised?

At what point will the taxpayers be refunded, pro-rata, for the closures of the facilities that they pay for?

IggyPride00

queencitybuckeye;1511312 wrote:Has the subject come up of the Democrats putting something other than Obamacare on the table? Otherwise, aren't they currently the "party of no" they rail against?

They think their concession is not trying to rollback the sequester cuts as many of their members want to do.

Strategically Reid decided they would look as bad as the Republicans if they said their will only be a CR if it is at pre-sequester spending levels.

The theory is that everyone hates the clean CR for various reasons because no one is getting what they want, so it should be the bill that passes.

IggyPride00

QuakerOats;1511296 wrote:And now this ---- WWII vets face arrest during Honor Flights.

http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=953619#.UkuNqxbw6xJ

I'll tell you what, this Leftist government can go fuck itself.

Shut it down forever!!!!!!!!!!!!

I got a chuckle out of an article I read about their being more guards at the WWII memorial keeping veterans out than their were at Bengahzi protecting the embassy.

I Wear Pants

queencitybuckeye;1511312 wrote:Has the subject come up of the Democrats putting something other than Obamacare on the table? Otherwise, aren't they currently the "party of no" they rail against?

Why do they have to put anything on the table? Put it to an up or down vote, it will pass. There doesn't need to be any bullshit tied to it.

queencitybuckeye

I Wear Pants;1511329 wrote:Why do they have to put anything on the table? Put it to an up or down vote, it will pass. There doesn't need to be any bullshit tied to it.

Fine, take that position, but don't then try to claim that the roadblock is partisan from one side only.

IggyPride00

Obama is having Boehner/McConnell/Reid/Pelosi to the White House tonight for some PR.

He has no intention of negotiating, but figures it will make for good optics that he is "talking" with leaders of both parties.

O-Trap

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:What do you consider "productive work". It is silly to me that there's this broad assumption that work done out of public purpose is always unproductive make-work while all private sector work is "productive".

Water Sommeliers, Massage Therapists who give HJ's, Porno Fluffers, Stock Photo Models, Porn Stars, Bartenders, Personal assistants and on and on....these are all paid by the private sector and seems to me would fail to meet this standard of "productive work" that people use when they apply it to public sector employees IMHO.

Perhaps this is true, but I'd submit that, at some point, even if the two entities (public and private sectors) were equal in the number of unproductive work, there would still exist more leniency on the side of the private sector, because the money to fund such uselessness is mostly both personal and voluntary.

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:Any work that makes somebody better off in their own subjective minds is productive.

Well that seems like nonsense. If a man gets paid to squeeze the heads off mice that were purchased at the pet store, I daresay that, while that activity might bring him some level of satisfaction, it would be neither meaningful nor productive.

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:If a corporation feels that a certain seemingly benign personal service will make its shareholders better off, that work is productive. If Congress and our agents in the executive branch feel a seemingly benign personal service will make the public better off, that work is productive on the same standard.

In the event that such is a true one-to-one parallel, then Congress ought to pool their own private funds to sustain this benign service.

BoatShoes;1511228 wrote:This is not a symposium on boolean logic.

I hardly think that's necessary to avoid speaking in exaggerations and extremes. Simply being engaged in a discussion about serious matters ought to be enough to compel a person to choose his words carefully.

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:If you didn't understand the connotation in the context of menial banter on a message board then I am sorry for your lack of familiarity with modern social conventions and the like. People speak in generalities in casual speech and I am sorry that this concept is foreign to you.

Personally, I would strive to eclipse the social convention of idle banter if the discussion at hand is more important than idle banter.

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:BTW my sympthathies for not getting to be able to watch your beloved socialist football team representing the Naval Academy battle the socialist football team from the Air Force Academy due to Republicans being upset over losing last fall.

He doesn't need sympathy. USAFA would have wiped the floor with them anyway.

queencitybuckeye;1511237 wrote:BTW. a really good bartender is worth his/her weight in gold, and easily meets the definition of productive.

This is a somewhat subjective notion, unless a company has actually compared having a bartender to having no bartender.

However, valuable or valueless, so long as the company owners are using their own money to fund the bartender, then it is irrelevant, and the bartender is allowed to be unproductive.

BoatShoes;1511238 wrote:No Child Left Behind creates federal socialist intervention into local public schools, Medicare Part D creates massive unfunded expansion of largest socialist program in America, Creation of Department of Homeland Security massive expands federal, socialist control over citizens to the point of groping them at the airport.

What do the Constitutionalist, So-Called "Fiscal Conservatives" do??? "Well...you know Boat those things I didn't really support by Bush either...." Lip Service with nevertheless unquestioned support. No filibusters, No shut downs, no chicken with the so-called "debt ceiling".

I know I'm probably not quite who you're referring to with this, but I would have been absolutely in support of this kind of behavior in light of those.

As our system is in what I'd call a rut of stupid spending, I think a little disruption is a good thing. Not only does it contribute to the evolution of political strategy, but it ideally disrupts the rut in the way at least some people think about doing politics.

I'm not advocating total anarchy, as I'm no voluntaryist or even anarcho-capitalist, but I do think that the disruption of the nonsense politics we've had for awhile now is a good thing.

BoatShoes;1511212 wrote:Obama enacts RomneyCare/HeritageCare/NewtCare and provides tax credits for people to get individualized health insurance....partly moving health insurance away from being employer-based for workers who don't have access to group plans...a goal of conservatives for years and what do they do???

"Shut Down teh Gubmint!!! Socialism!!! End of Health Care as we know it!!!"

Well, this is where partisan politics make people stupid, so I certainly concede your point here.

BoatShoes;1511248 wrote:He changed his points. First he said there was too much unproductive work...then he switched to talking about efficiency. And obviously he never made that specific point about lawyers either Con_Alma but apparently you don't understand that I was using a more specific example lol.

Perhaps your specific example was not one he would consider to fit his point.

Maybe a more apt example would be something like the number of people seen standing around a road construction site, perhaps. I think this would demonstrate unproductive work (or a lack of work at all, at that point) with overall decline in efficiency. I daresay, seeing any road construction site used to be a running joke when I landscaped. We would turn it into a game and count the number of people standing, doing nothing. Rarely was the answer zero.

QuakerOats;1511296 wrote:And now this ---- WWII vets face arrest during Honor Flights.

http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=953619#.UkuNqxbw6xJ

I'll tell you what, this Leftist government can go fuck itself.

Shut it down forever!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well that was emotional and reactionary.

Granted, the arrests are stupid, but I don't think the equivalent to "Burn the Government down!" is an appropriate response. It's like someone with a malfunctioning laptop then throwing the laptop against the wall. Sure, it might feel good in the moment, but now, your laptop is in even worse shape.

queencitybuckeye;1511312 wrote:Has the subject come up of the Democrats putting something other than Obamacare on the table? Otherwise, aren't they currently the "party of no" they rail against?

I can't complain about that. I voted for Dr. No.

QuakerOats

WAR VETERANS THREATENED WITH ARREST...
REPORT: WH rejected visit request...
PAUL: 'Goons' blocked landmark...
BARRYCADES: Park Service workers erect fences...
More guards than at Benghazi...
NPS says Obama admin ordered closure...
Reid blames Republicans...
Vets 'plan to storm Lincoln memorial'...
WWI mem closed 'except for 1st Amendment activities'...

When radical leftists control your government.

Change we can believe in ...

I Wear Pants

Quaker go get some Heggy's candy and calm the fuck down.

QuakerOats

80% of government is still 'open' yet the media wants the sheeple to believe otherwise, and the liberals in charge are taking out their angst against our finest veterans.

Calm down, move along.

Figures.

IggyPride00

Dear Mr. Speaker, I hated the Iraq war. I think I hated it as much as you hate the Affordable Car Act. [...] In those days, when President Bush was Commander in Chief, I could have taken the steps that you are taking now to block Government funding in order to gain leverage to end the war. I faced a lot of pressure from my own base to take that action. But I did not do that. I felt it would have been devastating to America. Therefore, the Government was funded.

An excerpt from a letter written today by Harry Reid to John Boehner.

ptown_trojans_1

Nah, everything is fine, who needs the Government.

Today, less than 30 percent of Intelligence Community employees are on the job and those who are working are stretched so thin that they are only able to focus on the most critical security needs,” Shawn Turner, DNI spokesman told Military.com. “The longer this goes on, the more the Intelligence Community’s ability to identify threats and provide information for a broad set of national security decisions will be diminished.”

Archive

Can we just shut the government down already?