90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Finding Common Ground In The Midst Of A Shutdown

Can a Tea Party activist, a mainstream Republican congressman and former Democratic  presidential candidate Howard Dean find common ground on how to fix Washington? We’ll find out.

A woman who wished to be identified as Nancy, holds a sign during an event with the Democratic Progressive Caucus with furloughed federal employees blaming House Republicans on the government shutdown on Capitol Hill on Friday, Oct. 4, 2013 in Washington. (AP)

A woman who wished to be identified as Nancy, holds a sign during an event with the Democratic Progressive Caucus with furloughed federal employees blaming House Republicans on the government shutdown on Capitol Hill on Friday, Oct. 4, 2013 in Washington. (AP)

More fire and brimstone from Washington this weekend over shutdown and a now-looming debt ceiling crisis.  Late last week, word was that House Speaker John Boehner had said he would not let the nation go into default.  By Sunday, that guarantee seemed off.  And shutdown, unabated.  Tea Party Republicans demand the president negotiate.  The president says not with the nation held hostage.  Where’s the light here?  Up next On Point:  our own panel dives in.  A Tea Party hardbar.  A mainstream Republican. And former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean.  On the crisis in Washington.

– Tom Ashbrook 

Guests

John Bresnahan, senior congressional reporter for Politico. (@BresPolitico)

Katrina Pierson, candidate for Republican nomination in Texas’ 32nd Congressional District, Dallas Tea Party activist, head of Pierson Consulting Group. (@KatrinaPierson)

Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, candidate for Democratic nomination for President in 2004. (@GovHowardDean)

Vin Weber, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives for Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District, adviser for Mitt Romney’s 2012 Presidential campaign, co-chairman and partner at Mercury/Clark & Weinstock.

From Tom’s Reading List

New York Times: G.O.P. Elders See Liabilities in Shutdown — “From statehouses to Capitol Hill, frustration is building and spilling out during closed-door meetings as Republicans press leaders of the effort to block funding for the health care law to explain where their strategy is ultimately leading. ‘Fighting with the president is one thing,’ said Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri. ‘Fighting with the president and losing is another thing. When you’re in the minority you need to look really hard to find the fights you can win.’”

Wall Street Journal: GOP Begins Search For Broad Deal On Budget – “In recent days, Mr. Boehner has been talking with Republican House members about raising the debt ceiling, insisting to them it must be done. By taking that stance, he has raised questions about how much leverage he could take into negotiations—should any materialize—with Democrats over the debt ceiling. In a session with centrist Republicans, Mr. Boehner suggested that debt-ceiling legislation would likely have to have some support from Democrats, acknowledging that any such measure would be opposed by at least some conservative Republicans.”

Politico: Anger At Government Soars — “As the government shutdown continues in Washington, Americans are angrier with how things are going than they have been in years, according to a new poll. Overall, 87 percent expressed unhappiness with the direction of Washington, with 44 percent saying they were ‘dissatisfied’ and 43 percent saying they were “angry” in a new CBS News poll out Thursday night. Only 8 percent said they were ‘satisfied’ and 2 percent said they were ‘enthusiastic.’”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Mike_Card

    Let’s first be clear about this so-called ‘Tea Party phenomenon:’ it is entirely funded and promoted by Koch Industries for the purpose of giving the Koch Bros businesses advantages. The only reason they like conservative, libertarian groups is because of those groups’ willingness to be purchased with $.
    If the Kochs had successfully purchased Democratic office-holders or candidates, we would be seeing enormous amounts of money promoting the Democratic agenda–like Obamacare and immigration reform. Kochs don’t care a whit about ideology–they only want votes for their interests, and they are willing to pay the big $ to buy the people in congress.

    • John_in_Amherst

      you left out Sheldon Adelson, the casino billionaire. What does it say about a party when it gets hundreds of millions – a huge part of its budget – from 2 libertarian elitist petrochemical tycoons with zero regard for labor or the environment and a guy who made his fortune catering to peoples’ gambling addictions, and its views are trumpeted by a tabloid media mogul who has dumbed down political discourse throughout the English speaking world?

      • Don_B1

        Mr. Adelson supposedly remarked that the $100 million was a small price to pay for the benefit of $4 billion in decreased inheritance taxes, etc. he expected that a Republican president would help enact.

        • John_in_Amherst

          so glad he lost the gamble. But will he double down in 2014 & 2016? Where is campaign finance reform?

          • Don_B1

            That just will not happen until the Democrats retake the House of Representatives and get a super-majority in the Senate, and even that may not be enough.

            But a thorough drubbing of the Republican candidate for the presidency in 2016 might push that case toward acceptance.

            But is is not clear that even enough Democrats recognize the need to do this first while the doing might be possible and the country might again miss the opportunity to put itself on a road to a restored democracy where ideas that work for everyone can win over ideas that only benefit the wealthy.

    • Don_B1

      The history of this “March to Default,” organized by radical right-wing organizations funded by ideological-blinded billionaires, is laid out clearly here:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html?ref=politics&_r=1&pagewanted=all&

      Read it and weep at the way such hokum as is being disseminated by these groups is being accepted by so many, many of whom are blinded by racism, mild or vitriolic it doesn’t matter in this case.

  • JGC

    Governor Dean, if the bipartisan group of Representatives (20 Republicans, 20 Democrats) gets a vote to remove the tax on medical devices, how will that $30-billion deficit in the funding of Obamacare be handled? Will there be a compensatory raise in taxation on other areas of healthcare, or will the Republicans demand a decrease of $30-billion in care to the recipients of the ACA?

  • Fredlinskip

    Imagine for a moment if after next presidential election the losing side says, “No we don’t like that guy- our guys in Congress are going to close down government and we’re going to not pay U.S. bills and send US economy in tailspin if our guy isn’t president”.

    I don’t understand how people don’t get that our democracy would be FOREVER damaged if Dems were to give in to current GOP demands?It’s not about ACA.

    It’s about whether we honor the constitutional process or not.

    The basic question we should all be currently pondering is whether or not we should scrap our constitution?

    • HonestDebate1

      The Constitutional process dictates that the President work with the Congress. He won’t even come to the table.

      • LinRP

        Come to the table ABOUT WHAT???????? The ACA is the law of the land. This point being made over and over about the President not negotiating is truly moronic and displays a complete lack of understanding of the rule of law and legislative PROCESS in this country.

        • HonestDebate1

          Evidently only the parts of Obamacare that Obama decided to implement are the law of the land. I am all for implementing the law of the land fully as written and letting the chips fall.

          He exempted Congress and business from the mandate by decree. The House offered to cut a deal if he delayed the individual mandate too. What’s good for the goose…

          • Don_B1

            Delaying the implementation of a couple minor provisions of the law for defendable reasons is not equivalent to decoding to not implement the law.

            The Executive branch has a lot of leeway in implementing laws. It was the Nixon administration that got in trouble for refusing to spend appropriated money and that is now illegal.

          • HonestDebate1

            It’s hardly just a couple of minor provisions.

      • NewtonWhale

        Actually, the Constitution says nothing of the sort.

        Article I, Section 7:

        “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it.”

        http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

        The ACA was passed by both houses and signed into law. If Republicans want to repeal it they can follow Section 7. Of course, it would never pass the senate or be signed by the President, so they took the country hostage.

        • HonestDebate1

          Where does it say Obama can implement the law of the land piecemeal without the consent of Congress? As Article 1 Section 7 states, Congress gets a say.

        • nj_v2

          Don’t confuse him. Greggg lives in his own special world.

          • jefe68

            North Carolina.

          • HonestDebate1

            Home of the 2012 Democrat NAtional Convention.

          • jefe68

            And one of the most regressive legislation bodies in the nation.

          • HonestDebate1

            You are entitled to your opinion but Dems ran the assembly for 100 years and the governorship for a quarter century. Republicans have been in charge less than a year. Your position is odd given the fact that you are still blaming Bush 5 years out.

          • Don_B1

            A “purple state” gone bad in the 2010 elections where regressive ideologue unthinking Tea/Republican Party members were elected to the governorship and legislature, making it a mockery of democracy with gerrymandering of its voting districts that will last at least to 2022, when the next Census will provide an occasion to straighten things out and relieve the Republicans of the awesome responsibility for meeting the needs of their citizens in an evenhanded way, which they have proven incapable of meeting even halfway.

        • jefe68

          Exactly, but the regressive right act only use the parts of the Constitution that suit their agenda. Right now it seems they want to rewrite it. Cruz is on record as saying as much.

      • John_in_Amherst

        Obama took an idea that originated in a conservative think tank. He was AT the table for months to negotiate the ACA before it was passed, and pissed off not a few progressives with his compromises. The bill passed both houses and was signed into law. The SCOTUS heard a case regarding the constitutionality of the ACA and decided in its favor. It is the law, and now you suggest he come back to the table to abrogate it? Now THAT would be unconstitutional.

        • HonestDebate1

          No, the mandate was nothing like previous ideas as if it mattered anyway. there is nothing unconstitutional going on.

    • John_in_Amherst

      another basic question: is what the tea part rump caucus is doing treason?
      Treason:
      1. the offense of acting to overthrow one’s government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
      2. a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or to one’s state.
      3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

  • JGC

    There may be a window for bipartisan agreement in the near universal loathing of Senator Ted Cruz.

    • HonestDebate1

      If everybody hated Cruz he would have gotten zero traction.

  • jefe68

    “The G.O.P. has become “an insurgent outlier — ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

    –Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein:
    It’s Even Worse Than It Looks

    Pretty much sums it up. You can’t negotiate with zealots.

    • William

      What is extreme about limited government and less spending?

      • NewtonWhale

        That’s a perfectly appropriate platform on which to run. Romney did it and lost.

        Extreme is taking the country hostage in order to impose a platform on voters who rejected it.

        • William

          It is not taking the country hostage. If it was Tip O’neil and Bill Clinton would be called hostage takers too. We have not seen any serious reduction in spending in 12 years. It’s just more of the same and kick the debt down the road. “The other guy will pay for it eventually” which means the generations not yet born are going to get slammed.

          • jefe68

            What’s that smell? Why it’s the smell of mendacity.

          • NewtonWhale

            You claim “We have not seen any serious reduction in spending in 12 years.” You’re wrong.

            CHART: The Gobsmacking Drop In Government Spending Under Obama

            “For a longer-term historical perspective, the drop in overall government spending after Obama’s stimulus funds expired in 2010 has been the sharpest since the 1950s, when the United States was demobilizing after the Korean War.”

            http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/chart-the-gobsmacking-drop-in-government-spending-under-obama

      • jefe68

        Oy vay.

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    Thomas Jefferson – “A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”

    It seems to me that if Americans had decent paying jobs due to renewed demand for labor, that is, more jobs than workers, we would not have a need for interfering in the healthcare marketplace. We wouldn’t have a debt problem either, or a trade deficit problem. We wouldn’t have as many people in prisons or on welfare, or on drugs, or illiterate or…. Why do some of us have to work 8,10,12,14,16 hours a day, when others get paid for doing nothing? I understand why so many of you want to have affordable health care, and yes I agree that what we have is not working, but I fail to see how we will be coming out ahead in the long run, when we will now be forced to give even more money to private companies that already have billions of dollars in assets ! The two parties will continue to allow ever more people to feed off the system, many of which are not even citizens. The two major parties are playing us for saps. Remember, these are the same people that take you war, unnecessary wars, trillion dollar wars. They prey on your fears. The American people deserve more.

    “22 Million Americans Are Unemployed Or Underemployed” April, 4, 2013

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/04/04/175697813/23-million-americans-are-unemployed-or-underemployed

    “Number of U.S. adults who can’t read” >>> 32 Million

    http://statisticbrain.com/number-of-american-adults-who-cant-read/

    “American Family Financial Statistics”

    http://www.statisticbrain.com/american-family-financial-statistics/

    National debt per person surpassed national median income

    http://visual.ly/national-debt-person

  • NewtonWhale

    “Common ground?”

    Are you serious?

    Republicans have taken the country hostage. If they get anything at all as a result we will continue to see this madness play out over and over again. Now that they realize how unpopular the shutdown is they are passing individual bills to open up government programs they like, in a cynical attempt to blame the shutdown on Democrats. They are depending on the reflexive false equivalence of mainstream journalists to put pressure on the President to compromise, to find “common ground”.

    They are like terrorists who release one hostage at a time then blame the cops for not ending the hostage crisis.

    And you are behaving as if that is an acceptable form of negotiation.

    • NewtonWhale

      I just watched Julie Pace, AP reporter, on Morning Joe.

      She said the the American people look at this and say “The Republicans are holding this up”, but in the end this is a Washington problem, and the President is the most visible figure in Washington, so he will get the blame.

      She perfectly illustrated the phenomenon at the core of Republican strategy:

      “A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress’s generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.

      A deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media.

      Ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable “hard news” segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the “respectable” media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. Hence, they hew to the practice of false even-handedness. Paul Krugman has skewered this tactic as being the “centrist cop-out.” “I joked long ago,” he says, “that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read ‘Views Differ on Shape of Planet.’”

      http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/3079:goodbye-to-all-that-reflections-of-a-gop-operative-who-left-the-cult

      • Don_B1

        There is more support for your position here:

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html?ref=politics&_r=1&pagewanted=all&

        and a good concise summary of the events since January 2013 by John Harwood on PBS’s Washington Week with Gwen Ifill:

        http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/watch/watch%20the%20show/42775

        None of which supports any story except that the Tea/Republicans decided to threaten a government shutdown and a refusal to raise the debt ceiling in order to “force” President Obama and Senate Democrats to “cave” on Obamacare and a host of other items on Governor Romney’s “Platform” for the 2012 Presidential Election, which lost by some 5 million votes last November.

        Their belief that this would be possible is more evidence of the Republicans’ living in a fantasy world, where every wish of theirs is granted and even the force of gravity is suspended. That they thought that President Obama could be intimidated into caving on his prime accomplishment for a six week CR after which he could then be blackmailed into even more disastrous for the country concessions and effectively declare himself a “failed president” shows their absolute disrespect and disdain for the Democratic Party and even democratic principles.

  • lobstahbisque

    “Democracy Corps- a Democratic-leaning polling firm- released a study this week based on a series of focus groups they conducted with loyal Republican voters.They divided them up into three sub-groups which together represent the base of the party. Evangelicals represent the largest group, followed by Republicans who identify with the tea party movement. ‘Moderates,’ the third group, make up about a quarter of the party’s base, according to the pollsters.

    Fear of a changing society is one thing that unites all three factions. The battle over OBAMACARE, write the study’s authors, ‘goes to the heart of Republican base thinking about the essential political battle.’

    Quote; ‘They think they face a victorious Democratic Party that is intent on expanding government to increase dependency and therefore electoral support. It starts with food stamps and unemployment benefits;expands further if you legalize the illegals; but insuring the uninsured dramatically grows those dependent on government. They believe this is an electoral strategy— not just a political ideology or economic philosophy. if Obamacare happens, the Republican Party may be lost in their view.’….”

    The article goes on in detail……

    “They are also unified in their belief that Obama is a usurper who has hoodwinked the public into re-electing him by hiding his true beliefs, which are essentially Marxist. They also think that Democrats have won the major political battles of our time because Republican legislators in Washington didn’t put up a fight.

    • lobstahbisque

      “But there are also deep divisions within the base, according to the analysis. Evangelicals still focus overwhelmingly on social issues. They think gay rights are the biggest threat to our society, but they also worry about the loss of what they see as an idyllic small-town culture. They feel besieged as the cultural ground shifts beneath them and see themselves as a beleaguered, “politically incorrect”minority.

      Tea partiers display a libertarian streak, and are far less concerned with social issues. They are staunchly pro-business. But there’s an easy alliance between these two groups– which make up well over half of the GOP base—because Evangelicals think tea partiers are fighting back and vice versa.”
      The moderates were, as one might respect, quite different. Like the tea partiers, they don’t worry as much about social issues. Their concerns are traditionally conservative— they worry about excessive regulation and taxation. THey have a hard time taking FOX NEWS seriously, and hold a deep disdain for the tea party faction. They are also keenly aware of their waning influence within the coalition.”

      • lobstahbisque

        “Moderates are not so sure about their place in the current Republican Party.They worry about the ability of Republcans in Congress to make government work. They believe the party is stuck, not forward-looking, and representative of old ideas.They worry about the Republican Party’s right turn on social and environmental issues — which makes it difficult, especially for young moderates,– to view the Republican Party as a modern party.

        Unlike the tea partiers and Evangelicals, the moderate faction desperately wants lawmakers in Washington to find a common middle ground. They are less likely to worry about unauthorized immigration than the rest of the base, and some went so far as to speak positively about immigrants’ contributions to our society and economy….. Moderates are not even in the same conversation as Evangelicals who deeply doubt scientists writ large and Tea Party Republicans who are consumed by big government and regulations that inevitably result from climate science.
        Evangelicals and Tea Party Republicans share and are consumed by skepticism about climate science— to the point where they mistrust scientists before they begin to speak.”

  • LinRP

    Common ground with the group outlined below? All funded by the likes of the Koch Brothers and The Heritage Foundation. NO!!!!!!

    It is 80 members of our House of Representatives who are demanding the right to dictate national legislative policy; that the nation bow their ideology.

    These 80 members = 18% of the House.

    These 80 members = 33% of Republicans in the House.

    These 80 members were elected with 12% of total votes electing Representatives.

    These 80 members = 18% of our population.

    These 80 members = districts that have become less diverse, as in districts that are 75% white to the average district that is 63% white.

    Mitt Romney won by an average 21 points in their districts to average districts where Barack Obama won by 4% more
    of total votes than Mitt.

    Math doesn’t lie. There IS NO COMMON GROUND with these people in the country as a whole.

    *Statistics thanks for Winning Progressive.

    • HonestDebate1

      The right to dictate national policy does not belong solely to the President . This is still America, the House gets a say.

      • LinRP

        Who is saying they don’t? That small majority has ZERO right to dictate policy and extort, however.

        • HonestDebate1

          Obama and Reid are saying they don’t by refusing to even talk to them.

          • Don_B1

            Actually President Obama has agreed to talk to them after they pass a “Clean CR” and raise the Debt Limit.

            After all, you would be among the loudest “screamers” if a small block of House Democrats tried to force a Democratic Party House Speaker to force a Republican Party controlled Senate and President to pass and sign, respectively, a bill that raised taxes on the wealthy to 60% on income over $8 million and removed the wage base limit on the F.I.C.A. tax, plus set a minimum wage of $12/hour for all workers in the country.

            You would be calling them “hostage takers,” except not now in this context because that would be an immediate giveaway against your argument which only appeals to those who can’t think through the issue.

  • Yar

    I would like to see candidates run on this platform in 2014.
    We agree to not take any campaign contributions or participate in PAC’s while in office, we will not trade stock or take anything of value while in office.
    Congressional pay should be enough reward for serving the people. The only way to overturn the damage caused by citizen united is to run on a platform against it while taking any money available during the campaign.

    It is time to clean house, maybe we should elect more women to help do it. I would love to see a woman running in every primary for each district. Often the Primary is the only election race. Who is in?

    • HonestDebate1

      I hear you but unfortunately campaign promises are worthless.

  • HonestDebate1

    The amber alert website is shut down but Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” website is up and running.

    • lobstahbisque

      Good morning. A friend of mine wants to know,if you had free healthcare would you take it? He awaits your reply.

      • HonestDebate1

        Sure as long as I could choose my doctor, smoke, drink, eat twinkles, race motorcycles and it didn’t cost the taxpayers.

        • lobstahbisque

          That’s what my friend thought you’d say…
          Thanks. LBSBSQ.

          • HonestDebate1

            Does your friend have a comment on why they would shut down a site to save children while keeping up Michelle’s Richard Simmons routine?

          • AC

            maybe because one requires a network of staff and resources? the health website at most requires an admin or 2 here and there to insert a new post….

          • HonestDebate1

            I don’t think so, it is a voluntary partnership between law-enforcement and broadcasters.

          • lobstahbisque

            Expand….

  • John Cedar

    Clearly, the Origination Clause was the most brilliant clause included in the original Constitution.

    “The house of representatives can not only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for the support of government. They in a word hold the purse; that powerful instrument by which we behold, in the history of the British constitution, an infant and humble representation of the people, gradually enlarging the sphere of its activity and importance, and finally reducing, as far as it seems to
    have wished, all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government. This power over the purse, may in fact be regarded as the most compleat and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of
    every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.”

    • Don_B1

      So what? Those words are apparently Alexander Hamilton’s contribution to the Federalist Papers, a document written to support adoption of the Constitution, but not in the actual Constitution, which were written in a totally different context from how radical conservatives are using them.

      And Hamilton would be outraged at the current intention of Tea/Republicans to use this “power” to renege on paying the bills from already spent, Congressionally approved spending. Hamilton was the leader of the forces for financial responsibility, and would be horrified by a group advocating intentional default. He would have called them Communists if the word existed in his day.

  • HonestDebate1

    The common ground is crystal clear, everything but Obamcare. Is there any common ground to implement Obamacare fully as written? No there is not. It’s not even close, beginning with the President’s delays. So take it off the table and work on it while funding the rest of government.

    The President wants no part of common ground.

    • JGC

      Favorite characterization of House members who insist on shutting down government over Obamacare: “lemmings with suicide vests”. (Thanks to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-CA)

      Come on, everybody: jump and pull the cord!

      • Bluejay2fly

        Lemmings are not suicidal. I cannot imagine a republican quoting something that is not true.

      • HonestDebate1

        The House is not insisting on shutting down the government.

        • jefe68

          And I saw a unicorn this morning.

          • nj_v2

            Me, too! I think it’s their migrating season.

          • Don_B1

            Actually there are small flocks of them out there, just waiting for their world to end.

    • OrangeGina

      Obama compromised to the big insurers and other powerful interests from the get-go when single payer was removed as an option. So much for Obama won’t negotiate, Obama wants no common ground. That is BS.

      Obama ran twice on his health care agenda and won. The Republicans ran twice AGAINST Obama’s ACA and lost. The Supreme Court ruled it constitutional. I think that illustrates we have more people in this country that want this, than don’t. There is a core of very sore losers in the Republican party causing all this pain. No matter how much the right wing echo chamber tries to project the blame onto the Democrats, sane voices will call them out.

      Sane Republicans can’t understand why the GOP is suddenly the party of anarchy. Sane Republicans who have been helped by the ACA since its inception are wondering why their political leaders don’t want them to have affordable healthcare, in some cases the FIRST OPPORTUNITY they have had to participate in the system due to various circumstances.

      • HonestDebate1

        It was not a compromise it was a stepping stone.

        “I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program.” (applause) “I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”

        Obama speaking to the Illinois AFL-CIO, June 30, 2003.

        • Don_B1

          So what is wrong with that?

          President Obama could see the writing on the wall in what the Senate would support in 2009 on a path to single payer, and agreed to drop the public option when Senator (from healthcare insurance) Joseph Lieberman (CT, I/D) vowed to filibuster any health insurance bill that provided for a public option.

          The public option can be added to the exchanges at any time the Congress decides it is needed to help control the cost of health care, or they can decide that the PPACA is not working and try some other approach, but right now the Tea/Republican are trying to prevent the country from even finding out how well the PPACA works.

          So far, everything is working according to design in Kentucky thanks to the Democratic Party governor.

          • HonestDebate1

            The debate was not honest. That’s what’s wrong with that.

          • Don_B1

            That from the most dishonest “debater” on this webpage?

            So just what exactly do you think was “dishonest” about the debate during the 2009-2010 period of working out the details of the PPACA?

            I have a few:

            The Republican members of Senator Baucus’s “Gang of Six,” who strung out the arguments, inserting many provisions into the bill, and then arrogantly claiming that there was nothing in the bill that they could vote for.

            Senator Grassley falsely claiming that a provision to evaluate the effectiveness of procedures so that those proven ineffective could be avoided was a “death panel.”

            But the biggest false claim that Republicans have been making is the one against increased employment by small business, which is addressed here and shown to be false:

            http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2013/10/14/131014ta_talk_surowiecki?utm_source=tny&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weeklyemail&mbid=nl_Weekly%20(12)

  • Bluejay2fly

    The common ground exists on some of the most important issues. Debt: The national debt has now reached into the tens of trillions (my state NY is 140 Billion in debt) yet both parties have never had a presidency in which the national debt was reduced. Taxation: both parties have done nothing to reform a tax system that has created the greatest disparity since the 20′s. Defense: both parties continue to fund the world’s largest military and never question the costly deployment of troops overseas. Employment: both parties allowed industry to flee the US which has devastated many communities and left millions jobless. Energy: both parties are completely accepting of America’s energy dependency and has done little to nothing to create a domestic energy policy free from foreign oil. The only difference between the parties is a small tweaking of each issue on a very superficial level to create the illusion something is being done about it without ever really changing the situation at all.

    • MrNutso

      Toward the end of Clinton’s second term, debt clocks that had been established in various U.S. locations had to be shut down — the deficit had been eliminated and the clocks had never been set to run backwards.

      • Bluejay2fly

        Spending did not got down to radically reduce the debt in so much we had a tech boom which increased the value our economy and lowered it as a percentage of GDP. We still had a nation debt the government did however have a balanced budget and incurred no deficit. However, our growing economy in the 90′s was fueled by gains in NAFTA and Globalization. These may have had a short term benefit but did not impact the death of our middle class and the unsustainable model of energy and resource usage.

        • MrNutso

          The original point was that the national debt never went down. It did under Clinton. Whether through reduced spending or higher revenue is not the point.

          Not withstanding 9/11, massive tax cuts for the wealthy and unfunded Medicare Part D, the debt was projected to be eliminated in 11 years. Whether that was a realistic projection or if could ever be achieved is a question with a political answer.

    • nj_v2

      Points taken, but debt as a percent of overall economy was reduced under Clinton.

      There is also significant common ground in terms of the degree to which both parties are controlled by, and do the bidding for, corporate interests.

      • Bluejay2fly

        Firstly, if the pie is growing I.E. a tech bubble certainly that will happen ,but it’s the choices that you make during that period which sets the economy up for years to come. What did Clinton do to help find suitable replacements for the millions of jobs lost during globalization? His welfare reform did nothing but push people onto SS disability costing the Feds billions more per year. Military spending went rolling on and the tax system was grossly inefficient. Our energy policy was still the same. He essentially was nothing more than a lucky person who enjoyed some sunshine and the hard choices and pain that should have been endured to stabilize the nation were avoided.

        • nj_v2

          Again, points taken, i was just raising a point of fact, not attempting to defend the entirety of Clinton’s record.

      • Bluejay2fly

        Yes, that is my point. Also, another aspect of this system is how anytime a politician wants to spend money people are always OK with it because we put it on the national debt.

      • fun bobby

        that was after a govt shutdown right?

        • HonestDebate1

          You will not get the honest and obvious answer from NJ.

          • fun bobby

            that’s the fun part

          • HonestDebate1

            I agree but it’s getting too easy.

    • fun bobby

      I have noticed that too. its like a one party system but you can blame the other party for anything you don’t like and that keeps a lot of people busy

  • MrStang

    Make no mistake.
    The Tea Party is The Republican party.

    The Republicans shut down the government to keep people from getting health insurance.

    • fun bobby

      yet the health insurance exchanges remain open. who is stopped from getting healthcare by the “shutdown”?

      • HonestDebate1

        Excellent question but even when the site is up, it’s down.

      • MrStang

        Pretty stupid strategy huh? You should consult for Ted Cruz and John Boehner. Perfect
        Pairing.

        • fun bobby

          are they saying that was their strategy or are you saying that was their strategy?

  • AC

    i try to stay out of things but i find the shut down annoying. and i do blame these tea party people. i would like to know what the voters who supported them are thinking? are they totally embarrassed or not? they strike me as loud-mouth angry types, so they might get good coverage, but how many of them are there really? can we all hope that this will be a wake up call for normal people to vote next time?

    • MrNutso

      In general I think the electorate that supports Tea Party Republican’s are hard core for smaller government and reduced spending. That’s why they are against the ACA as a government expansion and the debt ceiling increase as just more carte blanche to spend more money.

      Where were they from 2001 – 2008, when we saw 2 huge government expansions, DHS/TSA and Medicare Part D, and two unfunded wars, unfunded Medicare Part D and massive tax cuts for the wealthy that ballooned the deficit and national debt?

      • MrStang

        In general, the electorate that supports Tea Party Republicans VOTED FOR or Supported representatives that voted for DHS/TSA and Medicare Part D, and two unfunded wars, unfunded Medicare Part D and massive tax cuts for the wealthy that ballooned the deficit and national debt. An incoherence often symbolized by one of the signs/sentiments espoused at their Tea Party events:

        “Get your Government hands off my Medicare!”

        https://www.google.com/search?q=keep+your+government+hands+off+my+medicare&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=K7BSUpvFIrWo4AOpioHIBQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ&biw=1001&bih=628&dpr=1

      • TFRX

        “(The Tea Party voters) are hard core for smaller government and reduced spending”

        They love the rhetoric, but when the spit hits the fan, the bulk of them want the good goverment spending–the kind that goes to them.

        Their dream cuts basically fall into two categories: Unimaginably incomprehensible, or punishing people that can be labelled as “the other”.

        TANF is a great example: Tens of millions of poor whites, voting largely right-wing, get thrown under the (stereotype of the) Cadillac being driven by the welfare queen.

    • HonestDebate1

      The Tea partiers are still there in the same numbers as 2010 but have successfully been tarred and feathered as racist zealots. No one want to be treated that way, they are beaten down. But the truth is many people in America are fed up with spineless Republicans going along with the fundamental transformation of America. That was Romney’s downfall. Did you know that Romney won the independents handily in 2012? The reason he lost is because fed up Conservatives stayed home.

      • nj_v2

        More pulled-from-the butt analysis from DisHonestMisDebatorGreggg.

        Electorate has been steadily more self identifying as “liberal” over the last decade or so. In 2012, “independents” were more likely (than previously) to be Repub. leaning, so he was getting the votes of people who were already leaning his way.

        The few radical, racist Teabaggers weren’t enough to swing anything one way or another.

        • HonestDebate1

          Absolutely correct, the 2 or 3 radical racists were irrelevant. I was talking about the Tea partiers.

          • nj_v2

            [[ Absolutely correct, the 2 or 3 radical racists were irrelevant. ]]

            It’s the delusions speaking.

          • lobstahbisque

            Tea partiers aren’t racist, they only hate immigrants and gays. It’s the Ev-angelics who hate the blacks and gays.

          • HonestDebate1

            I love immigrants if they are legal, I don’t like law breakers. I love gays too, as long as they are not flaming liberals.

          • lobstahbisque

            Who is more a flaming liberal, Michelle Obama or Richard Simmons?

          • HonestDebate1

            As I have no idea about the politics of Richard Simmons, I’ll go with Michelle.

          • lobstahbisque

            You’re getting warmer, the ice you are skating on is getting thinner and those badges are weighing you down….

          • jefe68

            Wow.

      • jefe68

        You’re from NC right? That would explain a lot.

    • http://profiles.google.com/barry.kort Barry Kort

      I would like to know what the voters who supported them are thinking. ~AC

      There is scant evidence they are doing any thinking at all.

      • AC

        presumably one or more of them cut off their nose to spite their face and are only now realizing it. i would like to find one of them and ask them their thoughts. some lessons are hard learned, no?

        • http://profiles.google.com/barry.kort Barry Kort

          The history of human civilization reveals that some lessons are never learned.

    • jefe68

      What are they thinking? That this is a good thing.
      Some are nihilist and others are regressive to a point of absurdity (read up on the NC legislators) and others are just pretty stupid.

    • fun bobby

      are you missing for the panda cam?

      • AC

        pandas are cute, but i’d rather a kitten or puppy cam….:)

        • fun bobby

          I am certain they exist. the san diago panda cam is in HD and much better than the federal panda cam

        • HonestDebate1

          I’m more concerned about what the Donkeys are doing.

  • jimino

    Shortly after President Obama started his second term, a loose-knit coalition of conservative activists led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III gathered in the capital to plot strategy. Their push to repeal Mr. Obama’s health care law was going nowhere, and they desperately needed a new plan. Did they talk about rethinking ideas that voters had soundly rejected? No, they talked extortion, insisting that the threat of a shutdown would induce President Obama to abandon health reform.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html?ref=politics&_r=2&pagewanted=all&

    • anamaria23

      .Yes, that investigative journalism is quite revealing and startling for the scope of the organizations behind Cruz et al. The money flowing is mind boggling..
      Almost like a shadow government?

  • Markus6

    Common ground has become pretty hard to find … with either side. I tend to be fiscally conservative and vote Republican more than Democrat. Common ground with Republicans has been getting a lot tougher since they went nutty on gun control, the environment and wars. But I look at the other side who can’t seem to understand the broad and long term impact of a 17 Trillion national debt, sees Koch brother conspiracies everywhere and don’t seem to care if additional tens of millions of poor people move here and take jobs from Americans that need them.

    So, I’m having problems with common ground and unlike politicians, my job is not dependent on satisfying a polarized base that sees the other side as pure evil.

    A side issue is how disgusted we all are with Congress, but my guess is only a tiny percentage of us will vote against an incumbent who is with our party. We really have become simple minded and easy to manipulate.

    • MrNutso

      To address your later point, the recent 10% favorability rating of Congress is meaningless. One would assume on hearing that number that only 54 sitting members of Congress would be reelected. However, at least 66 Senators will return, and the number of competitive house seats that could change hands is likely not more than 50. So at best, there would only be about 16% new members in 2015.

      I suspect that most people are happy with the job their party in Congress is doing in general, and their representative/Senator is doing if they are a member of that persons party.

    • lobstahbisque

      Maybe we are now the puppets of the puppets of the oligarchs.

      • fun bobby

        as long as you are voting for the dempublicans you are

    • MrStang

      The Republicans did a fabulous job of convincing you they are fiscally conservative.They are not. They do not care about the deficit. They care about Rich people. Koch brother conspiracies are not everywhere, but they are certainly in your statehouse. Lookup the influence of ALEC on your local legislators
      http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Legislative_Exchange_Council

      have a go at the efficacy of trickle down supply-side economics, especially during a recession. Who is advocating austerity measures? Who benefits from this stupidity?

      • HonestDebate1

        OP just had a show on the income gap which has widened under Obama’s policies. Bush was the one who eliminated income tax for 6 million poor and made the rich pay a larger potion of the bill than at any time in history.

        • MrStang

          “a larger portion of the bill”
          What are you talking about? specifics please.

          • HonestDebate1

            I mean that the top 1% contribute nearly 40% of the revenue. That’s an all time high.

          • MrStang

            Ahh ya they’ve also received 95% percent of the gains….95%

          • TFRX

            I thought it was 99%. But your point stands.

          • HonestDebate1

            Correction, they earned it and again, the gap gotten wider, much wider, under Obama. Either way, why is it every single time I point out the rich are paying more than ever the argument ALWAYS jumps from “no they are not” to “yes they are but they should”?

            Well, they are as they should. Where’s the beef?

          • MrStang

            Correction, they stole it by buying legislation to increase their ill-gotten gains.

          • HonestDebate1

            Alrighty then.

        • nj_v2

          Greggg enters full distortion/disinfo mode.

          Look at how much this clown is out here. I’m thinking he has to be a paid shill. No one can spend this much time day after day pumping out this kind of crap without some motive.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61178-2004Aug12.html?referrer=email

          Tax Burden Shifts to the Middle

          Since 2001, President Bush’s tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found, a conclusion likely to roil the presidential election campaign.

          The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.

          Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.…

          (snipped)

          The bogus part of the claim by hacks like DisHonestMisDebatorGreggg—that the rich pay more of the taxes—is true in that the rich got so much richer, that even with the reduction in their tax rate, the gross, collective amount they paid still went up. But this is proffered as evidence of some kind of evidence that the rich have been (and are) being treated fairly.

          • HonestDebate1

            You have not refudiated anything I wrote.

            Has the gap widened or not? Have the rich ever paid a higher percentage of the bill or not? Did Bush eliminate Federal income tax for 6 million of the poor or not?

          • brettearle

            If HD doesn’t answer this, then FORCE him to answer it:

            CHALLENGE him to the point of Embarrassment.

          • HonestDebate1

            I answered it before your comment.

  • AC

    i’m not sure why, but this ‘down-voting’ makes me feel defensive, but how can you have a converstation with a coward? i swear it’s random and meaningless.
    i’m upvoting myself from now on when i see a down vote since i notice it lets me…

    • http://profiles.google.com/barry.kort Barry Kort

      It’s a crazy-making feature of DISQUS.

    • lobstahbisque

      It is but an illusion grasshopper. Let me do it for you….

    • nj_v2

      Studies show that ignoring online posting ratings reduces tension, lengthens life expectancy, and eliminates static cling.

      • AC

        oooh! i’ll try harder…

        • nj_v2

          Really, who wants static cling?

    • HonestDebate1

      I very rarely ever click the down vote because it’s anonymous. If I disagree I’ll just reply. As to my comments, I wear the down votes as a badge of honor.

      • nj_v2

        [[ As to my comments, I wear the down votes as a badge of honor. ]]

        It’s the delusions speaking.

        • HonestDebate1

          I’m sensitive, please don’t hurt my feelings.

          • nj_v2

            Sensitive hardly describes it.

      • lobstahbisque

        Those badges are gettin so heavy your teats are sagging.

    • John Cedar

      You should be far more concerned if you find the NPR audience up-voting your comments.

      But if that’s what you want, just regurgitate a NYT’s hate speech editorial instead of forming your own opinions.

      • AC

        what is an NYT hate speech editorial?

    • fun bobby

      I think they are funny. mention god in any fashion on NPR and you will get downvoted. I also like when people downvote facts or observations.

  • lobstahbisque

    I’ve heard it said that the desire of the right to drive down the approval rating of the WHOLE of Congress is a deliberate strategy to make the populace believe that government can’t do anything. Machiavellian I know, but possible.

    • MrNutso

      This has been a talking point about Republicans for some time. “Government doesn’t work. Elect us and we’ll prove it.”

    • nj_v2

      It’s the new Rethuglicon/Teabagger motto…

      “Government doesn’t work. Elect us and we’ll prove it.”

    • brettearle

      You’ve, seriously, heard it from the Right?

      Or, sarcastically, from the Left?

      Sounds like it came from the Left–and was designed to make you believe that it came from the Right.

  • Shag_Wevera

    The best option is impossible. That is dissolution of the union and the formation of a few smaller, like-minded nations. I can’t find common ground with Ted Cruz, or Cletus the slack-jawed yocal.

    • fun bobby

      you don’t think we can all get along? who gets Detroit?

      • Bluejay2fly

        Whoever who draws the shortest straw gets Big D

        • fun bobby

          I think there must be some way we can make Canada take it

          • Bluejay2fly

            I really see that as more of a south of the border kind of city. Maybe before giving it away to Mexico we could put all the illegal aliens there and name it North Mexico City.

          • fun bobby

            if we could move Detroit we could have just towed it into the center of a great lake and use it as a prison island.

          • Bluejay2fly

            Some people living there wouldn’t even notice.

          • fun bobby

            if we could move cities we could send Chicago to France. or better yet we could send it to Iran to destabilize them

          • Bluejay2fly

            I always wanted to set up Israel in the Baja Peninsula. Mexicans look a little middle eastern and the climate is similar. It would have saved us Billions in foreign aid and it would be nice to get rid of TJ. I see no downside.

          • fun bobby

            but then their war with the displaced Mexicans could spill over here

          • Bluejay2fly

            We could have bought it from Mexico with the proceeds from ditching Puerto Rico, Guam, and every other overseas collective which drains money from us. Also, it would make great fusion food Kosher Mexican and California would not have to worry about Israelis crossing the border clogging up CA’s prisons with gangs.

          • fun bobby

            i am all for giving Puerto Rico the boot, its like a tumor that’s metastasizing. I am sure the jewish cartels that sprung up would be just as bad or worse than the current Mexican ones created by our prohibition policy

          • Bluejay2fly

            Legalize many illegal drugs and tax them. Now for border security use the IDF because having been born in Mexican Israel they would be bilingual. Also, it would add a nice cruise port for west coasters because Ensenada and Cabo San Lucas are sh*tholes. Maybe even Mexico could be cleaned enough to make it livable. End all welfare including “prison” and our stoop labor can be done by our drunken peasantry.

          • fun bobby

            i think without the corrupting influence and rampant violence of our prohibition policies mexico would be pretty nice. instead of the balance of illegal immigration we have now I think they would go home in large numbers.just like how Lebanon is a beautiful resort whenever the place is not being blown up by someone. do the isrealies all speak Arabic?. I like your idea about ending prison that would fix a lot of problems

          • HonestDebate1

            The Muslims already have too big of a foothold.

  • MOFYC

    The first thing lawmakers need to realize that those
    advocating the opposite viewpoint ALSO represent hundreds of thousands of
    Americans.

    • John Cedar

      The democrats don’t care about that.

    • John_in_Amherst

      yes. And they lost to Obama twice, last time by 5 million votes, even when the ACA was a centerpiece of the campaign. What happens in a democracy is that the winners of elections set policy. Unless you subscribe to taebagger ethics of “my way or else”.

  • nj_v2

    Compromise with the likes of these people?

    I don’t think so.

    When do you think we’ll see Chris Hedges on an OnPoint panel? (Hint: Don’t hold your breath.)

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_radical_christian_right_and_the_war_on_government_20131006

    The Radical Christian Right and the War on Government

    By Chris Hedges

    There is a desire felt by tens of millions of Americans, lumped into a diffuse and fractious movement known as the Christian right, to destroy the intellectual and scientific rigor of the Enlightenment, radically diminish the role of government to create a theocratic state based on “biblical law,” and force a recalcitrant world to bend to the will of an imperial and “Christian” America. Its public face is on display in the House of Representatives. This ideology, which is the driving force behind the shutdown of the government, calls for the eradication of social “deviants,” beginning with gay men and lesbians, whose sexual orientation, those in the movement say, is a curse and an illness, contaminating the American family and the country. Once these “deviants” are removed, other “deviants,” including Muslims, liberals, feminists, intellectuals, left-wing activists, undocumented workers, poor African-Americans and those dismissed as “nominal Christians”—meaning Christians who do not embrace this peculiar interpretation of the Bible—will also be ruthlessly repressed. The “deviant” government bureaucrats, the “deviant” media, the “deviant” schools and the “deviant” churches, all agents of Satan, will be crushed or radically reformed. The rights of these “deviants” will be annulled. “Christian values” and “family values” will, in the new state, be propagated by all institutions. Education and social welfare will be handed over to the church. Facts and self-criticism will be replaced with relentless indoctrination.

    U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz—whose father is Rafael Cruz, a rabid right-wing Christian preacher and the director of the Purifying Fire International ministry—and legions of the senator’s wealthy supporters, some of whom orchestrated the shutdown, are rooted in a radical Christian ideology known as Dominionism or Christian Reconstructionism. This ideology calls on anointed “Christian” leaders to take over the state and make the goals and laws of the nation “biblical.” It seeks to reduce government to organizing little more than defense, internal security and the protection of property rights. It fuses with the Christian religion the iconography and language of American imperialism and nationalism, along with the cruelest aspects of corporate capitalism. The intellectual and moral hollowness of the ideology, its flagrant distortion and misuse of the Bible, the contradictions that abound within it—its leaders champion small government and a large military, as if the military is not part of government—and its laughable pseudoscience are impervious to reason and fact. And that is why the movement is dangerous.…

    (snipped)

    • Bluejay2fly

      They should be christian with a lower case c which was the same way WFB Jr. described phony conservatives.

  • Bluejay2fly

    I bet nobody talks about the problem of how every body that is in congress spends 30-40% of their time fund raising. If you spend that much time at work outside smoking or playing on the internet you would be fired.

    • fun bobby

      this is more akin to brownnosing at work which is usually pretty effective for job security

    • Yar

      I thought they spent 100% of their time fund raising. You have to admit we have the best congress money can buy.

      • Bluejay2fly

        Maybe the quality of our congressmen has gone downhill like the US Auto industry. Next election I’m getting a good, reliable, hardworking German senator.

        • fun bobby

          maybe we can recruit angela merkel

          • Bluejay2fly

            Apparently, you offended a Greek with that last comment.

          • fun bobby

            i would have thought they were too lazy for downvoting

          • Bluejay2fly

            You must have REALLY ticked him off!

    • brettearle

      It might make sense to lengthen the office, before reelections. would be necessary.

      If only for that reason.

      Of course, there are also bad consequences to do it, the way, that I am suggesting, as well.

  • brettearle

    It is clear, as national media analysts have suggested, that the only way out of this is to open the Government up–on the condition that both sides enter into formal negotiations for spending cuts, revenues, and changes in Entitlements.

    Before this current disaster, Congress’s approval ratings were at an all-time low and were noticeably worse than the President’s approval ratings.

    If there is any other time, where we see a total disregard for the Rights of the American People–above and beyond campaign finance, special interests, and lobbyists–more than we are seeing right now, please step forward and make yourself heard….

    Even though it is the President who is being held hostage, more than the other way around, there needs to be some way to trot out a more conciliatory tone, from the White House–if only than to mollify, publicly, the recalcitrant ignorance of the House.

    DC couldn’t care less what the Public thinks.

    Disgrace is much too soft of a word to describe this pathetic situation…..

    • Bluejay2fly

      Yet reelection ratings for congress is upwards of 80%.

      • nj_v2

        What do you mean by “reelection ratings.”

        The portion of incumbents who get reelected when they run again?

      • brettearle

        Where are your numbers from?

        And, if accurate, how many of the 20% remainder are Democrats vs Republicans?

        Are you suggesting that the low approval ratings for Congress are cooked, eschewed, or otherwise biased?

        • Bluejay2fly

          The approval rating is that low but they still get reelected in record numbers. Remember there are 535 people in congress most Americans could only list about 10 names and certainly not all the reps from their state. Voter apathy and corporate campaign money has a lot to do with it.

          • brettearle

            So, what you are saying is that dissatisfaction does not turn into activism, by going to the Polls?

            If that is what you are saying, then the Public TRULY gets what it deserves.

            Is that what you are saying?

          • Bluejay2fly

            Nothing has changed because people are bought off with gizmo’s and are too distracted to really understand the complex government problems and vote accordingly. Many politicians are running on social issues because that is much easier to form an opinion on than fiscal matters.

          • brettearle

            You make good points.

            But if the Economy collapses, I think you’ll see an obvious change in the polls–if the collapse doesn’t stop the elections, that is….

          • TFRX

            I forget a study–a bunch of years ago–it was summed up with “People disapprove of everybody else’s Congressional reps”.

            I’m paraphrasing, but adding more words to this idea–Americans say “my Senators are fine, yours are the porkbarrel crooks”–simply isn’t necessary.

          • Bluejay2fly

            If America does not need another aircraft carrier yet you are a senator from the district where it is built what would you do? Making matters worse defense contractors will have components for that carrier build in numerous districts in order to increase congressional support. People will throw away national interest for local.

    • Fredlinskip

      Didn’t Dems offer Boehner a way out by agreeing to go forward with House of Reps spending #’s?
      How many concessions would you like Dems to make to hostage-takers?
      Horrible precedent.

      • brettearle

        The point is that THE WELFARE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE transcends how many concessions either side can give or will give.

        I see the House at much more at fault–but, because of the PUBLIC’s RIGHTS, the President has got to find some way to be more conciliatory:

        Otherwise, if the Debt Ceiling is not raised, the economy will collapse.

        What’s more important, the President not being more conciliatory or the Economy collapsing?

        If the House is dysfunctional and adolescent, if not Infantile, then it’ll simply make things worse, if someone doesn’t grow up and becomes less stubborn.

        • Fredlinskip

          Know where you’re coming from.
          Respectfully disagree.
          You don’t legitimize political terrorism.
          Longer range consequences would be devastating (and not that long at that).
          Obama has sustained unprecedented abuse from GOP antics throughout his term. He has compromised in innumerable ways on many issues in the interests of “working with” the right.
          This is not the time to do so.
          What is to be Obama legacy- that he allowed minority to rule?

          • brettearle

            Fred–

            I,too, know where you’re coming.

            But I respectfully disagree, backatya.

            I’m sure that you and I agree on many things.

            But in a major crisis, if you’re in a foxhole with a fellow soldier whom you can’t stand, if the Enemy is the Collapse of the Economy and your mate won’t fight–and may be helping to make the problem even worse–then you have to find a way to coax him to fight, or else your own life is in danger, much less the country’s.

            At that point, LEGACY DOES NOT MATTER.

            You can de-legitimize political terrorism later on–NOT during a National Hemorrhage…

            Besides, I WASN’T suggesting that Obama completely cave….

        • Fredlinskip

          Know where you’re coming from. Respectfully disagree
          You don’t legitimize political terrorism.
          Longer range consequences would be devastating (and not that long at that)

          Obama has sustained unprecedented abuse from GOP antics throughout his term. He has compromised in innumerable ways on many issues in the interests of “working with” the right.
          This is not the time to do so.

          What is to be Obama legacy- that he allowed minority to rule?

          4th time I attempted to post this comment (perhaps I’m being censored for sounding so much like a broken record)

  • TFRX

    After two elections with new Tea Party members getting to DC and finding out that, gawsh, this governing stuff is a hell of a lot easier to rail about than actually do, why is there a candidate here rather than someone who’s been in Congress.

    And since we don’t have any Conservadems on the panel, can I rest assured that none of our guests will be singing the praises of a Max Baucus or Joe Lieberman?

  • William

    The President said he is not going to negotiate so there is not much to discuss.

    • brettearle

      Sir, it is your bias that makes things 50 times worse.

      • William

        So saying what Obama has said, on numerous occasions, is making things worse?

        • brettearle

          Oh no, Obama needs to accept some blame–but not at the expense of a Law vs Shutdown.

          That is MUCH worse.

          • William

            A simple, clean Obama-care law is the starting point. The people demand and should receive to be treated equally under the law. Strip out the special interest exemptions and the GOP will sign off on it.

          • brettearle

            You have NO leg to stand on–if it’s the LAW OF THE LAND.

            If you don’t like the Law, then find a legal way to put it back up for a vote in Congress, in the next possible session.

            Or else find a way for SCOTUS to review it.

            But if you do it this way, then you destroy the rights of the American People.

            Your attitude is ALL EGO without looking at the dire consequences–and, therefore, your position is a DISGRACE.

          • William

            DOMA was the law of the land too.

  • rich4321

    That’s it. In the past, I have voted for a few Republican candidates, NO MORE! From now on, any candidates bare the name GOP, Republican or Tea Party can kiss my vote good-bye!

  • MrStang

    Is it unfair to mention the Howard Dean has advocated eliminating the IPAB board which would help reduce the cost of the ACA?

    “IPAB is one of the reforms in the Affordable Care Act. It’s a board of experts that recommends ways to save money in Medicare if the program’s expenses run above a certain level.

    Dean argues that IPAB can’t work and thus that”getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.” He’s Howard Dean, and he represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party! He also represents McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, a Washington lobbying firm.

    Dean’s op-ed notes his affiliation in the tagline, but it doesn’t say what his clients think about IPAB. For that matter, Dean has refused to disclose which firms he’s representing on behalf of McKenna Long & Aldridge. It seems to be regular practice at theJournal editorial page to let retired Democrats lobbying for the health-care industry write op-eds calling for a repeal of parts of the law that reduce the industry’s profit margin.

    Dean’s bio at his lobbying firm boasts, “With an extensive set of contacts nationally, Governor Dean is uniquely positioned to develop partnerships between industry stakeholders and local governments.” No mention about fighting the handmaidens of special interests, alas.”

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/07/howard-dean-concerned-american-and-non-shill.html

    • Markus6

      It’s hard to find someone who is more one-sided than Dean. He is a wonderful example of the problem. You’ll never hear facts from him that contradict what he wants. He’s as bad as Katrina.

      • MrStang

        Please don’t sully Dean with the Koch-Party person comparisons. Dean is more nuanced regarding this issue though he doesn’t get a pass on the industry lobbying. Katrina on the other hand offers bupkus plus hot-air…can’t run a government properly with mediocre rage merchants.

  • ThirdWayForward

    If a terrorist group managed to shut down the US government and destroy its credit rating, we would be all over them in a nanosecond and bombing them back to the stone age.

    But when the Republicans do it, the media roll over in their safe, smug moral equivalence and these political hostage takers get away with economic murder.

    A straight up vote on funding the govt would restore it in 15 minutes. The votes are there to end this idiocy — let’s put to an open vote. There is no reason that a minority of one party should be able to hold the entire government hostage.

    NEVER EVER VOTE REPUBLICAN.
    It only encourages these political terrorists.

  • Twinkie McGovern

    Tom, “the middle” hasn’t fallen out of this situation; the middle ground is occupied by the democrats. Please try not to suggest that there is a conflict between “polarized” extremists. The only extreme positions in this fiasco are occupied by Republicans,

    • HonestDebate1

      This is the first time in the history of shutdowns (there have been many) that the President has refused to speak to the opposition. It’s never ever happened.

      • Marc Prufer

        This is the first time that there is such an unrelenting unwillingness of the opposition to negotiate in good faith.

        • HonestDebate1

          Not even close, the democrats have always behaved this way.

    • William

      What is extreme about demand equal treatment under the law? Obama gives his special interest donors exemptions but tells everyone else tough luck? It is all about equality. The GOP wants a clean law and not something that caters to rich, special interest donors.

      • Marc Prufer

        Take it up with the Supreme Court.

        • William

          Separate but equal…yes….apparently they are not perfect huh?

  • TFRX

    Let’s not talk about “the middle” today without remembering how the right wing has become much more extreme since the days of even Saint Ronald Reagan.

    And let’s not be so caught up in “comity” and “conversation” and “polite” that good policy is discarded. Good policy is the goal.

    If the screaming from the right continues, who cares? More importantly, what would it take to stop their poutrage, and how far have they moved the goalposts in the last four years?

  • idakeir

    PLEASE call it the Affordable Care Act, so people can think about it rationally.

  • ToyYoda

    Considering how much the extreme right also believe in gold, and want to get rid of the feds, I wonder how much the extreme right’s behavior is financially motivated (either by a spike in gold price if US defaults / or by recouping their losses from the ~25% drop in gold prices this year.)

  • MrNutso

    Tell me Katrina, since Republicans gained control of the House, what has the President gotten?

    • Marc Prufer

      The worst least productive Congress ever!

      • HonestDebate1

        The less they do the more I like them.

  • J__o__h__n

    Obama “got everything he wanted” — why is this idiot on the air? There are better conservative guests.

    • TFRX

      Would you claim “There are better conservative candidates?

      • J__o__h__n

        Posner is always thought provoking. Pat Buchanan is nuts but at least he isn’t an idiot. I actually liked Tony Blankly. I’m sure there are a few others.

  • MrStang

    Tom this Koch Party person will speak in hyperbole and think she’s spousing wisdom.

  • adks12020

    What is Pierson talking about? Obama has gotten everything he wants? Is she serious?

    • Marc Prufer

      Delusional she is!

  • Stephen706

    Amazing–and realizing that NPR is more liberal and left leaning, still amazing!!! The Republicans want to negotiate and the Dems/Pres want to not talk at all, and the blame is on the Republicans!!!–Seriously. Y’all have lost your mind.
    Spending starts in the House. We have not had a real budget. We have hit this debt ceiling time and time again, with the Dems/Pres making promises that have not been kept as well–but no one seems to see that. Not even your guests or the host.
    Dems want a “clean bill” with no conditions and then will talk???–sounds like dealing with North Korea!!! Empty promises!
    And who is ordering all of the inconvenience and disruption to the people–Pres owns the Executive Branch and last I checked Dept of Interior is there.
    We are $17T in debt or $53000 per citizen. We are still accumulating debt! This is not sustainable. Our leaders are not being accountable or responsible or even CARE. They are playing games with we the people as the suckers! We need to do different. ACA is the law of the land–fine, respect it and keep it… just figure out how to realistically fund it and everything else NEEDED (not desired, needed) and without raising taxes any further so we can start rolling the debt clock backwards.
    Doing anything else is Einstein’s definition of Insanity in play

    • Stephen706

      Or another way to look at this is Charlie Brown trying to kick the football that Lucy (the Dem/Pres) is holding…
      Seriously, they need to come to conference. Keep ACA and find a way to make all work for the greater good while not killing our future

      • jefe68

        Another way to look at it that a minority of Congressional members are using the debt ceiling as a threat because they have not won an election. This is not negotiating, it’s hostage taking.

        • Stephen706

          It goes both ways… as the founding fathers designed, this as a representative republic. Spending begins in the House.
          Want your cake–come to the table. Why do we need to recklessly continue our overspending ways

          • TFRX

            Why can’t this “Center right” country ever address this reckless overspending stuff when all those center-right folks are in the White House and both houses of Congress?

          • HonestDebate1

            Because the center right are big spenders too.

  • TFRX

    FreedomWorks?

    Please get some analysis on air this hour about FreedomWorks from a guest who is not 1) taking the slot of a liberal 2) being the host or 3) has a vested interest in getting Republicans elected.

  • J__o__h__n

    Why am I tempted to send Congressman Sessions a check?

  • DeJay79

    Katrina Pierson “Obama has gotten everything he has wanted since 2008″

    WHAAA! where has this women been living? I am absolutely sure that he has wanted much more and different things than what has happened in our government.

    The real fact is that No One has gotten exactly what they have wanted for a while.

    Ms. Pierson’s perspective is dangerously one sided

    • TFRX

      She’s been living in the Dallas exurbs, it appears.

      And did she talk about “choosing” TX-32? I’d like to know how long ago she moved there.

      • J__o__h__n

        “Katrina is a highly skilled professional visionary
        with 12 years experience in an intense, fast paced work environment.”
        http://www.piersonconsultinggroup.com/#!about2/c4nz

        • TFRX

          Visionary? She’s spent the last dozen years soaking in a tub, attached to electrodes, telling Tom Cruise that “person X is going to commit a crime”?

        • Glenn LaVertu

          That maybe true but none of her positions have been supported. Not to say that the others are, just to say that if one is as vehemently anti-something, some facts need to be used (this particular point especially). This is unfortunately the modus operandi of the Tea-Party.
          She is skewing definitions and ideas to look favorable, or even “smart”. Making sweeping assumptions as the Tea Party does is not smart.

    • MrNutso

      Even if arguably true between 2009 and 2011, why is that unfair. If one party controls both houses of Congress and the Presidency, why can they not enact their prefered legislation?

  • MrStang

    So the Medical Device Lobby, The Insurance Companies, The Koch/energy Lobby are represented.
    Who represents the consumer, the People, the 99%? Not this bunch.

  • ThirdWayForward

    Katrina Pierson is the best argument for jettisoning Texas from the Union that has yet been made.

    Tom, do press her on exactly what it is about Obama’s health care reform that she objects to. The irony of all this is that this health care reform is patterned on Republican schemes that avoid comprehensive, Medicare-style single-payer systems. Whatever Obama does, including incorporating traditional Republican ideas, the right will decry and oppose simply because it’s Obama. You have to realize that this is purely a moronic, tribal thing with them — there is no intellectual or moral content to their opposition. It is why they resort to these nihilistic hostage-taking tactics. This is why it is impossible to reason or negotiate with the Tea Party Republicans. They are fomenting disorder because they do not want Obama to succeed in any way. When the goal of one side is almost exclusively to destroy the other, then no agreements can be met.

    • Glenn LaVertu

      OMG yes.

    • MrStang

      Indeed. Obamacare/Affordable Care Act is the embodiment of compromise.

  • TFRX

    Okay, we have a “Grand Bargain” liberal here, in the person of Howard Dean.

    I didn’t read much about Dean’s positions lately, but I’d hoped that OnPoint staffers might have figured this out before airtime.

    If this is an “all sides” conversation, can Tom have booked a liberal who doesn’t want to give away SocSec or Medicare because about everyone inside the Belway says it’s inevitable?

    • thequietkid10

      So what’s your plan, stick your fingers in your ears and shut “blah blah blah” I can’t hear you? Declare that you got yours, and let the system collapse when I retire?

      Social Security and Medicare equal about 50% of our budget, we are 17 trillion in debt and growing. And each generation is having fewer and fewer children to support a growing retirement population.

      When Social Security was first enacted, the average person died before they could collect it. It was never intended to provide a ten year vacation at the end of ones life.

      We aren’t taxing the one percent out of this one, even if we all wanted to.

      For the record, I would accept a grand bargain if we got serious about cutting government.

      • TFRX

        My Plan? Keep JAQing it. Please, put up more scare numbers with no percentages, no history, just a “OMGWeHaveToStopItRIGHTNOW!!!one!!11!, when a Democrat is in the White House.

        I want a press corps not full of lemmings who are saying this and can be caught out by someone just sitting at a keyboard in Anyburb USA. I want some institutional memory in our media about how all this stuff is only a goddamn crisis when a Clinton or Obama is in the White House.

        Start your own thread about fake bargains and fake crises.

  • MrNutso

    Katrina, we have a representative republic, not a direct democracy. If you don’t like the law, get your side to win both houses of congress and the presidency and then you can f@ck the country.

  • TFRX

    “Debate monopolized by Democrats”, per Pierson?

    This is getting cuh-ray-zee! I don’t know much more about what passes for the things that white-collar consulatants need to say at cocktail parties, but boy howdy, I want to hear from a normative conservative Texan. Provided one exists any longer.

    Please get Hank Hill on line one.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Lets get back to facts. The affordable care act was passed into law and survived the test if the Supreme Court. Negotiating to undo it while threatening federal default and risking setting our anemic recovery back and putting hindreds of thousands of people out of work is reckless and amounts to economic terrorism. The t party is no more than an angery mob willing to set the house on fire because the don’t like their real estate taxes. Boehner needs to stop letting the t party minority tail from wagging the dog and focus on improving the ACA and not destroying it and playing chicken with the lives of millions of people.

  • d clark

    OK now I’m going to have to be sexist. I looked at Ms. Pierson’s website and conclude she is a most attractive FASCIST!

  • Yar

    Say exactly what the CR is! It currently is a bill to keep the government open through December. Why would anyone negotiate over a short term spending bill which is only being used because congress won’t negotiate a budget.

    • anamaria23

      Didn’t the Senate present a budget to the House in May and 18 times the Speaker refused to bring it to conference? The last amount presented was just what the Repubs were asking for. Then, the Speaker called conference 15 minutes before shutdown. This is according to Congressman Chris VonHollen.

  • MrStang

    Gov Dean Democrats are not perfect but please stop this nonsense about them being fiscally irresponsible.

    “Debt and Deficit. In the past 17 Presidential terms, nine were GOP led and eight Democratic. Of nine GOP Presidents, six added to debt/GDP and deficit/GDP as a percent. The only three that did not, had a Democratic House and Senate. Of eight Democrats, each one, reduced deficit/GDP and debt/GDP as a percent. That is 66 years of rhetoric of fiscal responsibility with zero net results for GOP. What makes matters even worse, is the fact that the president who added a historical 20.7% to the debt has one unique aspect of his presidency – President G. W. Bush had a GOP majority House and Senate.

    Spending. The Republican Party often talks about financial responsibility, but did you know that since 1978-2011, spending has gone up 9.9% under Democrats versus 12.1% under GOP.

    Federal Debt. Republicans love to tell us how they will not close tax loopholes on millionaires and billionaires, yet never bring to our attention that from 1978-2011 debt went up 4.2% under Democrats versus 36.4% under the GOP.

    GDP. The only thing that the Democrats have a higher numerical yield than the GOP led administrations, is the GDP. It’s a good thing to have it at 12.6% versus a GOP 10.7%. From 1960 to 2005 the gross domestic product measured in year-2000 dollars rose an average of $165 billion a year under Republican presidents and $212 billion a year under Democrats.

    Big Government. Federal spending (aka “big government”): It has gone up an average of about $50 billion a year under presidents of both parties. But that breaks down as $35 billion a year under Democratic presidents and $60 billion under Republicans. If you assume that it takes a year for a president’s policies to take effect, Democrats have raised spending by $40 billion a year and Republicans by $55 billion.

    Federal Deficit. Under Republican presidents since 1960, the federal deficit has averaged $131 billion a year. Under Democrats, that figure is $30 billion. In an average Republican year, the deficit has grown by $36 billion. In the average Democratic year it has shrunk by $25 billion.

    National Debt. The national debt has gone up more than $200 billion a year undhttp://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/06/02/the-black-and-white-numbers-democrats-are-better-than-republicans/er Republican presidents and less than $100 billion a year under Democrats.

    Inflation and Unemployment. Democratic presidents have a better record on inflation (averaging 3.13 percent compared with 3.89 percent for Republicans) and on unemployment (5.33 percent versus 6.38 percent). Unemployment went down in the average Democratic year, up in the average Republican one.

    Outcome: Based on the data, Democrats have had a much more successful run when it comes to economy, job creation, debt and deficit, and shockingly, even spending.”

    • TFRX

      Dean has spent too long inside the Beltway and too long getting guest spots on shows where certain passwords need to be said. One of those is “Democrats are trying to mend their wastrel ways.”

      It’s almost like the scene in Horsefeathers where Chico asks Groucho for a password, and it devolves into “I can no let-a you in until you say Swordfish”.

    • Stephen706

      Exactly right… but the main bottomline is STOP THE MADNESS once and for all…
      This is the best time to actually negotiate th future of this country financially. With a Dem Senate and Pres and a GOP House

  • Bigtruck

    Katrina Pearson and her ilks selfish, small mindedness is the problem. Grow up.

  • Yar

    If single payer was put before the people it would pass. So there.

  • MrNutso

    Well Vin Weber, do you think social security, medicare would pass congress today, and if not these programs should be scrapped.

  • MrNutso

    Come on Tom, challenge these liars. Make them cite facts that the majority of Americans don’t support ACA.

    • OnPointComments

      There has never been a poll that showed the majority of Americans support the ACA. Yes, they like this part or that part, and maybe they wish it did this or that, but the law that was passed and upheld by the Supreme Court has never had the support of the majority of Americans.

      • J__o__h__n

        Everyone likes all the benefits but doesn’t want to pay for it. That would probably be true of anything.

        • HonestDebate1

          Free stuff always sells.

        • thequietkid10

          There is no such thing as free, especially when it comes from the government. It comes out of your pocket, or it comes out of the people who are employing you and/or competing for your services.

    • dirq

      A majority of Americans support sensible gun laws, but, well…
      Well, you don’t see democrats shutting down the government in order to get them, now do you?

      • HonestDebate1

        No we have Obama issuing EO’s because Congress (the people) will not support stricter gun laws. More guns equals less crime.

  • MrStang

    A large percentage of people would like single-payer or a public option.

  • William

    Opposition is really not unusual against certain laws. Obama and the Democrats ignored the DOMA law because they said it was unpopular, even though they swore a oath to upload all laws. So, now, the GOP is doing the same thing based on what the majority of American people want.

  • J__o__h__n

    Pierson is now explaining that we have representatives to make laws after she was just claiming Obama care was not valid as the country didn’t have a say on it. She is the least informed guest ever to appear on this show. Please don’t waste my time with her ever again.

    • Marc Prufer

      Agreed! Perhaps that is why we’re in this mess?

    • NewtonWhale

      I think this cartoon fairly describes the Tea Party Terrorists and the media hacks who aid and abet them.

      • keltcrusader

        to a capital “TP”

  • MrStang

    This Koch-Party person is a voice from deep inside the republican Id.

  • Marc Prufer

    The President is the ONLY person in Washington elected by all of the people. Not some tea party representative that has a district of a few thousand people.

    • William

      If there was evidence that a government agency abused their power to silence certain political organizations prior to an election would that make the election of a political official questionable?

      • Marc Prufer

        Bill, what are you suggesting — is it about the IRS — that has been duly investigated and adjudicated — is there something more to your query than that?

        • William

          Where are the people doing the perp walk?

  • MrNutso

    Tom, how about pointing out that Pierson is advocating that those without health insurance or who were previously uninsurable should not have it.

  • rich4321

    Oh, nice, ACA was past as the law, now they have buyer’s demorse. And to the guest Katrina and her kinds, STOP USING AMERICAN PEOPLE AS their argument! I and many of my friends are American people, we DON’T take your view!

  • TFRX

    “It looks like the President has taken his ball and gone home.”

    Please, Pierson, don’t pretend that the idea of taking last-ditch after-the-fact tantrums to stop a bill that was passed and then upheld by the Supreme Court is anything like normative.

    “I’m not going to let you getaway with that, because the Koch Brrs don’t fund the Tea Party.”

    Temper, temper, Pierson. Let’s have a talk about your astroturf groups. The more we look into it, the worse you look.

  • ThirdWayForward

    The Forbes poll a week ago indicates that “only one-third of Americans support repealing, defunding, or delaying Obamacare”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/30/new-poll-only-one-third-of-americans-support-repealing-defunding-or-delaying-obamacare/

    The right wing radicals are very selective in the polls that they want to act on. Truth has never been an obstacle for these ideologues.

    Howard Dean is entirely correct — the right does not want health care reform implemented exactly because, like Medicare, people will see that they like it, despite all of the incessant negative propaganda against it.

  • Dab200

    The rule requiring 60! votes if the senate is not democratic. 51 is a simple majority and a true democracy!

  • fionnmaccumhailus

    Sometimes politicians are called on to do the right thing in the face of public opinion. All the changes of the past century had large numbers and sometimes majorities of the Americans against them. And we are better for the change. The #ACA is one of those times when it is the right thing to do and way overdue

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    The Republicans have offered NOTHING. Shut down the government but NOT the roll out of “Obamacare” by linking it to passing the continuing resolution. Where are the brains behind that?

  • Michiganjf

    TOM,
    Why do you keep letting the Tea-party guest claim full ownership of those who say “they don’t like Obamacare???!!!”

    First, there’s a fifteen percent swing in the polls if you simply call it “the Affordable Care Act,” then you have to take into account all the LIBERALS who wanted the legislation to go further, as in a single payer system!!

    That leaves the Tea Party perspective in the MINORITY, not the majority!

    Stop giving this fanatic a pass on her gibberish!

    • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

      And then there’s all of the misinformation being disseminated by republican activist groups the sway the polls. Then there’s people like me who have issues with it but would not repeal it, but rather optimize it be that via single payer option or not. You just don’t accept invitations to a working group with a gun to your kids heads.

    • sickofthechit

      It’s not just gibberish, it’s giibberriissshhhee

  • John Smith Millions

    Republicans take good advantage of American ignorance about the Affordable Care Act, and in fact, groups funded by the Koch Brothers and friends have run ads sowing further confusion. The Tea Party and Republicans know they can’t win on their actual positions, so they wrap them in words about ‘government overreach’ and ‘fiscal responsibility.’ Meanwhile, the ACA is law, the exchanges are up and running, and millions of people (including entrepreneurs) are looking forward to getting coverage without being turned away due to a pre-existing condition.

    Tell someone exactly what the ACA does and see how their reflexive anti-”Obamacare” position softens very quickly.

    • TFRX

      But we have it on Chuck Todd’s authority that the press’ job isn’t to tell the public what the ACA does, or when the GOP is lying about it.

      I can’t make up enough stupid things about our press corps. “Upchuck” is fighting to be the hood ornament of stupid.

  • Marc Prufer

    These folks are misunderstanding the process of our Democratic Republic where the people are represented in Congress and Laws are passed by majority rule.

  • Jim

    Ignorant and whining adults should have a third party.

  • Fred_in_Newton_MA

    Keep talking, Katrina. You’re digging a deep hole.

    P.S. Vin Weber – is it not true that a MAJORITY of the American People are NOT against government involvement in healthcare? How many people favor Obamacare OR Single Payer healthcare, i.e. Medicare-For-All? What’s the real breakdown of the polling numbers?

  • DeJay79

    To the common person on the street is asked is they prefer the affordable care act or Obamacare, They Make a choice!

    That show just how much the GOP has branded Obamacare as bad if you are a republican.

    BUT!

    If you ask those same people about the specific parts of the law the majority support most or all of it.

    My point is that a poll that simple ask people if they support Obamacare then the results are going to be untrue.

  • dirq

    Let’s be clear- harming your country on purpose is unpatriotic. People who love their country should not do it. it’s as simple as that. People who love their country should not threaten their country either. And that is what the GOP has done, and is doing.
    They made their demands- repeal Obamacare- and made their threats- or else: Or else the government shuts down, or else the nation defaults on its debts. And now they have made good on their first threat to harm the nation- the government is shut down.

    Explain to me how people who presumably love their country could ever do that.

    • John_in_Amherst

      unpatriotic is too kind. This is treason

  • Roy-in-Boise

    If candidates seek office calling themselves Tea Party Candidates first and Republicans second, then they should be a stand alone political party. Various (state level) Secretary of States around the nation need to look into this. Truth in lableing has a place in elections too!

  • RickinWNY

    Since when does the Tea Party minority in the house get the “line item veto”? No president has ever had that power, regardless of the size of their majority!

  • TFRX

    And another health-care company blames something on the ACA, per the caller at :45m.

    Caller David seems to have an odd mix of things he avows he’s seen that affect him, and now adds in things he’s “heard” about other people.

    Tom, insurance companies lie and blame things on the ACA all the time. You had a guest who said as much last week. You can say that now. It’s not breaking the rules of PublicRadioPolite.

    And how many minutes do I need to listen to public radio before I have to introduce the idea that I don’t have to stay in a crap job because I’m worried about the next job having even worse healthcare?

  • HonestDebate1

    The shutdown does not mean default. Revenue continues to come in and the bills can be paid.

    • cnebbe

      The shutdown means poor function and excess expense.

      • HonestDebate1

        True but continuing down the same path we’ve been on means poorer function and unfathomable expense.

        • TFRX

          Fine; we await your heroic right wingers (every one of which is a conservative when a candidate, but too weak-kneed wussy moderate after they’re gone) to fix it when one is in t the White House.

          Just like last timenever.

        • cnebbe

          You do realize that this shutdown, though, is not about the budget. It’s only about the ACA, which is funded. If you want less debt, we are going to need to talk about taxes in addition to spending.

          • HonestDebate1

            We already raised taxes. there is no possible way to tax our way out. No way, no how.

          • cnebbe

            What taxes are those that you are referring to?

          • HonestDebate1

            The top rate was raised and Obamacare was ruled a tax. There are others as well.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    So did I hear correctly… Furloughed workers were told they will be paid for furloughed days… So in the interest of economic responsibility were paying people for not delivering public services… To prove what point and punish whom?

    I guess it’s true… Life imitates art. You can’t make stuff like this up!

    • BHA_in_Vermont

      So true, we can only hope they will be able to cover the backlog of work they will have, thus earning the back pay. People don’t see an immediate crash with the government essentially shut down but fail to recognize that what we can “do without” for a couple of days isn’t necessarily something we can do without “forever”. The longer these people are not on the job, the more likely the backlog will be insurmountable.

      • TFRX

        I have been in an office run so poorly and so short of resources that, after a week’s vacation, everything that I handed off to others was still waiting on my desk.

        That’s what our civil servants will be dealing with, but through no fault of their own.

        And the “reasonable” righties will bitch about “see, gummint is inefficient” over it. I think P.J. (“I used to be funny once”) O’Rourke will say something first.

        • sickofthechit

          I don’t remember when pj was ever funny.

  • joseph makela

    and this is just about the insurance aspect!

    hard to gloat, because as a Canadian we do pay for it…
    thing is we actually like eachother…
    seems like you all hate your fellow citizens OVER HEALTHCARE!

  • William

    But John, you shifted the financial burden from you to Dave. How is that fair?

  • MatthewNashville

    Of course BCBS is going to make ACA sound awful in the case of the caller from Kentucky, they don’t want you to like it.

  • Yar

    I haven’t seen a bill funding the EPA!

  • MrStang

    No Compromising with fools. You get foolishness.

  • J__o__h__n

    She is now calling for compromise yet the reason she claims she is running is that her opponent has been caving in to the Democrats.

  • jefe68

    I can not believe she just said the President should grow up.
    When she’s a member of the tea party, who act like petulant adolescents.

    • brettearle

      It is common pathology to accuse others of what you, yourself, are guilty of.

      • TFRX

        I’m not projecting, but I’m pretty sure you are!

        • brettearle

          I get it?

          (Of course, all projection aside, I’m sure you weren’t projecting when you read my word, `you’, in the above comment, to be referring to `she’, and nobody else.)

          • TFRX

            (I wasn’t talking about any one person, just throwing an old joke out there.)

          • brettearle

            Touche!

  • MrStang

    Who is “We” Katrina?

    • brettearle

      Her and Katrina vanden Heuvel.

      (A little humor ought to be placed, in the Forum, during dark times)

    • HonestDebate1

      Who is the “single” payer everybody here pines for?

  • RickinWNY

    If universal health insurance, and especially a single payer system is so costly that it would bankrupt the USA, why hasn’t Canada gone bust in the past 45 years? Seems that for some reason Canadians pay half us much, live longer and have lower infant mortality than Americans and no Canadian goes bankrupt due to a health issue. How could that “terrifying” system not work for the USA?

    • joseph makela

      it is an integral piece of our social fabric,
      with all our differences, bro – health care is a non issue here in can do Canada!
      except of course for the rising costs(always administrative-right?)
      sure we pay 35%nettax on salary. but you dont miss what you dont have.
      USA is confused, you are exceptional in that you hate your fellow citizen.

      • sickofthechit

        We don’t hate our fellow citizens, we just don’t realize we are (or should be) all in this together.

  • cnebbe

    They should hold a vote. There’s no benefit for Obama or the Democrats in compromising at this point. It will not make the tea party work with him better – they negotiate like Yassir Arafat always did. Katrina is an illustration of the biggest problem with America.

  • Eric A Stratton

    I can only hope the Tea Party will lose. This is legislation that went through, was supported by the supreme court. The Tea Party lost. They need to quick acting like children and they need to fund the whole government, not just the parts they don’t like. They’re acting like cowards.

    • brettearle

      It is pretty amazing, isn’t it–when children and cowards can hold a country hostage?

  • TFRX

    Pierson:

    “We need compromise from Obama. The president needs to grow up.”

    Wow. Just a discredited talking-points machine with good breath control, isn’t she?

    At some point I’d love a word count on her v. everyone else combined this hour.

  • rich4321

    The President needs to grow up? HA, holding the nation hostage is very mature I suppose. It’s a criminal act!

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    I am an American and *I* want the Affordable Care Act, only because we don’t have Single Payer.

    - The ONLY reason my 20 year old daughter, basically disabled by migraines, can be on my insurance is BECAUSE the ACA mandated children can be on their parents’ insurance to the age of 26. What private insurance company would insure someone with a preexisting disability (illegal under the ACA)? And if they did, what would it cost?

    - I recently involuntarily retired due to a large layoff. I can still buy insurance through my prior employer’s plans. The cheapest (high deductible, $1K/person cap on drugs) costs $17K a year for my family, the most “generous” costs $28K. BOTH are more than my retirement. My wife has Rheumatoid Arthritis and the drug that keeps her out of a wheelchair costs $16K a year without insurance, $900 when I was employed, it will be more under the “retired” plans.

    The price for coverage under the Vermont exchanges is more than the “active employee” price but less than the “retired employee price” AND there is an income sensitivity component which DOES NOT exist with the plans offered by my prior employer.

    John Boehner does NOT speaks for “Americans” he speaks for SOME Americans. And fearing for his hold on the speakership, kowtows to the Tea Party in hopes of keeping it.

    Obama NEEDS to clearly lay out the ACA to the American people. The VERY vocal opponents are making a lot of “it is BAD” noise, no facts, just ideology.

  • Yar

    The biggest reason for personal bankruptcy is unpaid health expenses. Maybe this is the same for the nation.

  • adks12020

    OK, I don’t agree with Vin Weber’s stances on the issues but at least he is rational. Why can’t more Republicans like him stand up and tell the Tea Partiers to shut it?

  • Tim from Massachusetts

    These conversations are really only interesting until someone, (today it was a caller), starts insulting one of the guests’ parties, (today, calling the Tea Party “the spoiled child”). You already know that having three politically-charged guests is going to result in arguments and people interrupting each other, but you’ve gotta clamp down on the name-calling. Instead, you guided the question back to the guest: “How do you respond to the ‘spoiled child’ analogy?” That’s when I turned the radio off.

    • sickofthechit

      Why? They are behaving like spoiled children. The law (ACA) was duly passed, duly signed by the President and upheld by the United States Supreme Court. Do we need the Pope to weigh in as well? charles a. bowsher

  • Kathy

    If Obama didn’t compromise, where in the ACA is the public option? The law itself was pre-compromised: a free market privatized plan instead of the far more sensible single payer or national health service that every other civilized country has.

    • sickofthechit

      Or just start lowering the Medicare age 5 years every couple of years. Before you know it, everyone is covered and it has been done gradually.

  • MatthewNashville

    BCBS doesn’t want you to like ACA. Of course they are going to offer you a policy that is amazing, but they wouldn’t have offered it if ACA hadn’t been written into law.

    • sickofthechit

      Actually, from what I have heard, the ACA policies are expanding coverage for substance abuse and other items to levels not previously offered so comparison of last years plan to this years is difficult and inaccurate. charles a. bowsher

  • nlpnt

    Ms. Pierson is talking about what the President “needs” to do like a mother scolding a misbehaving child and talks about the Republicans sticking to their position.
    She has it almost exactly backwards.

    It would be nice if Obama *DID* stick to his guns for once, or, barring that, if the Republicans would stay in their position, accept a win and acknowledge the President HAS compromised, and not shift constantly further right to keep trying to get more and more out of him.

    • ThirdWayForward

      Because their primary goal is to make Obama fail, whenever he tacks right and tries to compromise with them, they simply move the goalposts and demand more.

      It’s a less-than-zero-sum game in which the goal is to lose less than the other player — the goal is to maximize the difference between the other player’s score and one’s own, even if both players are harmed in absolute terms. It means that hurting the other player may be the most effective way of winning the game.

      We think that this explains a great deal of conservative politics in the Obama era — they are so wrapped up in their own political tribalisms that they are willing to damage government, economy, and country to try to maintain and increase their power.

      When the other side resorts to taking hostages, you can’t start giving them what they want — the only way out is to subdue them (politically, electorally). This is why Obama and other Democrats need to be out there calling out the obstructionists.

    • sickofthechit

      In Kentucky we call it “bass ackwards”.

  • William

    Gov. Dean, wow….do you man that 80 billion a month the Fed pumps into Wall Street each month is not enough for those guys?….how has that worked out for main street?

  • Jim

    What the heck? there is NO RISK FOR DEFAULT????

    WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG WITH THIS IGNORANT WOMAN?????

    • Erica

      I came here exactly to say this. This woman is an ignorant idiot.

    • dirq

      The simplest answer is she is out of her mind.

    • TFRX

      An open question to white-collar Dallasites: Is Pierson really one of you? Can’t someone say something that makes me think Dallas isn’t crazy?

      (And, no, “She’s jes’ exaggeratin’, that’s all” isn’t gonna cut it.)

    • brettearle

      The fact that she is yet to undergo ElectroConvulsive Therapy, this week.

      • sickofthechit

        I think she is a little more overdue than a week.

        • brettearle

          I stand corrected.

    • jimino

      Facts do not matter to zealots like her. The only way to force them to operate in the fact-based universe in connection with this issue is to systematically reduce or eliminate every possible entity in their Congressional district that is supported by federal dollars, e.g. military installation, weapons manufacturers, etc. In other words, actually give them what they claim they want and see how reality affects their world view.

  • ThirdWayForward

    The main reasons that we are in this political mess are:

    1) gerrymandering of US electoral districts, which gave the Republican Party a majority of seats in the House of Representatives, despite losing the popular vote (more people voted for Democrats in House races, but because state Republicans redrew the districts, they have a majority of seats).

    2) the capture of the Republican party by the radical conservative Tea Party. The so-called Gingrich-Hastert rule, the requirement of “a majority of the majority”, which has been employed by Republican speakers means that the Tea Party zombies have much more leverage over national politics than their constituent voter numbers would justify. The Hastert rule is anti-democratic and anti-compromise, and it feeds obstructionist political tactics.

    It allows a political tendency, which maybe has the support of 20-25% of the electorate to bring the government to a standstill. They think they can get their way because they are ruthless and have nothing to lose.

    3) Easy filibuster in the Senate, which means that even if a majority of Senators support legislation, votes can be prevented.

    • Jo Bleaux

      Don’t forget the inherent lack of balance in the Senate. Wyoming has the same representation as California, which has between 35 and 40 times as many voters. When this is combined with the filibuster, it means a smallish minority can control the Senate.

      • ThirdWayForward

        For a nation that prides itself on our democracy, there are certainly way too many of our political customs that are not democratic.

        The architects of the American Revolution were among the finest thinkers that the 18th century could provide, and their design has usually served us well, but this shouldn’t stop us from continually trying to improve the system.

        The problem with reforming a decision-making system, however, is that the reforms must be enacted by the existing system. Obstruction is easy, reform difficult.

    • William

      4. IRS acting under orders of Democratic operatives attack TP groups prior to 2012 election.

      • TFRX

        Don’t learn anything now, troll.

        • William

          Defeated by your inability to present facts, troll.

      • Marc Prufer

        Faux scandal — yeah we got it — bla bla bla!

    • BHA_in_Vermont

      The “majority of the majority” should be made illegal. It is, at best, immoral. The politicians are there to run the government for ALL Americans, not just those in the majority and not just for the majority of those in the majority. It is a nearly guaranteed “no compromise” action. Anything that only a minority of the majority will vote for NEVER sees the light of day.

  • Guest

    Katrina.. I think you need to go back to school and take macro 101… seriously.. you are NOT fit to be a politician. Maybe you should go back to being a housewife.

  • Yar

    Maybe we can sell an Aircraft carrier to China to pay our bills.

  • J.Ko

    Did she say there are more ways to have choices than government overhaul? Has she noticed the many rules and regs passed on behalf of the corp lobbyists to limit choice that legislators panhandle to for their parties? If the tea party would pull their heads out they’d realize they and the occupiers are really on the same side. Then maybe we could get our democracy back.

  • AC

    heavens. that was really mature. the ‘little baby’. lol. she’s kind of the tea kettle calling the pot black!

    • J__o__h__n

      tea bag

    • HonestDebate1

      Pot or kettle, take your pick. Either way we are in hot water.

  • MarkVII88

    I will now do my impression of Katrina Pierson for this entire show: Insert fingers in ears…Close eyes…La La La La La, I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you…La La La La La…Crazy!

  • MrStang

    2014 cannot come too soon. I hope Americans see how stupid crazy and intolerant these Republicans are. May they be kicked out of the House in 2014.

    • dirq

      Sadly, as another responder pointed out, with gerrymandered districts, the far right politicians are coming from districts filled with crazy constituents. There’s no guarantee they’ll all disappear. Hopefully they’ll lose their majority, though.

    • Marc Prufer

      They’ve practically cemented themselves in through their district gerrymandering. The only way to get rid of them now is to wait another 8 years when there’s another census but we have to take back the state legislatures. Or if they actually default — then people may wake up to at least ensure that one of them is never elected again.

  • d clark

    Wow, Katrina actually just said that the debt limit is imaginary and no real consequence will come from default. There is NOTHING we can do with these delusional TEA PARTY TALIBAN TERRORISTS. They must be defeated and banished!

    • dirq

      Let’s just stick with defeated. This is a free country, even for people with terrible ideas.

    • Marc Prufer

      Delusional is the word!

  • MrStang

    Katrina even signed off with a lie about the IRS.

  • MsAbila

    It is sickening to listen to the scare-tactics. Telling us that the gov’t won’t pay social security to recipients is just one of them.

    If the gov’t doesn’t want to pay its bills perhaps it shouldn’t be collecting taxes…. how about that?

    • Marc Prufer

      You haven’t got it right — but you may have to find out the hard way — you know the old saying – “some people if they don’t know — you can’t teach them.”

  • MrStang

    And Weber signs off equating Tip O’Neil and John Boehner.
    just pathologically wrong.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Yeah, Tip O’Neil was dealing with Reagan — an honest broker.

  • http://profiles.google.com/barry.kort Barry Kort

    There is a way out of this systemic dysfunctionality of government, but it’s not going to emerge from negotiations.

    It’s going to emerge from fundamental research into the root causes of systemic dysfunctionality.

    • HonestDebate1

      The Liberty Amendments are the way to go.

  • ThirdWayForward

    Gridlock is the result of largely informal practices (Senate filibuster, House Hastert rule) that have been mainly used by Republicans to obstruct and take hostages.

    We need reforms that abolish these practices. If signing a discharge petition were secret/anonymous, then representatives could vote their consciences and not tow the party line, and the Hastert rule would be unenforceable. This would be technically an easy system to implement for a body like Congress.

    We would be in a much, much better place politically if this kind of rules change could be enacted — it would change the dynamics in Congress.

    • http://profiles.google.com/barry.kort Barry Kort

      Reforming the rules may be desirable, but it only defers the problem, because no matter what the rules are, the players will invariably discover novel ways to game the system.

    • Marc Prufer

      Fox news is definitely responsible in part too — lets not forget that these folks get their news from Fox, Limbaugh and Beck. They’re in a bubble that has to be broken if the folks back home are going to wake up.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    President Obama has called for raising the debt ceiling numerous times because the deadline is next week. However, it is highly unusual that he has NOT asked for a specific dollar amount to raise the debt ceiling. Presumably he will want the debt ceiling raised to fund current spending through the 2014 elections.

    Why is the President not asking for a specific amount as Presidents usually do? Could it be because it would have to be north of another $1T just to get through one year?

    • dirq

      If I were the president, I would insist on an amount that would cover the rest of his presidency. Making threats with the debt ceiling is completely unacceptable behavior.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        He be willing to go to default if congress doesn’t agree to this demand? Then won’t the default be 100% on Obama for obstinately sticking to an unreasonable demand?

        • Marc Prufer

          That is like saying that the kidnapper that kills the hostage child is not responsible — its the parents for not paying the ransom.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I don’t think so. We were only discussing the length of the debt ceiling hike. Obama wants no debt ceiling constraint because he wants no limits on spending.

            The debt ceiling is very popular because it is one form of check and balance against run away spending. It hasn’t worked very well but imagine what it would be without it.

    • Marc Prufer

      The deficit has come down during the Obama Administration. The current deficit is half what it was when he took office. The debt that has accumulated was voted on by Democratic and Republican Presidents and Congresses. If you have a problem with the deficit and debt then at least you should know the facts!

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Facts?
        Which fact did I get wrong?

        Did you know that Treasury showed no ‘borrowing’ for much of the summer through accounting measures? They have to ‘catch up’ and that is why the debt limit needs to be raised >$1T even though next years deficit might be around $700B.

        So, get your facts straight before you hurl charges.

        • Marc Prufer

          The one where you say that the annual deficit has gone up another 41 Trillion — the deficit has come down!

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Huh?
            Now you are just making things up.

    • TFRX

      Keep “Cavuto marking”, keep JAQing it.

  • homebuilding

    The foreigners who invest in our economy (making USA debt possible) are watching this debacle.

    If Miss Katrina doesn’t think they can slow or stop their investment, she’s dead wrong !

    There’s a lot about us that perplex these foreigners.

    An important one is, “Don’t the Obama Care haters know that your health care and insurance costs were inflating far faster than every other commodity for ALL OF THE THIRTY YEARS before President Obama?”

    This is looking more and more like a Confederacy Uprising (having little basis in fact or law)

    • Marc Prufer

      I totally agree!

    • Crozet_barista

      Tea party = John Birch sSociety = Confererate uprising and the re-establishment of the pre-civil war feudalism and (pseudo) slavery – free exploitation and abuse by the small group of ultra-rich owners class of the poor masses. Breakdown of public institutions and far-reaching privatization including law enforcement, prisons, schools etc etc is part of the goal.

    • Bruce94

      I agree that this does indeed look like a Confederate uprising. My take on the Tea-Party base of the GOP is slightly different from yours and Crozet’s below. IMO they’re a coalition of the following: flat-earth religious zealots; laissez-faire States’ rights libertarians and nihilistic, Know-Nothing nativists. That said, recently, I came across an interesting article that I believe makes a credible case ascribing a racist agenda to the Tea Party and describing their machinations to date. Here’s a link to Robert Parry’s “The White Man’s Last Temper Tantrum.”

      http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/19738-focus-the-white-mans-last-tantrum

  • Crozet_barista

    Wonder why the talking heads have not mentioned the correct qualifier for the current self-inflicted crisis: deliberate extortion and sedition. The GOP has been hijacked by the Koch brothers-bankrolled Tea billies who planned this showdown from the onset (and refused to talk, discuss negotiate like adults for months if not years). Remember that the John Birch Society was the radical extremist group decades ago with co-founder Fred Koch (Charles and David’s daddy). Now they found a way to control the political process, bent on destroying the social and economic contract of the past 80 years from within.

    • fun bobby

      to what end?

      • Crozet_barista

        to re-eatablish feudal society

        • fun bobby

          ok, how do you feel about microwaves?

    • OnPointComments

      The correct qualifier for the current self-inflicted crisis is RANSOM: President Obama and the Democrats are saying “Give us the money we want in the manner we want it or we’ll shut the government down.”

  • Marc Prufer

    I think the Democrats biggest mistake when we had all three branches of government was not to change the law relating to debt limit increase. We should have also changed the rules of the Senate over the filibuster and passed a law that does the Hastert rule under. Then maybe we could get something done without crisis.

    • fun bobby

      perhaps they should have worked to dissolve the legislature entirely right?

  • StilllHere

    So far what we’ve relearned from this shutdown is that government doesn’t do much and should most likely be a much smaller and part-time endeavor in most cases. Let’s make it happen!

    • brettearle

      So far what we’ve relearned from this shutdown is that government is filled, more and more, with unreasonable zealots and ideologues who put their Egos first, before the welfare of the American People.

      • OnPointComments

        I agree. This is primarily political games being played by politicians putting themselves first.

    • TFRX

      If you’re so fekking invested it it, I’m sure you and all your little sandbox tantrum throwers will do it when a Republican next gets into the White House.

  • Mandala8

    The phone line was busy from the beginning of the show. I don’t understand how house rules allow a Speaker to not call for a vote on legislation passed by the Senate – and vice versa, for that matter when it’s going the other way. The second thing I wanted to ask about is your guests’ take on Jimmy Kimmel’s non-scientific experiment of asking people on the street if they were for Obamacare – most apparently said no, then if they were for the Affordable Care Act and most said yes! Looks like the Republicans won on that one – rename it, talk badly about it, then see if people are interested in it – against a backdrop of Democrats not educating the public on it’s benefits well enough.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Do you know how many house passed bills Harry Reid has blocked from a vote in the Senate in the last 3 years?

      • brettearle

        Do you know how many house passed bills Harry Reid has blocked from a vote in the Senate–in order to encourage a shutdown and possibly put the country over an economic cliff?

      • J__o__h__n

        How many bills did the House waste time passing as they knew they had no chance of passing in the Senate? How many bills did they pass to repeal Obamacare?

        • StilllHere

          You appear to be unclear on the concept of democracy. I suggest a refresher.

      • Marc Prufer

        Yeah — over 40 that tried to defund or repeal the ACA. So if the Senate started passing bills in the that have no way of passing the House? Is that productive, or would it be better to pass something that can pass both houses and be signed into law by the President?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The Democrats tied raising the debt ceiling to campaign finance reform in 1973. And there are other examples of policy being tied to lifting the debt ceiling.

    • sickofthechit

      The ACA is not “policy”, it is Law. It has been duly passed, duly signed, and duly upheld by the United States Supreme Court. Do you now require the Pope’s blessing? Let me assure you, he would give it. charles a. bowsher

      • Bluejay2fly

        Nice Job.

    • Marc Prufer

      What Law did the democrats try to upend?

    • brettearle

      You mean to the point of THREATENING a shutdown?

      You mean to the point of actually repealing a LAW, or changing an already existing LAW, before threatening a shutdown?

      Is that what you are actually, and SPECIFICALLY saying?

      PROVE it.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        The law that is being implemented now is not the law that was passed by congress.

        Obama has changed it 19 times via executive order and SCOTUS changed the law to find it constitutional.

        Those changes certainly warrant a discussion.

        The House is now only asking for 2 things related to Obamcare: a one year delay of the individual mandate (the same delay Obama unilaterally gave to big business) and to have Congress and political appointees live under the same Obamacare rules that rest of America has to abide.

        And Reid has blocked voting on bills to fund the 95% of government that doesn’t involve Obamacare.

  • sickofthechit

    This is the letter I sent to my Representative Andy Barr (R) KY this morning.

    I oppose the House Republicans use of a Government shutdown as a last ditch effort to destroy the Affordable Health Care ACT. It is the Law of the Land, Duly passed, Duly Signed and Duly Upheld by the United States Supreme Court. I realize that you have countless constituents who are loud in their opposition to this Law, but it is incumbent upon you (as OUR “Representative” to communicate to them (as unpleasant as it may be for you to do) that it is the law of the land, and if they want to see it overturned they will have to do it at the ballot boxes, not by threat of Blackmail. Because Blackmail, and shameless manipulation is what you are participating in with these various, “I like this”, and “I like that”, little patchwork of bills you have been trying to pass off as “Legislating”. That kind of politicking brings shame to a body that at one time deserved to be looked up to. No more, your parties behavior shows the worst side of Democracy. The side that decides that since it hasn’t got what it wants, nobody else can have anything. The rest of us live in the 21st Century, isn’t it time your party began moving in that direction? Aren’t you able to lead them? You know this is wrong. As Edgar Guest said, “Stand up to life and play the man, you can if you but think you can.” Every other industrialized nation has universal health care. While this is a far cry from that, it is at least a step in the right direction.

    I have been uninsured for the last 12 years. I make less than $20,000/year. Now maybe I could have qualified for Medicaid, but I have been to ashamed to apply. Now with the implementation of the ACA I will be able to apply for it and either I will qualify for Medicaid or I will be getting a subsidy for ACA coverage. Either way it is a great day for me. A day I have long awaited. I am 57 years old, I have sleep apnea and COPD without health coverage. Over the last 12 years there are countless things I have avoided doing because I was afraid something might happen and I would lose my home and everything. You can’t imagine what it is like to live in fear like that unless you have done it. I even had a lady friend who would have married me to get me coverage, but I knew that was wrong. So when I hear your parties talking heads saying they are trying to protect us from “Obamacare” I just wish they would protect me from themselves. Because they are the danger to the 30-40,000,000 AMERICANS who are without health protection!

    As OUR Sixth District Representative, you ought to be working to make it better, not working to defund it or delay it. You are supposed to be working for ALL KENTUCKIANS, you are OUR Representative, please keep that in mind as you enjoy the benefits that we are paying for.

    Thanks for listening, now get back to work, get everybody back to work.
    Charles A. Bowsher

    • William

      Why is it that we have to bring down people inorder to uplift you? Could we just have expanded Medicaid for those in situations like yours? Why is it so critical to force people to buy a product even though they don’t need it? Does that not open the door for future demands by corrupt government officials on us?

  • jimino

    This is the elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring and no so-called journalist has held any bloviating Republican responsible for their constantly-repeated false claim, without which they literally have no valid argument whatsoever.

    • n.

      except the journalists of the LA Times…and many others…Why Tom Ashbrook & guests refuse to shine a light on *these facts* is beyond me. Why not point to the polls, Howard Dean, instead of the weaker “They’re gonna like it!”? Not to undermine his point that this is indeed what the TPers are most afraid of – the success of the program!

      An another thing: the Congress has always had the right and the mandate to legislate in matters of finance and economics, which is the freakin foundation of the ACA and the reason that Romney initiated health care reform in Massachusetts to start with, and why he considered it his signature achievement!

      The lies & distortions and the people who feed and believe them continually make me feel like my head is going to explode….

  • truegangsteroflove

    It was inevitable that this would happen, and may turn out to be a good thing in time. I’ve been around “right wingers,” “conservatives,” and Christian fanatics on and off for decades. We err when we view them as mere “ideologues” and religious zealots. It all has to do with the underlying psychology of the individual. There is deep disturbance just below the surface, and the noise we hear is the outward manifestation.

    “Liberals” aren’t such hot stuff either. Why, I wonder, would “liberal” politicians and other “newsmakers” appear on Fox News, when it is clearly a disreputable propaganda network that fosters the biggest lies it can come up with to promote its agenda. There’s a certain gameness about this, that it’s all a big dance, and the important thing is that you get on TV, no matter the format.

    Maybe now that things have gotten this far, the phoniness of the whole process will come to light. Trends eventually reach their pinnacle, their logical conclusion. The “Tea Party” is fake, propped up by moneyed puppeteers, the most prominent, but far from only being the evil Koch brothers. If we’re lucky this will be the end of them too.

    • William

      You have not problem with the MSM but Fox is too Conservative?

      The results is what matters and we have a long history of failure with the federal government and various programs they dream up to “fix” problems.

      Look no further than Detroit and realize the game is up.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The Chicago Tribune, Obama’s home town newspaper said it best this August. Delay the implementation and re-write this beast.

    “Bottom line: Let’s delay and rewrite this ill-conceived law. Congress need not start from scratch. Lawmakers can build on what all of us have learned from three years of painful trial and error. Three years of attempting, but failing, to make this clumsy monstrosity work for the American people.”

    • Marc Prufer

      Next debt ceiling we’ll hold it hostage until the House votes to raise taxes on the top 5% of wealthy Americans. That ok with you?

      • sickofthechit

        Top 10 or 20% sounds better to me. I’m a long way from there.

        • StilllHere

          Got it, it’s all about you.

  • OnPointComments

    Do the American people get to pick and choose the parts of the ACA with which they will comply, and other parts they can choose to ignore? Or do they have to take the whole thing, lock, stock, and barrel?

    Your comment is the typical liberal position: if the American public doesn’t like the law we passed, then the public is too stupid to know what’s best for them.

    • jimino

      Yes, the “typical liberal position” is that we should make important decisions based on facts.

      Do you really not comprehend the FACT that many of those opposing the ACA actually support its provisions? We really do have an entire segment of our population who are like the Emily Litella character on old Saturday Night Live but without her ability to eventually comprehend reality and concede: “Never mind.”

      • OnPointComments

        I’m sure that there are parts of the tax code that the public likes, but if you ask them whether they like the IRS as a whole, the answer is no. And that’s the thing about the ACA: no one gets to choose the parts they like and ignore the rest of it.

  • OnPointComments

    Pass me some of that constitutional mustard for this turkey of a law.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    If we started from scratch and said we wanted to insure 30 million additional citizens (but still not insure another 30 million) and provide access to insurance to those with pre-existing conditions then this is NOT how we would do it.

    Obamacare will cost $2.6T (CBO) in its first 10 years. It does little to bend the cost of care down. What Obamacare actually accomplishes could be done much more cheaply.

    It should be clear to objective observers that this scheme is seriously flawed. So one has to ask why are the Dems rigidly avoiding reforms? It is all about growing government, government control and political power.

    • Marc Prufer

      The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says that the ACA actually projects to reduce the debt by more than $100 billion over ten years. (The CBO released an update in March of last year and another after the Supreme Court decision, both of which lowered projections of the law’s costs.) Yes, Medicaid expansion costs a significant amount of money, but the ACA pays for it, largely via reductions in Medicare reimbursement rates and new taxes that mostly fall on the wealthy. The difference between savings/revenues and costs increases over time, so the law actually projects to reduce the debt by $1 trillion in its second decade.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        The CBO reports under the rules required.

        When you have a scheme that taxes for its first 10 years but only pays benefits for the the last 6 in the measurement period then it will ‘look good’. But it is not sustainable and when the CBO redoes its analysis each subsequent year it will look worse and worse. Don’t fall for the tricks.

        Still, my original point was about a straight cost/benefit analysis. This is independent of whether it is revenue neutral.

      • tbphkm33

        Careful here, you do not want to interject logic into the debate… the Nopublican’s are incapable of understanding anything that is not sugar coated by the FOX “entertainment” New propaganda machine.

      • William

        Taking 600 billion out of Medicare and spending it in Obama care is not saving money. It ‘s still spent.

    • Bluejay2fly

      Why did Bush get a blank check to fight two wars that cost Trillions and achieved nothing. In fact, we are still hemorrhaging money for those wars ,but when the GOP is asked to spend money on the ACA to help US citizens, its HELL NO! At least money spent on the ACA is given to Americans and stays in our economy. I think the GOP is not cost conscience they just do not want it to be successful.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Both wars had bi-partisan support.

        The Iraq war was mis-managed and Bush paid politically for that mismanagement.

        • Bluejay2fly

          That is because the congressional military industrial complex owns both parties. Bush did not pay badly enough when we lost Trillions, weakened this country militarily, and left behind hundreds of thousands of dead. However, the point is being Conservative means not wasting money. The GOP wasted money on those farces but are blocking ACA because of fiscal concerns? More like they are afraid it will work. I also never said anywhere that it was only a GOP war!

      • OnPointComments

        I had the feeling that sooner or later the disastrous ACA would turn out to be Bush’s fault, at least in the eyes of liberals.

        Today must be the day for malaprops: this constitutional mustard for the ACA has made me have a guilty cost conscience.

        • Bluejay2fly

          Where did you get it was Bush’s fault from that post. Do you even read these posts or just spout off like a moron.

          • OnPointComments

            I stand corrected. You agree with me that the disastrous ACA is the fault of the Democrats and President Obama.

          • StilllHere

            Well played.

          • Bluejay2fly

            I am not a fan of the ACA ,but for it to blow as big a whole in our budget as that ***bag Bush did with those wars it would probably take years if at all.

          • OnPointComments

            Now I’m beginning to think that Bluejay2fly’s mission is to blame Bush for the hole thing.

          • Bluejay2fly

            I am the only real Republican here. What you know about the GOP is this modern abomination that has sold out and committed intellectual suicide. Go read WFB Jr the founder of Conservatism.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Did you vote for Romney?

          • Bluejay2fly

            The last time I voted was for Ronald Reagan even Bush 1 was a shill. I really wanted H Ross Perot to win back in the 90′s. He wanted to kill Bush 1′s NAFTA deal. The GOP has devolved into an unintellectual party that serves the needs of globalization which works against the majority of Americans. Romney and his paying 12% tax rate is emblematic of that lack of character. Running someone as DUMB as Sara Palin is an insult to anybody who has a HS diploma. The GOP is a disgrace and it breaks my heart to think a party which gave us great presidents like Eisenhower and Reagan can sink so low.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            You do understand that Romney didn’t write the tax laws. So Obama’s marginal rate is 5% higher and that makes him 5% better?

            Elections are about choices. Obama vs. Romney. For anyone conservatively inclined who sat out the last election was a de facto vote for Obama.

            Romney’s platform was almost identical to Reagan’s platform. From you comment it sounds like you voted for Reagan but weren’t too happy with him so maybe your no-vote makes sense.

          • Bluejay2fly

            Romney lobbied in congress heavily to keep that law from changing so he owns it. Reagan’s term was during a very nasty Cold War and some issues that he should have addressed and some of the foreign policy decisions were constricted by those parameters. His policies would not translate well today as the world is different. I think if the wealthy hide their money off shore (Romney) and do not reinvest in America they are parasites and it is those kind of criminals that run this nation (both parties included). Also remember the president is not a dictator and congress has changed considerably since the 80′s that makes it a very large difference.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Romney ran on fiscal responsibility and reigning government spending to less than 20% of the economy while eventually balancing the budget. Romney’s skill set is to get things to run more efficiently. Long overdue for our Federal bloat.

            Obama’s path is to continue to grow government. He’s done nothing to reign in waste fraud and abuse.

            Again, it is about choices. And it is surprising that you bring up some lame Democrat talking point ["lobbied in congress heavily to keep that law"].

            Obama voted AGAINST raising the debt ceiling in 2007. Don’t you think that is a bit more direct and irresponsible than these vague charges about romney from 20 years ago when he wasn’t even in government.

          • Bluejay2fly

            I saw the footage of him speaking. If you have not figured out this economy is warped because of both parties being fiscally irresponsible than it’s hopeless. Romney would have been another shill allowing the rich to evade taxes like he did, he would have continued wasting money on the military, and would have continued our dependency on conspicuous consumption. He is a sh*tbag. Obama is not much of a president as well. Congress runs the show anyway and even if Obama had a ton of great reforms they would founder just as the ACA is foundering. If you think Obama has made tons of changes you are delusional.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            The top 10% already pay the bulk of the income taxes [71%].

            Were we more likely to have tax reform under Romney or Obama? There was only one man running on a platform to create economic growth. Romney.

            IMHO, Romney is not a great politician but he would have been a great President because his skill set aligned the fixing the bloat that is killing our Federal government. Everything he has ever done has turned to gold. You just have to look at his turn around at the SLC Olympics. They were suffering with corruption and financial problems. He rolled up his sleeves and turned the thing around.

          • Bluejay2fly

            A business man is a Henry Ford or a George Pullman they designed things, built factories, and changed the world for the better. What do the Mitt Romney’s of the world do? They move money around in that giant casino of a financial system. Do people on Wall Street think of any other consequence or cost than what impacts them and their companies? No, so if I move my plant from NJ to Mexico I can pollute their environment because of poor environmental standards AND save on labor costs. If people in NJ no longer work and wind up in prison or on welfare let the state take care of them. These people have built an economic engine of very costly externalities that they do not have to pay for. These smartest people in the rooms have wrought havoc on the environment and in this nation. I hate them more than the lazy poor that live on the government dole. They are soulless, unpatriotic people, who place money over everything. Romney who professes to be religious is the biggest hypocrite of them all. If he had any courage he would have went to Africa not Paris for his missionary work. The fact that anybody in the GOP could consider him anything less than reprehensible shows how shallow and unintelligent this party has become.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Again you repeat simplistic Democrat talking points.

            You don’t seem to understand what private equity is about. I have experience working for company that was purchased by private equity (not Bain) so I have a pretty good idea.

            First, they usually purchase companies on the open market — for public companies this is transparent. Usually they purchase companies that are failing. Then they add value by making the companies more efficient so they can last for the long term. That is how they return value to their shareholders. So in many cases they are saving companies and jobs. They are also providing returns to their shareholders — who are often public sector pension funds and charitable endowments.

            And now you are criticizing Romney’s missionary work he did as a teenager?
            I dunno, We could compare that to what Obama was doing at the same point in his life — per his autobiography — doing blow.

          • Bluejay2fly

            That may very well be in some cases but in others it may also mean parting out the company. The problem is we need low level unskilled labor jobs in order to employ people who are not so bright. It may make sense to robotize your factory but maybe many of the 1000 people you kick to the curb wind up unemployable. This creates a huge problem especially when you add the cost of welfare, the police departments, prisons, and the court system. Social Revolutions happen during times of crop failures and high unemployment (France1789, Russia1917, Germany1933). All our financial wizards have done is to create an economy obsessed on continuous growth in a world of finite resources. When this car finally does throw a tire the destruction of the middle class in a heavily armed society could be one giant mess.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Where were you when they closed the buggy whip factories?

            And there you go with the IQ test again.
            Weren’t you advocating letting the markets sort out with Medicare/Medicaid (above)?

            Maybe we need a few less lawyers and a few more tradesmen like electricians and plumbers.

          • Bluejay2fly

            Its a complex point but here is the basics. Our great liberal experiment of social engineering has failed. Our murder rate, suicide rate, sex abuse, it all points to failure. Our great conservative experiment of allowing unfettered capitalism has concentrated money in the hands of the wealthy at the expense of the many. Predatory capitalism has resulted in us exploiting poor nations labor and their environments. Somewhere between these to extremes is a better solution but before can be formulated we must first understand people. What makes them happy, how can we create the optimal situation for that to occur, and how to do it in the least invasive and most sustainable way possible. Quasi Socialism which is what we have (Medicare and Medicaid) in many gov programs is the worst of both worlds. If the poor died in droves because the gov. refused to pay for their medical and hospitals demanded cash up front the market would be forced to change. Our interference short circuited that process and now its so expensive socializing it would be ridiculously expensive.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I agree that both parties have been irresponsible. Cheney’s remark that “deficits don’t matter’ was terrible.

            However, they are not equally to blame. Most of Bush’s overspending happened when the Dems took over Congress in 2007. Bush took pride in not vetoing bills — big mistake when congress is out of control.

            Obama, through Harry Reid, have not passed a budget during Obama’s term. That means they are simply ‘continuing’ the spending and priorities from Bush’s term. Obama’s had $7T in deficit spending during his tenure and what do we have to show for it? It is criminal.

          • Bluejay2fly

            Do not get a martyr complex for that man he was a complete imbecile and deserves all the scorn he gets. However, to be fair Obama, Clinton, Bush 1 are pretty terrible as well.

      • StilllHere

        You’ve been duped. Obamacare helps the healthcare industrial complex (Chinese medical device mnaufacturers, Indian drug companies, non-US based pathologists …) not Americans. You are a complete pawn in their scheme to enrich themselves.

        • Bluejay2fly

          Your duped if have not figured out Medicare and Medicaid did basically the same thing. Ideally, we would have been better off with none of those programs and let the market sort it out. However, this is how it evolved and one more wasteful programs to help people is not the worst thing in the world. It sure beats giving Israel Billions or building 5 more aircraft carriers than we do not need.

          • harverdphd

            all your history teacher and get your money back

          • Bluejay2fly

            You really should change your user name to stupid-internet-troll or smart-ass-punk because nothing you post adds anything meaningful to the discussion. I also doubt you even went to college, judging by your invaluable insight.

      • William

        Most likely for better reasons that when Obama invaded Libya and wanted to invade Syria.

        • Bluejay2fly

          ALL these foreign interventions cost money and should be avoided. Its like throwing Prada shoes out your window to ward away a muling alley cat (that’s tantamount to an air assault). You could go outside and yell at it but you may slip and fall and get injured and be off from work without pay (ground war). Bush had us throw our whole wardrobe out the window and then made us wandering all over the neighborhood slipping and falling in an ice storm looking for a cat that was never there. If I had my way the last war we would have fought would have been only the ones declared by congress, as what our forefathers would have intended.

          • William

            Bush got Congressional and UN approval so we can’t say he did it in the middle of the night. Clinton’s Iraq Liberation Act was a step towards war.
            I would not mind pulling all out troops out of overseas bases unless we own the land and let the rest of the world blow itself up. JFK and his “let the world know, go anywhere, pay any price” nonsense has destroyed out nation…

          • Bluejay2fly

            I know congress went along with Bush. I really do not know if congress would have acted outside the presidency had the POTUS been vehemently against any military action. I guess when I said Bush I implied Him and his henchmen. It’s like going to a Sting concert you would expect he would have other musicians on stage and not sing without accompanyment.

          • TFRX

            Please don’t pretend Max Clelland and I didn’t get called “traitor” for saying “show me the evidence”.

            Please don’t pretend all the intel was presented to both sides.

            Saying “the other side is a traitor” is a cheapass way to get votes. I’d say you’re overlooking it, butyou have a track record here.

  • walterwz

    We can not afford to negotiate with terrorists. The fact that the Tea Party are the most extreme of right wing extremists is perfectly clear. The fact that they are willing to crash the economy makes them terrorists. By their own words if you negotiate or if you compromise you are weak. Weakness for these rabid right wing extremists is blood in the water it invites a feeding frenzy. Negotiating with terrorists invites more terrorists.

    Lets make one thing perfectly clear. When the Republicans say negotiation, what do the mean exactly? It means that they make demands and we on the other side make compromises. The negotiation is successful when we have capitulated to enough of their demands.

    The Tea Party Republicans are not the only pawns of the rich.
    Money has corrupted all parties and all levels of the political process.

    • tbphkm33

      I agree, we cannot give in to the demands of a minority fringe of an increasingly irrelevant political party.

      Nopublican’s – get your house in order or be abandoned to the dustbin of history.

      • HonestDebate1

        Who is more moderate than Romney or McCain? How’d that work out for Republicans?

      • harverdphd

        Update: you already have – the government is shut down.

      • pete18

        If they were irrelevant then they wouldn’t have the votes to stop anything.

    • StilllHere

      Nice rhetoric. You should be in Washington, they need your kind of civility.

    • Marc Prufer

      Problem is they’ve got all the other Republicans scared into voting with them.

    • harverdphd

      …and Bush was a Nazi…

    • sickofthechit

      I call them “Repugnicans” (copyright 2009 charles a. bowsher)

    • William

      We talked to the MB and gave them 1 billion dollars to take over Egypt. But we can’t respect an opinion of people that oppose Obama care and talk to them?

    • OnPointComments

      “We cannot afford to negotiate with those Republican terrorists. Now get the Ayatollah on the phone for me and let’s see what I can do for Iran.” –an unsubstantiated remark from the President

  • HonestDebate1

    The Amber Alert website is back up which proves it never had to be taken down.

    • WorriedfortheCountry
      • WorriedfortheCountry

        3 down votes?

        Who agrees that the regime should be blocking scenic views on the side of the highway?

    • fun bobby

      were there any ambers that went unalerted?

      • HonestDebate1

        That’s the least of Obama’s worries. He doesn’t care at all.

    • OnPointComments

      Has the government allowed Bruce O’Connell to run his business, and Ralph & Joyce Spencer to return home? Is the City Tavern open? These are but a few of the private properties that the government has shut down.

      Police blocked the entrances to the privately run Pisgah Inn on the Blue Ridge Parkway on Friday. Owner Bruce O’Connell said there were three cars and five rangers stationed outside. “Their message is, ‘sorry, we’re following orders,’ ” he said, describing it as a “24/7 blockade.”

      The National Park Service ordered Philadelphia’s City Tavern closed, even though it was not closed during prior government shutdowns.

      Joyce Spencer is 77-years-old and her husband Ralph is 80. The Spencers never expected to be forced out of their Lake Mead home, which they’ve owned since the 70s, but on Thursday, a park ranger said they had 24 hours to get out.

      Jonathan H. Adler, Professor of Law and Director, Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law: “These closures also raise some interesting legal questions. For instance, on what authority can the NPS or another federal agency order the closure of a facility run by a private concessionaire or tenant? Do the relevant lease or concession agreements provide for this? And if there is not clear authority for ordering a closure in this sort of instance, might the federal government be liable for the subsequent losses?”

      Former Justice Department lawyer Hans Von Spakovsky: “They should immediately file a lawsuit and seek a temporary injunction against the government.”

      The phrase “jack-booted thugs” comes to mind.

    • lobstahbisque

      The Amber Alert website was never taken down which proves it never had to be put back up.

      • HonestDebate1

        Yes it was.

        • lobstahbisque

          No…

  • brettearle

    Can you bring up the difference between the current diluted ACA version and the original edition–which was changed in order for it to pass Congress?

    Were not some of the cost-saving strategies–that were introduced for the long run–omitted?

  • tbphkm33

    It is difficult to find common ground when one side is controlled by zero-sum lunatics. There is no choice but to fight the extremist fringe of the Nopublican Party.

    The “Tea Party” and their band of like minded lunatics are in fact the American Taliban. These “conservatives” have tossed their hat in with the likes of Al Qaeda to damage and destroy the United States and the American way of life.

    If you look beyond the reality that one is “Christian” and one is Islamist, there similarities between the Taliban/Al Qaeda and the Tea Party become more-and-more evident. The rightwing, no matter what the flavor, truly believe they are on a mission from God and no one should stand in their way.

    In both societies, these rightwing extremist fringes are vocal minorities who have drunk the Kool-Aid.

    A healthy society cannot exist with minority rule.

    • Bluejay2fly

      Very insulting yet very true. Well done.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Here are the 6 principles from the Tea Party express group.

        Are you against any of these or is it just about their ‘tactics’ that you disagree.

        “Tea Party Express is proud to stand for six simple principles:

        1) No more bailouts
        2) Reduce the size and intrusiveness of government
        3) Stop raising our taxes
        4) Repeal Obamacare
        5) Cease out-of-control spending
        6) Bring back American prosperity

        • tbphkm33

          Of the 6 lunatic fringe demands, I am against four – numbers, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

          1) “no more bailouts” – yep, I think we all agree the crony capitalism that saved the rich should be repealed and never embarked upon again.

          6) “Bring back American prosperity” ??? – who is not for that??? Of course, five years of Nopublican’s with their heads in the sand, the shut down now and the impending default are not ways to bring back prosperity. What drugs are the Tea Party on???

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Thanks but I’m interested in hearing from our self proclaimed Eisenhower republican.

            The government could be opened in 5 minutes if Obama sat down with Boehner in good faith. The GOP ‘demands’ have been weakened to the point of this flipping to be on the Dems now.

          • harverdphd

            Actually the bailouts saved a lot of public employee pension funds.

          • pete18

            One “non-lunatic” vote for out of control spending.

        • Bluejay2fly

          2) We are against large gov. unless it means defunding an oversized military, closing bases overseas, foreign military aid, reducing the size of our prison industrial complex, or reducing Medicare and Medicaid.
          3) We are against tax raised so if you make 100,000 million and work in a brokerage house you can pay your 12% because we will not change the Tax laws which are barbaric, dysfunctional, and give the wealthy more money since the 20′s. We shall also not go after off shore banking which enables companies to hide money overseas.
          5) We will cease out of control spending but will not go through the budget to kill corporate welfare or end programs like Radio Free America which should have died at the end of the Cold War. We will only kill programs not in our lobbyists back yards.
          6) We will bring back American Prosperity by allowing Unchristian christians to throw bibles in the faces of queers, muslims, and any women who thinks of an abortion while simultaneously ignoring all our own sins.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            None of your gripes has anything to do with the Tea Party. Look to the DC imbreds in both parties.

    • sickofthechit

      Just the wrong cool aid

    • William

      Obama said he is not going to negotiate. I would imagine he can’t because of his radical base. So there can’t be any common ground until he comes to the table.

  • jsmetz

    Your Tea Party candidate dodged the question about her source of campaign funding. Please press her on it. Has she received campaign support in the form of cash, or a pledge of cash, or a loan, or some other form of direct financial support for her campaign, or not?

  • pm05

    These Republican guests sound like such babies — they have to get “something” out of this! So, stick a lollipop in their mouth, change their diaper, and send them on their way!

  • IBCLC

    I think the right forgets that the ACA IS a compromise. Many of us progressives (at least as many as there are Tea Partiers) wanted a single payer system or an extension of Medicare to all. Why should we compromise anymore and gut what little we did get? Also, the R’s are hypocrites. The ACA was modeled off their ideas in hopes of pleasing some of the Rs into voting for it. None did because they hate Obama and as McConnell said their only reason in life was to defeat Obama. They did not do that and now it is their sour grapes that will ruin the country. To me they are traitors and economic terrorists.

    • William

      The current Obama-care does not treat the American people equally under the law. Special exemptions for big business while individuals have to pay is discrimination. I’m tired of these special interest groups getting exemptions while everyone else toes the line of the law.

      • anamaria23

        Are they exemptions or delays?

    • Livy4506

      This is exactly correct. The better approach is the single payer system, but in the comprise it was lost (insurance companies must “wet their beaks”. The ACA is the compromise.

    • OnPointComments

      Unless you are a member of the Congress, you were not part of any negotiation on the ACA.

  • brettearle

    It’s called Propaganda.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Senator Rand Paul:

    “The president is intransigent. He will not give an inch, yet he expects the entire country to take the whole Obamacare mile. It is his way or the highway.

    It was not a good idea to shut down the government. It’s also not a good idea to give Mr. Obama 100 percent of what he wants on Obamacare. Why is the president so opposed to trying to make this law less bad? Why is he continually refusing to compromise?”

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/3/paul-the-shutdown-means-shut-up/#ixzz2h46nX8Jy

    • anamaria23

      He is willing to compromise, just not with a figurative gun to his head. There were more than five bipartisan meetings in crafting of the plan. 10 major ideas are Republican including the individual mandate and high risk pool. Google ” McCain defends ” . Medicare for all, very popular, was defeated. How about, next time, the Dems threaten a shutdown if we do get what we want.

      The budget is down to exactly what the Repubs asked for in addition to the sequester, yet the Speaker, after he got what he wanted, refused to accept it or bring it to conference for six months, until 15 minutes before shutdown.
      The Repubs won on gun control. They obstructed the Jobs Act. They want no action on environment and will probably hold up Immigration Reform. President gets 100% of what he wants??
      This a move by Repubs cannot be allowed to become precedent and the Hastert Rule has to go.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        How many GOP amendments to Obamacare were allowed to come to a vote in the Senate?

        Answer: ZERO

        • jefe68

          Wow, you seem to have a lot of time on your hands. What are you retired?

        • anamaria23

          You need to do some fact checking easily available on line.

        • StilllHere

          Nicely done.
          She’ll have no response for you.

    • TFRX

      Please keep fluffing crap from the Moonie Times.

      People will stop pretending you’re thoughful.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        It was from Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky).

        The WT decided to publish it.

        • pete18

          If it’s not in Balloon Juice it’s not real.

  • fun bobby

    from the photo it seems its just a bunch of Nancys protesting

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      There were a group of Government workers from MD who came up to Cape Cod last week during the shutdown. But they found the National Seashore closed.

      They channeled the WWII vets and broke through the barricades and still went to the beach.

      • fun bobby

        (read the caption of the photo above)
        that’s funny so they are really upset their paid impromptu vacation got ruined?wow and the beach survived? the beach survived Americans visiting it without a throng of government employees to supervise it?

        • lobstahbisque

          Again with ‘the photo’. WHERE?

          • StilllHere

            Welcome to the internet. You might want to get warmed up before making a fool of yourself. Ahh, nevermind. Thanks for the all caps grandpa!

          • lobstahbisque

            I thought the photo corresponded to some relevant post, but it didn’t. Lighten up. It was just some inane behavior from one of the other trolls….there I fed you.

      • jefe68

        You do know that most beaches are closed after labor day, right?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Maybe where you live but not on Cape Cod. They might close the hot dog stands.

    • lobstahbisque

      You couldn’t mean a bunch of flaming liberal homos could you? No of course you didn’t.

      • fun bobby

        don’t you people read photo captions?

        • lobstahbisque

          Sorry I just got back from the lobster pound.

          WHAT PHOTO?

          • fun bobby

            top of the page Captain Observant

          • lobstahbisque

            OH! But I only see one Nancy and he’s a girl.

          • fun bobby

            he? you are pretty incoherent. is that what you are going for?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    60 Minutes reports on disability abuse.

    This will never get fixed under Obama and the Dems.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/10/07/60_minutes_reports_on_disability_benefits_being_abused.html

    • lobstahbisque

      Yes let’s pick on THOSE people. I guess it’s ok to bully them, after all they’re less than you or I, huh, old buddy old pal? And they would never call you out for being xenophobic, wink, wink….

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Huh?

        You are suggesting we need to protect ‘THOSE’ people who are not disabled but are abusing the system?

        Senator Coburn was clear. Some folks are committing outright fraud. Others are using the system as alternative safety net because their unemployment ran out. He is asking for both accountability and honesty in the system. Who could be against that?

        If you actually listen to the piece you’ll find out that the US taxpayer paid out $1B to lawyers — many of whom run disability scam mills — over the last 4 years.

      • harverdphd

        calm down, he said “abuse”

      • fun bobby

        yeah that’s what 60 minutes in known for

        • lobstahbisque

          As Oscar Wilde once said, “Ending a sentence with a preposition is a behavior up with which I will not put.”

          • fun bobby

            its the guy off in whose trailer they were whacking sir

          • HonestDebate1

            At first i thought your comment didn’t make sense… then I got it. I’m slow.

            That’s way more clever than what I had. I would have just recast the sentence to say:

            “yeah that’s what 60 minutes is known for, smarty pants”.

          • fun bobby

            it seems at this juncture I could take credit but it was a line from bevis and butthead the movie

  • harverdphd

    What majority, the majority who can’t afford care despite the aca? Go figure.

  • harverdphd

    Because when medicare was passed we were all employed, no one was on food stamps, and the rest of the word subsidized our prosperity.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “I was laughing at Boehner — until the mail came today,”

    “Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four.”

    Obama voters are not immune to the effects of this monstrosity.

    http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

    • tbphkm33

      Hmm, just more rightwing propaganda?

      • jefe68

        He posted a story from NC the other day that was not correct at all. The premiums in that state are going up because the NC legislation and governor have passed a law that will not create an ACA exchange or expand Medicaid. This has caused the prices in that state to go up for those not getting insurance from their employers. This has also caused some insurance companies to leave the state, thus also causing a rise in premiums.

        The regressive right is just spinning BS.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          I don’t remember posting that but if you say so….

          But last I checked Jerry Brown (D) is governor of CA and they do have exchanges. The story is about people whose insurance has become much more expensive because of Obamacare.

          Remember the Obama promise: “If you like your insurance you can keep it”

          The fine print was “if you pay $10K more per annum”

          • jefe68

            You are correct, sorry it was OonPointComments. Sometimes it gets hard to tell which right winger is posting which bit of propaganda.
            The story I am talking about comes from North Carolina. CA is doing a great job.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Yeah, the right wing nuts blur together after a while :-)

          • jefe68

            You all sound alike…

          • pete18

            But there’s such variety coming from your side.

          • jefe68

            At least were not nihilist.
            You lot seem bent on making everything worse, not better.

          • pete18

            So if you admit to your own uniformity why are you trying to make a critique out of it in others?

            You have a funny definition for “nihilist.”

            “You lot seem bent on making everything worse, not better.”

            Sure, from your perspective but I’d say the same about you from my perspective. Where does that leave us? Maybe an honest difference of opinion?

            I’d suggest getting back to making substantive points instead of a reflexive “nihilist, regressive” outburst to everything you disagree with.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Last I checked the local San Jose newspaper isn’t a right wing publication.

        Try again.

  • harverdphd

    Nothing is decided by polling; we do not run the country by plebiscite.

  • JGC

    Ted Cruz: Destroying entire planet best way to stop Obamacare (The Borowitz Report)

    • JGC

      And you can be sure, however the Honorable Senator Cruz decides to destroy the planet, it will not be due to “global warming”.

  • sickofthechit

    Not Bernie Sanders! charles a. bowsher

  • William

    The Democrats promised Medicare would only cost 9 billion by the year 2000. It is costing 500 billion with 60-80 billion given away in fraud. So those that opposed the Medicare plan back in the 1960′s were correct.

    • fun bobby

      not to mention the fact that government subsidies drive up the costs for everyone

  • William

    Obama ignored DOMA didn’t he? Was that not the same thing we are seeing now? What’s the big deal?

  • William

    So was DOMA and that was Bill Clinton’s biggest legacy issue, other than welfare reform.

    • Overtired

      Forgive me but I have no idea what point you are attempting to make. DOMA passed in ’96 and seventeen years later it was struck down, so what? DOMA wasn’t passed or struck down by holding the budget hostage and shutting down the goverment until one side got it’s way. Clinton’s legacy is totally irrelevant.

      The Affordable Healthcare Act is already a law on the books. The time for negotiations and concessions on the AHA has come and gone. It can be debated, altered and even repealed in the future but shutting down the government by holding up a vote on the budget is not the time or the place for any of that.

  • William

    Really? No evidence….what have you been reading.

  • William

    Oh yeah…that is why that lady that ran the show is retiring…no corruption there huh?…just another day….

  • Fredlinskip

    If I am to understand GOP’s most recent explanation for threatening to severely damage our nation’s economy it’s basically this:
    Because Obama postponed ACA for businesses for a year, he is not following “the letter of” the new law; if ACA isn’t implemented for both businesses and individuals, Obama is not “playing by the rules”.
    Therefore GOP in Congress is not going to “play by rules” either; “So there!”
    (At this point GOP’s hypothetical tongue sticks out).

    Problem is that GOP doesn’t get to decide this, the Supreme Court should be the entity to decide the legality of implementation of ACA and they already have.

    No matter how you look at it, GOP threatening to damage our nation unless their demands are met is not a legitimate course of action.
    And if Dems were to acquiesce to their demands, our constitution would be permanently damaged, because it would mean that any Congress could repeat this behavior in the future any time they decide they don’t like results of constitutional process.

    If you don’t believe in our constitution please skip town.
    Don’t hold the country ransom.

    • Robin Harris

      Agree!

      (repeating post regarding show with Tom Friedman.)

      I wish journalists would do their work and provide correct information and correct misinformation.
      Just letting both sides present their point of view doesn’t move us forward. Folks keep asking about how President Obama can make changes to the ACA. For example, “How can he delay the small employer mandate?”

      It’s because he heads the executive branch of government. The executive branch executes the policy set, know as legislation, by Congress. The Senate and the House of Representatives make up the Congress.

      The majority of Congress passed the ACA, While there are some differences regarding whether the majority of American voters currently support the ACA, there are other legitimate ways to seek repeal or revisions. Shutting down the federal government is not only
      illegitimate, but damages the country and will make it more difficult to do business in the future.

      One legitimate way involves the majority of Congress voting to repeal the legislation–since only one house is willing to do that then the repeal approach is a non-starter.

      Another way would be to make revisions to the ACA. The easiest way to do that is through negotiations where both parties come to the table freely and willingly. A gun to the head puts a damper on, and dooms, a
      negotiation process.

      • OnPointComments

        The executive branch cannot unilaterally change laws passed by the Congress.

        • Fredlinskip

          I sure hope you were all over W when he unilaterally expanded executive powers and participated in all sorts of nefarious activities.

          Postponing one part of ACA for a year is a concession to GOP and businesses to give them more time.

          I know how much you would love ACA be implemented in full now, but you’re just going to have to wait a year.

          If you wanted implemented in whole, you shouldn’t have waited until the day the first half was implemented to take prisoners and threaten great harm to your country.

          • OnPointComments

            The US is a nation of laws. Under our laws, the president cannot change laws passed by Congress.

          • Fredlinskip

            Part of ACA was postponed.
            Previous admins are guilty of far worse.
            You’re grasping at straws to justify completely bogus, unprecedented and harmful actions by very likely the most “obstructionist” Congress in American history.
            Move on.
            How about working towards improving our health care industry.
            It’s easier to tear down that’s for sure , but helps no one.

          • OnPointComments

            You seem to not understand. If another administration broke the law, then that administration should have been dealt with. It does not mean that the next administration gets to break the law also.

            Perhaps you will provide us with a link to the laws broken by previous administrations.

          • Fredlinskip

            We could perhaps discuss the constitutionality of the approval of torture tactics long before W admin provided John Yoo’s torture memo which granted approval for such actions. We could discuss extraordinary rendition. There are a lot of directions we could go with this, but we ‘d be diverting from the question at hand.

            If you’re total justification for threatening at intentionally wounding your own country is that you don’t like the fact admin postponed part of it’s implementation for a year, then I would hope some day you might find in your heart (if one there be) to forgive Dems for a sincere attempt to alleviate it’s dangerously expensive and inefficient health care system.

            And please file your law suit soon.

            Maybe someday GOP will see fit to come up with improving American Health Care –
            Oh Yeah, they did! – in Massachusetts!!

          • fun bobby

            did they?

          • Fredlinskip

            I must admit, i still don’t quite get the connection.
            You’re unhappy about 1/2 of ACA being postponed for a year and this justifies intentionally damaging our economy?
            If you’re angry, why don’t you go out and smash some pumpkins or something or better yet do something constructive.
            Why would you work to hurt fellow Americans?
            Where is that coming from?

          • OnPointComments

            I’m not angry or unhappy about 1/2 of the ACA being postponed, but the manner in which it happened is unconstitutional. This president and members of his administration believe that they are above the law.

          • Robin Harris

            A delay is not changing the law. The legislation is not a project plan. The executive branch is responsible for implementing law and getting to the goal/end point. The Obama
            Administration is doing that. The system would be unworkable if the Congress were responsible for including every detail of implementation in legislation. While the length of some bills may give the false impression that step-by-step instructions are included.

          • OnPointComments

            You are wrong. A delay is changing the law. The executive branch cannot unilaterally change laws passed by the Congress.

          • Robin Harris

            Don’t you think that if anyone really considered the delay to be unlawful, that there would be legal challenges? In life, business, and yes in government, changes are made to plans. The delay for small business was not considered a substantive change that would require legislation. If anyone really thought that then it would be high on the list of changes sought by Republicans.

          • OnPointComments

            You are confused and wrong on a couple of points. First, the “employer mandate” requires large businesses, those with 50 or more employees, to offer health insurance; it does not affect small businesses. There are a number of lawsuits that have been filed to overturn President Obama’s unconstitutional delay of the employer mandate. One of these lawsuits, filed by Judicial Watch on behalf of an employer, states that President Obama has violated the Administrative Procedures Act, which forbids actions not in accordance with the law, and contrary to constitutional right. At least one Democrat has questioned the legality of President Obama’s action: Senator Tom Harkin stated “This was the law. How can they change the law?”

          • Robin Harris

            I misspoke regarding the employer-mandate. Yes, ACA small businesses implementation is going forth. Regarding the lawsuits, I am open to the concept that people are wrong and confused on many points. Let’s see how the lawsuits are resolved. We disagree and I am looking forward to seeing how this all shakes out. I just hope the country isn’t too damaged by this loss of focus on what’s best for the country.

      • Fredlinskip

        Good point.
        Although I think it might be more readily seen if posted as a new comment.

        Word of caution- there’s a poster or 2 here that don’t let facts cloud their judgements any (not referring to OP) and will argue all day long. If you meet one take it with “grain of salt”.

  • OnPointComments

    What do these statements have in common?

    “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”

    Obamacare will “cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

    “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”

    “We will work on this process publicly. It’ll be on C-SPAN. It’ll be streaming on the Internet.”

    • Robin Harris

      Granted. President Obama should have prefaced these remarks with, “All things being equal.”

      Health care need to be reformed because the U.S. pays too much for too little quality and relatively soon will not be able to afford our current system.

      The ACA was a compromise and it was known that it was one step in the process to fully reform our healthcare system.

      Health care costs have been increasing for decades and it has been increasingly difficult for small businesses to continue to fund health care for their employees without increases in premiums and reductions in covered care.

      Many individuals and businesses have been waiting for the implementation of the ACA. For many different reasons, all related to costs and care.

      It is totally understandable if a business decided to no longer provide health care, or to pay employees to choose their own health care coverage through a marketplace. It is a win-win for many. Because if a business made such a decision, it was because the business’ costs stayed same or decreased and employees have access to the same or better health care coverage.

      Certainly depending on what was already in place in states, some people will pay more and some less. Folks need to remember that without the ACA, the health care costs trend line would still be up.

  • Jon

    A political party is just like religious organization. The ideal way to eliminate partisanship is to eliminate parties. Jesse Ventura is right and it’s pity he doesn’t have many audience. This govt shutdown took place only because of the existence of parties.

    • fun bobby

      he is a great American. I wish he would run for congress or president

      • Jon

        only if independent candidates like him can get in the debate monoplayed by 2 parties

        • fun bobby

          they are really the same as having one party except people always can blame the other party for everything they don’t like. dempublicans

          • Jon

            one advantage of being independent is you don’t have to consider for any party’s agenda collectively (only for your constituencies) and you don’t give a damn to any ideology. Ideologyless is the only hope for democracy. Otherwise political struggle is just ideology and even religious struggle – just look at all those theologies from far left to far right that guide the politicians.

  • hopeful61

    I am a self employed “liberal” in MA. I am all for health care reform but the ACA is not doing anything to lower my personal costs or even stabilize them. BC of MA assured me my premiums will go up in 2014 to roughly $650 per month (52 y.o. individual female subscriber) with an at least $2,000 deductible and co-pays which WERE $35.00 for specialists (including physical therapy) are going up to $50.00. I had the misfortune of a serious injury in 2013 and my out of pocket costs are in excess of $10,000 so far. The only way to get affordable insurance in this state is if you work for the govt. or if you work for a large corporation. The ability to obtain AFFORDABLE health insurance should NOT be tied to one’s employment status.

    • brettearle

      Were you told, under no uncertain terms, that you are not eligible for special exemptions of subsidies?

      Have you spoken with the Massachusetts Commonwealth Health Connector [not the exact title], who might give you some perspective or offer an alternative?

      Also, the Ombudsman with State Department of Health and Hospitals [may be under somewhat similar name]?

      • hopeful61

        You have to make under roughly $40,000 to qualify for “tax credits” and I’m not sure what it is now to quality for MassHealth (Medicaid) – in 2013 it was less than ~$30,000 for a single person. I can certainly get a high deductible plan (I believe at least $5,000) and keep my fingers crossed but with my serious injury in 2013 and advancing age, I’m not sure that is such a good idea…and my monthly costs will still be at least $400 and up. I will make a few calls but my review of the updated MA Health Connector reveals increased premiums with increased co-pays and perhaps even increased deductibles across the board, for the individual self employed subscriber.

    • jefe68

      The cost increases are due to our market based system that uses a fee for service. Which make health care in this nation absurdly expensive. The ACA is flawed in that it does not really go to the root of the problem. Which is our entire health care system needs to be overhauled and rebuilt for the 21st century. There are many reasons why this is an almost Herculean task, but nonetheless it could be done, and it should be. What you are asking for, and I might add so am I, is a single payer system not unlike Canada’s or Switzerland’s or dare I say France.

      • hopeful61

        Agreed, I work in the insurance industry (I am an R.N.) and they will still do whatever they can to increase profits and deny care. CEO’s of health insurance companies will still make exorbitant salaries. People will still have to struggle and fight for their care. Since I had a deductible added to my plan several years ago, I have had to fight for my yearly physical. I have received bills related to routine blood work and tests like Pap smears EVERY YEAR since I have had a deductible because all of a sudden, these routine tests are “not medically necessary”. It’s insane.

  • JGC

    I am a dual U.S./Canadian citizen living in Canada, and today I participated as a volunteer in a medical research trial at McGill University. The graduate student who was shepherding me through the trial, mentioned that she has colleagues at the NIH (where I was employed in the 1980s, so I am fairly familiar with the NIH culture). Only “essential personnel” are permitted on campus, and of those, many were working in the dark because the lighting had been cut.

    It is a total embarrassment to think this is how the premiere research institution in the U.S. has become a political football in this Trail of Tea Party Tears.

    • fun bobby

      where is your wait at the ER longer? how about the wait time for a doctor’s appointment?

      • jefe68

        Why don’t you do some research instead of making silly comments to get a reaction.
        Why are you so lazy? Why is that regressive right wingers are so fixated with nihilism?

        • HonestDebate1

          Jefe, I enjoy seeing you fritz out but really, you make it too easy for Fun Bobby. It’s embarrassing.

          The questions were rhetorical and I’m sure FB knows the answers you seems not to know. Your admonition for him to do research is hilarious.

          http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/07/after-bad-press-and-confusion-justice-department-restores-federal-amber-alert-website/

          • jefe68

            I’m not fritzing out at all. He made a comment that was not true. As you and a host and most of the other right wingers do here day in and day out.
            What you view as rhetorical I view as inane. In that lies the rub.

          • HonestDebate1

            How can a question be untrue?

          • jefe68

            Oh let me count the ways, you posted a comment that alluded to the rhetorical nature of his question. Which one could call a loaded question. Or one that is perpetrating a fallacy. There is also the purpose behind the question as well.
            So, yeah a question can be “untrue”.

          • HonestDebate1

            I see, a question can be untrue if you make up the motivation then infer from there. Gotcha’

            The fact is wait times for appointments and visits to the ER are horrible in Canada. Maybe there are good things about the system too but why shouldn’t the subject be broached in the context at hand? FB asked some good and relevant questions.

          • jefe68

            Wait times in the Canadian system depend on where one lives. Which why if you are going to make a blanket statement about their system it might behoove one to look a little deeper than he was.

            The thing is what FB was alluding to, and this is my impression, is that the Canadian system is inferior to ours. It’s not. It’s outcomes are better overall. It’s moot anyway as a overwhelming majority of Canadians would never trade their system for ours. We have the worst health care system of any industrial nation. That’s a fact.

            As long as we are on the subject of questions and content, I’ve not seen one alternative plan offered by the Republicans to fix the mess we call health care. Not one. Why is that?

          • fun bobby

            We have the worst health care system of any industrial nation. That’s a fact.
            why no citation jefe?

          • StilllHere

            Sounds subjective too.

          • jefe68

            Look it up. You could start with the World Health Organization. Which ranks the US 38th in results and #1 in costs.
            When compared to every other industrial nation we come in last. Except for cost.

            Mind you Canada is 32. Number 1 is France.

            Oh and we are 48th in efficiency.
            http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries

          • fun bobby

            a sure fix for inefficiency is to increase the role of the US federal govt. If there is one the the feds are known for its fantastic efficacy

          • jefe68

            Lets repeal the ACA and do nothing then. Keep everything as it was until the entire health care system collapses.

          • fun bobby

            the healthcare system was going to “collapse” with out the ACA? what would that look like?

          • fun bobby

            that’s silly

          • jefe68

            Your intent was pretty clear to me and the chap you made the comment too.
            You think your cute, don’t you.

          • fun bobby

            jefe I am already taken

          • fun bobby

            that’s what I was wondering

          • StilllHere

            It doesn’t take much, very touchy fellow.

        • fun bobby

          same questions for you jefe. I was not asking you because you clearly have no idea and are too lazy to look it up. I was asking someone who claims to have personal experience with both systems. I was interested to find out if he would answer the same way the Quebecor I was talking to this weekend did. I like you better when you were rebuking people for calling politicians Nazis and terrorists

          • StilllHere

            He’s become what he once hated.

          • jefe68

            Well, that’s not the same is it.
            You made a comment about the Canadian health care system. I happen to know people who live there and I also think that if you looked up some info on it you would have found out that it’s better than ours in so many ways and they are not even close to being in the top ten of health care systems.

          • fun bobby

            actually, I simply asked a question. that’s what this symbol “?” means when it is at the end of a sentence.

          • jefe68

            Oh boy, questions can be loaded, last time around the block on this for me.

          • fun bobby

            jefe stop reading into things and go get yourself a nice plate of poutine

      • JGC

        The Nobel Committee has been trying to reach you on line 2, fun bobby. They are awarding you this year’s prize in Economics, for your insightful analysis of price control and demand in the world of medical delivery. Pick up the phone NOW, dammit, before they change their mind and give it to Krugman– again!

        • fun bobby

          its about time. I predicted the housing market collapse in 2002. Greenspan did not see it coming until 2006. I am more qualified for the economics prize than Obama was for the peace prize. thanks for the praise but I don’t see what it has to do with my questions

          • JGC

            If you don’t see what that has to do with your questions, then I will have to say “likewise”, because my original post was about the frustration of NIH basic medical research being trapped in the morass of Tea Party politics, not on U.S. vs. Canadian healthcare as pertains to the individual subscriber.

            It may not be too late for you to become the new chair of the Fed, fun bobby, (although just a few minutes ago I saw that finally the Obama administration is getting behind the nomination of Janet Yellen). I do not have any recollection of Alan Greenspan warning about a housing debacle in 2006. I remember the “irrational exuberance” remark, but that was in the Clinton administration about the stock market, not the housing market. My recollection is that he left his chairmanship in 2006, content that everything was peachy with the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and that it was only after the financial meltdown in 2007/2008 that, in front of a government panel, he confessed he had been blindsided when the U.S. banking/investment system did not in fact behave “rationally”.

          • fun bobby

            his 2006 comment was in an interview after the meltdown. I only asked because you said you were a duel citizen so I thought maybe you had experience with both systems and would be able to answer those questions. funny how many people were upset even to see the questions asked. I was talking to a Quebecor who works in America (what Canadians refer to as “the States”.) and he had some opinions that were interesting.

      • jefe68

        And yet 57% of Canadians are happy with the system and nearly all Canadians would never dream of switching to our dysfunctional American system.

        • fun bobby

          wow, a slight majority!
          so you have some hard statistics on what Canadian would never dream of?

          • StilllHere

            That one’s a mind reader so no stats necessary.

          • jefe68

            Look them up yourself troll.

          • jefe68

            Compare that to 75% of Americans who think the US system stinks and it’s pretty clear that Canada is doing a lot better in this regard.

          • fun bobby

            i wonder how many Americans would be satisfied if they were receiving Canadian style care. its apples and oranges. about 100% of Canadians I have met love slathering vinegar on their fries.

          • jefe68

            Decent affordable health care is not apples and oranges. Now you’re on about how some Canadians eat fries. By the way in Belgium they eat them mayonnaise and in Germany with curry ketchup. In Scotland they eat them with brown sauce and vinegar. One thing all these countries do have in common though, they all have good affordable health care for all their citizens.

          • fun bobby

            culture is important. the world does not move to the beat of just one drum jefe. what might be right for you may not be right for some. it takes different strokes jefe. different strokes to move the world

      • TFRX

        Maybe you can stop regurgitating your fantasies about Canadian health care.

        • fun bobby

          your comment is incoherent. are you aware of that?

          • StilllHere

            He’s still in line for his shrink appointment so cut him a little slack.

          • brettearle

            Yeah, still in line for the SHRINK of costs, in long run, for the advocacy and the strong approval of ACA.

          • fun bobby

            I hope you are comfy it might be a while

          • nj_v2

            ^ Troll

          • brettearle

            His comment is quite coherent.

            And mine above is especially coherent.

          • fun bobby

            keep telling yourself that

          • brettearle

            At least two others feel the same way, I do.

            Lord knows how many others there are.

          • brettearle

            The `he’ in my comment, above–about Canada and the draft–does not refer to TFRX

          • fun bobby

            what are you talking about?

          • TJPhoto40

            Your comments are combative ad nauseam and not at all “fun,” bobby.

          • fun bobby

            I simply asked some simple questions. why did so many get bent out of shape?

          • brettearle

            He isn’t bent out of shape at all.

            He’s as much of a straight-shooter, as they come….

          • fun bobby

            he is another one who cannot tell the difference between an interrogative and a declarative sentence

          • brettearle

            We discuss issues here.

            We’re not grammarians.

            Your pettiness is showing.

            Big Time.

        • brettearle

          Maybe he should move to Canada–even though there’s no draft.

        • brettearle

          My `he’, below, does not refer to you.

          A third party misunderstood that–and chose not to recognize for whom my ‘he’ was intended.

      • JGC
        • fun bobby

          so the short answer is that our wait times for care are less. thank you for not being so upset by the questions as others have been

          • JGC

            You’re welcome. And in Quebec, most people eat their fries covered in gravy and cheese curds.

          • fun bobby

            I suggested another poster eat poutine earlier

    • OnPointComments

      Why won’t Harry Reid schedule a vote on bills passed by the House to fund the NIH, VA, National Park Service operations, the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery of Art, SNAP, and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum? Is it right that Harry Reid gets to have temper tantrums and obstruct the business of government?

  • nidur

    Why are we the only modern country that has such trouble with the idea of providing health care for all? The first president to propose the idea was Teddy Roosevelt. Other presidents have tried, but failed to pass anything. Finally, Obama, after tremendous opposition, passed a less than perfect bill. Now that it is law the Republicans idea of negotiating is the say “first defund your major achievement as president and then we’ll talk.” If there were a real Tony Soprano he’d be proud that someone copied his way of doing things.

  • HonestDebate1

    The three-legged stool upon which our system of government sits was brilliantly conceived to hold itself in check. The founders were very stingy with the power they vested to government. The power lies with the people.

    These facts are the best evidence why Ted Cruz and friends are not some fringe faction of whacked out zealots holding the country hostage. They can’t. There is no way they can force the President to do squat without the will of the people. There are a lot of Americans standing with the effort to defund Obamacare.

    • OnPointComments

      President Obama and members of his administration believe that they are above the law. Whether it’s circumventing drug laws and immigration laws, recess appointments, welfare work requirements, or using private email accounts to circumvent FOIA, this Imperial Presidency believes that laws mean nothing.

      • Fredlinskip

        Recess appointments are a bit of a embarrassing way to operate. But in the face of the most obstructionist minority in congress in history, how else do you expect any appointments be made.

        Prior to the Obama Administration, 20 executive branch nominees were ever filibustered. Under Obama, 16 have been filibustered. This is over 35x the rate of previous administrations. This is just one small example of the degree of obstruction Obama has faced.
        And this a president elected by a resounding majority of the electorate?

        So now GOP because they disrespect our constitution so much, they choose to threaten to damage American economy unless they achieve minority rule?
        If you dislike our constitution so much, what are you doing in this country?

        • OnPointComments

          You are the one who seems to have a problem with the constitution. You justify the president ignoring the constitution because he doesn’t like the process. I want President Obama to follow the constitution regardless of what anyone else does or has done.

          50.6% to 47.8% is not a resounding majority.

          • Fredlinskip

            If you view electoral college it is a resounding one.
            If you want Obama to follow the constitution, you surely would not wish him to “negotiate” under these conditions., because our Democracy will never be the same, if the results of constitutional process is negated by those who would hold our nation ransom.

          • TJPhoto40

            You’d be just as bitter and distorted in your analysis if Obama had won 65%. Your incessant postings on this raw nerve subject suggest that you’re in need of a holiday and re-education in a Buddhist temple.

          • TFRX

            Yep. We’re dealing with folks who, back when things were bills, said “Obama’s health care proposal had to get 75-80 votes in the Senate to be truly bipartisan”.

            Bipartisanship: It’s what’s for Democrats to worry about, says the media.

    • Fredlinskip

      The three-legged stool as outlined in constitution brought about a law called ACA. What we have now is GOP attempting to ignore constitutional process, damage our Democracy and do very real damage to our economy. If Dems were to acquiesce to these demands political terrorism would forever be a viable course of action, constitution be damned.

      Apparently you would like this country to be forever run by whoever chooses to do the most damage to their own country.

      Don’t think this would bode well for the future of this country.

  • OnPointComments

    When I watch a hearing on C-Span, I evaluate the motives and sincerity of the questioner by the questions that are asked. For example, if the questions from a member of Congress are: who appointed you to your position, who was president when you did this, to whom have you made political donations, are you a Republican or a Democrat, and other questions along this line, I doubt that the questioner is interested in facts or solving a problem, but instead is primarily interested in a party agenda and scoring perceived political points.

    Watching President Obama’s press conference today, his primary focus has been to blame Republicans. If he truly believes it is 100% the Republican’s fault (and he may believe this), would anyone entering into a negotiation, with sincere hopes of achieving a solution, start the negotiating process with accusations of it’s all your fault, you’re the one that’s ruining the country, you don’t care about the American people, you’re holding the country for ransom, and on and on? In my opinion it’s likely that these statements show the President is more interested in a party agenda and scoring political points than crafting a solution to the problem.

    • jefe68

      He blamed the GOP because they caused the shut down.

    • ETThompson

      Obama rightly believes the Republicans have caused this situation, because they have. Not only are they the proximate cause but this has been their long-term strategy. They’ve refused numerous attempts at budget negotiations since the beginning of the year, because they didn’t think they could get what they wanted. They thought they’d be better off using the gun called the CR and the debt ceiling to get their way. Obama knows that if he gives in to these terror tactics, the Republicans will come back with even more extreme demands. In fact, the reason they thought this could work is he’s been so weak in past negotiations. It is not only not wrong of him not to negotiate with a gun to his head, it is essential that he not do so – if he does he’d be allowing a minority of a minority to do whatever they want. The analogy with terrorists is apt. Obama should stand firm.

      • OnPointComments

        Regardless, if you were entering into compromise and negotiation with hopes of achieving a solution, would you start the process with name calling? Do you think the strategy of name calling helps achieve success?

        • ETThompson

          I’m not sure what name-calling you’re talking about? What do you mean? The stuff you cite in your original post is not name-calling – they are statements of fact. Are you saying the president should not accurately state what is happening? Tell me what specifically the president said that amounts to name-calling.

          • lobstahbisque

            Boehner is quite a dirty enough word on it’s own. But on Halloween is has magical powers. Say it 3 times in the mirror and he materializes, glowing orange, with a black cape and pitch fork…

          • OnPointComments

            If John Boehner’s response had been that the president and Democrats were guilty of extortion, demanding that they get the money they want in the manner they want it or they’ll blow the whole thing up if they don’t get their way, would you consider that statement to be inflammatory? Suppose Boehner called them irresponsible? Would such statements foster an atmosphere of cooperation at the beginning of the negotiation process?

          • ETThompson

            I really don’t see what your point is, but to answer your question, no, it wouldn’t, if Obama had actually done that. Which he didn’t.

            What is inflammatory are the Republicans actions. They have actually shut down the government in order to get their way, and they are threatening to default on the debt, a much much worse outcome, in the very near future. These *actions* are inflammatory, offensive, and anti-democratic. Obama is right to call them out on them. Bullies need to be called out. The Republicans have entirely and consciously created an atmosphere devoid of the possibility of cooperation through their actions.

            You seem to be fixated on words, ignoring deeds, but a quick scan of Boehner’s FB page will find many statements that, by your standard, are harsh, negative, etc. And you can find much much worse on the web. How about the AZ Republican who compared Obama to Hitler Monday?

            I guess I don’t understand your point – you think that Obama should ignore the Republicans bad actions, and be conciliatory and agree to negotiate with a gun at his head? So the Republicans can get everything they want and give nothing, as they’ve clearly stated they will do? I’m glad Obama is not doing that…for once. He’s gotten way too pushed around by this crowd and I for one am glad he’s finally stood up to these terrorists.

          • OnPointComments

            President Obama said the word “ransom” eight times; he said that Republicans were intent on blowing the whole thing up, and were irresponsible. Plainly stated, compromise and negotiation doesn’t start with demonizing and demeaning the person with whom you are negotiating. It dooms the negotiation to failure.

            I wonder if the Obama administration’s diplomacy with Iran starts with calling them terrorists and murders. I bet it doesn’t.

          • ETThompson

            That is because it is exactly like a ransom! When you threaten to do something terrible unless someone complies with you that is a ransom. The Republicans **have said** they will blow the country up – is that not a problem for you?? I simply do not understand why doing something terrible is no problem for you but then calling that out is?

            OK, say I concede your point. If I’m having an argument with my wife, it’s not a good idea to call her names first. I think that’s what you’re trying to say. I really don’t think it applies in the case of two seasoned politicians who understand that what you say in front of the cameras is a form of showcraft.

            But what you talk about in your post and what you seem obsessed with is such a tiny point in relation to the *reality* of shutting down the government and possibly crashing the economy. I don’t understand your passion about this one unimportant thing and yet you ignore the very real world, serious and possibly catastrophic consequences of what the Republicans are doing! I mean, what is your position on the real issue that matters here?

          • jefe68

            If it was not true, yes.
            Unfortunately it is, that’s just what the Republicans in the House are doing, acting like extortionists.

        • Fredlinskip

          If one party ignores results of all constitutional process, then threatens the welfare of American people unless they get they’re way, it becomes something other than a negotiation. Someone who decides to yield to extortion would not be “compromising”.

        • jefe68

          Negotiating what exactly? You can’t negotiate with crazy people.

          • pete18

            Yet the Republicans must still try, for the good of the country.

          • jefe68

            Well, I rest my case. The delusional nihilist right proves yet again how myopic they are.

            Funny how you mentioned myopia in the negative and yet here you are deep in the mire of it.

    • pete18

      My sympathies to you for spending your time in such a painful and unproductive way.

      • OnPointComments

        It’s a thankless job, but someone has to do it.

      • Fredlinskip

        It is painful to continue to attempt to argue a position when the facts are simply not on your side.

        But lack of facts and being on the opposite side of the truth never slowed down GOP’ers before.
        Keep on arguing.

        • pete18

          My sympathies to you for holding such a painfully myopic outlook.

          • Fredlinskip

            My apologies to you sir. If my passions get the best of me sometimes, it is because I care about my country.
            But if my outlook is so myopic then please explain to me the bigger picture I am missing in this current situation.

          • pete18

            Big picture: People who believe Obamacare and raising the debt ceiling is destructive to the country
            find the Republican’s actions a necessary hard line negotiation, which is completely constitutional. They see that the Democrats’ actions have played just as big a role to bringing us to this moment as the Republicans’. We will survive this just like we have the other 17 government shutdowns that have happened since 1977.

            People who support Obamacare and President Obama believe that the Democrats have played no role in creating this “crisis,” that the Republican’s actions are unconstitutional (but the President’s are not) and that this is a unique crisis that will forever change the course of constitutional government (unless of course the Republicans back down and win nothing in concessions).

            The big picture is all a matter of perspective.

          • Fredlinskip

            Agreed, except that my myopic understanding of “raising debt ceiling” hurts no one unless it doesn’t happen.

          • pete18

            There are negative consequences to both not raising and raising the debt ceiling. Which one you focus on depends on your priorities and perspective. President Obama’s perspective in 2006 was the same as Senator Cruz’s is now.

          • Fredlinskip

            And the negative consequences of raising the debt ceiling are……?

          • pete18

            I’d rather focus on the negative consequences of RAISING the debt ceiling:

            “The fact that we are here today to
            debate raising America’s debt limit is a
            sign of leadership failure. It is a sign
            that the U.S.Government can’t pay its
            own bills. It is a sign that we now de-
            pend on ongoing financial assistance
            from foreign countries to finance our
            Government’s reckless fiscal policies.
            Over the past 5 years, our federal
            debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to
            $8.6 trillion. That is trillion with a
            ‘‘T.’’

            That is money that we
            have borrowed from the Social
            Security trust fund, borrowed from
            China and Japan, borrowed from
            American taxpayers.

            This year, the Federal Government will
            spend $220 billion on interest. That is
            more money to pay interest on our na-
            tional debt than we’ll spend on Med-
            icaid and the State Childrens Health
            Insurance Program. That is more
            money to pay interest on our debt this
            year than we will spend on education,
            homeland security, transportation,
            and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year
            than we are likely to spend to rebuild
            the devastated gulf coast in a way that
            honors the best of America. And the cost
            of our debt is one of the fastest growing
            expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical
            investments in infrastructure like
            bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our
            families and our children of critical
            investments in education and health
            care reform; robbing our seniors of the
            retirement and health security they
            have counted on. Every dollar we pay
            in interest is a dollar that is not
            going to investment in Americas
            priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans a debt
            tax that Washington doesn’t want
            to talk about. If Washington were
            serious about honest tax relief in this
            country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by
            returning to responsible fiscal policies.

            But we are not doing that.”

            -Barack Obama 2006

          • Fredlinskip

            Perhaps Barack has come to realize raising ceiling has nothing to do with future spending?
            Anyone who is not willing to change their views in response to revelation of new facts is not a mature individual.
            Hopefully, IMO, GOP will also be capable of maturity for the sake of the country?

          • pete18

            What NEW facts could have possibly presented themselves between now and then that would make any difference to the argument he was making then?

            Since he now explains this contradiction by saying that his vote and stance was just “political” in 2006, and given how many times he’s changed his mind or broken his promises to voters, how would you ever know when he was being authentic?

          • Fredlinskip

            The facts of the matter may have not changed, but he may have reached a greater understanding of them.

            It’s called growth. I would hope people continue to grow throughout their lives.

            OR if as you say, perhaps it was simply a “political” chance to vent frustration of ballooning debt and deficit.

            It should be obvious to folks by now that raising debt ceiling has nothing to do with additional spending and has no bearing on debt and deficit.

          • pete18

            But that’s where the difference lies. It isn’t at all obvious, it is a very debatable premise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li0no7O9zmE

            I didn’t say that Obama was being political, that’s what he said. I have no idea because it’s impossible to tell when he’s being authentic. It’s just as likely that he’s being political now. However the argument he made in 2006 was and still is valid.

          • Fredlinskip

            The debatable premise is that “raising the debt ceiling has negative consequences?” It’s paying bills that’s all. Don’t pay’em. That doesn’t mean they go away- it means you eventually pay ‘em plus interest.

            I like in video where banker asks, “maybe you should consider a little more income”?

            Exactly, it worked for administrations before Depression until Coolidge and his ilk decided to cut taxes on higher incomes, It worked for FDR. It worked for Eisenhower & Clinton. Create more revenue from those who can afford it most.

            Even if you were to create an environment where spending equaled revenue through cuts, that obviously will do nothing about current debt.

          • pete18

            The debatable premise is whether raising or not raising the debt ceiling has any affect on government spending. I think the answer is clearly it does because if the people in government always know that they can raise the debt ceiling when the don’t manage their budgets properly they have no incentives to manage their budgets properly and will continue to overspend because it’s easier and it’s how most of them maintain their power.

            I’m not sure how it is that you can maintain that you can’t affect the debt through cuts but somehow you can magically do it through raising taxes.

          • Fredlinskip

            So you are advocating credit default?

            As far as effecting the debt I believe history provides plenty of instances when debt was lowered when tax on upper brackets was raised.
            To me it’s a simple premise. Paying debt requires $.
            If you think cuts are enough, I think you’re dreaming.
            The cuts required to make a dent would seriously wound our economy in longer run.

          • pete18

            “To me it’s a simple premise. Paying debt requires $.”

            Yes, and cutting spending on other things frees up money to spend down the debt.

            The math is quite simple. You cut $200, 000 million in spending you have that money to spend on debt reduction, the same way you would if you raise $200,000 million in new taxes.

            Only problem is that to raise enough money to have any effect you couldn’t just tax your favorite targets of envy, the already overtaxed rich, because there’s not enough money there. So you’d also have to hit the middle class as well. Taxing either would be a terrible idea during a recession.

          • Fredlinskip

            I don’t believe you can cut you cut your way to prosperity.
            But I don’t want to get dragged down in the same old myopic rhetoric with you.
            I appreciate a respectful conversation.
            My biggest present concern is current manufactured crisis.
            Appreciate the respectful conversation and your point of view.
            Later

          • pete18

            We’ve found and clarified our points of difference, that’s about the best one can expect. I enjoyed the back and forth. Cheers.

          • TJPhoto40

            Why are you arguing about the budget issues when the debt ceiling is about commitments already made? You don’t say you refuse to pay a debt you put on your credit card, do you? You obviously don’t understand the basics here. If you don’t like the US spending priorities, talk to your congressperson after the country has paid the bills it has already incurred. Get with the reality of this.

          • pete18

            When I have a debt on my credit card I don’t increase the spending on my family budget and I don’t use another credit card to pay off the debt on first one. If I do that then I will never pay off my debts and there will never be any stability in my household budget. This is what the government is doing. Raising the debt ceiling without any negotiated cuts in spending will continue this unsupportable downward spiral.

          • TJPhoto40

            Are you paying attention? I already said the debt ceiling is about debts incurred that have to be paid off. Your analogy is increasingly off target, worse than comparing apples and oranges. If you don’t like how the government is spending money, attack the problem on the front end–when budgets are devised–not on the back end when the debt is to be paid. Full faith and credit of the US govt is the issue here, along with spending priorities established by your representatives, not whether you think the spending is out of control.

          • pete18

            The difference between us is that you don’t see a connection between always raising the debt ceiling and future spending, and I do. I agree with the 2006 version of Barack Obama.

          • jefe68

            If the US defaults interest rates go up for all businesses and anyone with a mortgage or wanting to get loan. IN your view this seems to be OK.

            The US has never defaulted on it’s obligations, never. US treasury bonds are held in high regard for this very reason and are used as safe investments.
            Your argument is not only inane, it speaks to nihilist nature of a lot of the right.

          • pete18

            Obviously this is not as bad as delaying Obamacare for a year, or we would already have an agreement on the debt ceiling.

    • TJPhoto40

      Are you paying attention in a somewhat objective way or just listening with hyper-partisan ears, OPC? I don’t see how you can continue to blame the President for this absurd shut-down and all the conspiratorial obstructionism that the Republican Party has foisted on us since Obama took office for his first term. This is just the latest and possibly most irrational action yet. All the while Republicans go on claiming the Pres won’t talk to them. Give me a break.

      What’s to talk about? He’s talked to these lemmings numerous times over the years, to no avail. And the necessary government procedures at hand are not the right occasion for negotiating–you do what’s called for and then negotiate about budget or something worthwhile, not dig for goodies when it’s time to pay the bills. I’m so sick of Boehner and these other party hacks spinning the facts into their distortions of political leverage that I have no more patience for even listening to them. So the President must have much more patience than reasonable people everywhere have exhausted.

  • gslouch

    With all due respect, the president has reached out to the republicans at every turn of his administration and has always been snubbed. He simply knows better than to suggest negotiation with the repubs now. And in reality it is their fault, although maybe because of a small out of touch faction of their party. Their using a law to hold the dems ransom. So next time they could say we ll shut down the govt unless you repeal SS. come on, this is pure politics. And in case you haven’t heard, families that lost their sons in Afghanistan over the weekend will not receive an automatic payment promised to them and must pay their own way to see their sons’ bodies come off the military plane. Absolutely disgraceful republicans!!

  • 1standlastword

    Katrina Pierson…YIKES! What a disappointment! Please Texas don’t embarrass yourselves and don’t send another Tea Party whacko to the U.S. Congress to constipate our political process

  • jefe68

    It might come to this: Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which says the “validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned.”

    The Republicans are truly off the rails here, and proving that they are, well Daffy Duck says it better than I:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xrw0gbnNuU

    • TJPhoto40

      Yeah, I think Daffy should have an evening cable show running against all the partisan pundits. Jon Stewart and Colbert have nothing on Daffy for profundity in comic form.

  • Shark2007

    Katrina is the perfect example of delusional T bagger thinking. One can only hope she has a 401k or IRA that will plummet when her buddies in the House default on the U.S. debt.

    • TFRX

      I wish it were so. But we can’t neglect the Wingnut Welfare System; there will always be someone out there to give a right-wing consultant some money.

  • Fredlinskip

    IF I am to understand the current manufactured crisis, there are 3 possible resolutions:
    1) Obama caves and acquiesces to major GOP demands in interests of saving the country from economic hardship of a credit default.
    Results: Our Democracy would be forever changed because it would mean that constitutional process and therefore our constitution no longer really matters, because any time a minority wishes to extort ransom it would have a ability to do so, no matter what the results of ordinary constitutional process.
    This seems like a no-brainer- this simply can’t happen if there is anyone out there who loves this country.

    2) GOP caves and ends their self-made crisis:
    Results: Well it seems the crisis may have gone too far for that. GOP would look like fools (if they don’t already?) and get hammered in next elections. Therefore it is becoming harder & harder for them to reverse course. Of course if they were to put their country first and truly perceived the consequences of their actions, they would do the right thing, regardless, but I wouldn’t bet my stock portfolio on it.

    3) We go into default (perhaps Gov remains closed?):
    Results Our economy is damaged severely in ways we can only speculate at the moment.

    Seems like whole charade is a little like Russian Roulette.
    Got stocks?

  • lobstahbisque

    Jon Stewart made a great pungent analogy tonight. He compared Boehner’s blaming POTUS and the dems for the crisis to farting and then blaming it on the dog. Apt and vivid.

  • TJPhoto40

    I can somewhat appreciate the good sense of Vin Weber’s take on this situation, although I think he credits Boehner for holding the Republicans together when in fact he’s just trying desperately to hold onto his own power as speaker. As for Katrina Pierson, she seems to be living in an alternate universe. She claims Obama has gotten everything he’s wanted while the Republicans capitulate time and again, when nothing could be farther from the truth. The Republicans have a justified reputation as obstructionists, and clearly planned a campaign of continuous opposition to virtually everything he’s championed since he took office in 2008. All of that in the cause of preventing him from winning political points and in order to defeat him at election time. (Unfortunately, that cynical scheme failed pretty miserably in 2012.)

    Only someone who is similarly and blindly opposed to the President simply for what he is–a Democrat with vaguely liberal leanings, and maybe some racial bias in there for extra spice–would continue to see the world with such blinders. It’s no wonder we’re in this stupefyingly dysfunctional situation. And as for her claim that ignoring the debt ceiling won’t be cause for default–it’s all just more “scare tactics,” yeah sure– she shows both ignorance and appalling arrogance.

    • nj_v2

      [[ …a Democrat with vaguely liberal leanings…" ]]

      Continuing billions in nuclear power subsidies is “vaguely liberal”?

      Failing to close Guantanamo after promising to do so is “vaguely liberal”?

      Bailing out on a public health care option is “vaguely liberal”?

      Opposing same-sex marriage for years is “vaguely liberal”?

      Launching FBI raids on anti-war activists is “vaguely liberal”?

      Failing to prosecute Wall Street and banking executives involved in fraudulent behavior which almost crashed the economy is “vaguely liberal”?

      Violating his own ban on lobbyists working in his administration is “vaguely liberal”?

      Continuing with renditions of alleged, but unproved, terrorists to countries where they could be tortured isn “vaguely liberal”?

      Blocking the release of photographs documenting the torture and abuse of detainees by the U.S. military is “vaguely liberal”?

      Extending the PATRIOT Act without any reforms is “vaguely liberal”?

      Dramatically increasing government secrecy is “vaguely liberal”?

      Selling $60 billion in arms to the Saudi dictatorship is “vaguely liberal”?

      Failing to disclose visits from industry officials during the process of “health care reform” is “vaguely liberal”?

      Dramatically increasing drone attacks, killing hundreds of civilians is “vaguely liberal”?

      Cracking down on more government whistle blowers than any other president is “vaguely liberal”?

      Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

      • Cutler Hamilton

        WTH are you talking about?!?!?! You sound as beleaguered and confused as Ms. Pierson. Half the stuff you named can only be related to the Bush era. Selling arms to the Saudi’s?? We’ve been selling arms to all our ally’s and they are an ally in the region. Read up on your foreign policy please. Launching FBI raids?!?!? Bailing out on public health care?!?!?! You have no clue what you’re talking about. On second thought, can’t believe I wasted time responding to you!

  • jefe68

    From the NY Times:
    The turmoil created by the partial shutdown of the federal government has already sent investors fleeing from stocks to the safe harbor of Treasury bonds, long considered the safest investment on earth because the full faith and credit of the United States government has never been questioned. If that safe harbor is undermined, most economists have said loudly and repeatedly, the impact could be catastrophic.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/politics/many-in-gop-offer-theory-default-wouldnt-be-that-bad.html?_r=0

  • Seldoc

    If someone can explain to me how one would go about negotiating with Ms. Pierson, please do.

    • Cutler Hamilton

      Was trying to figure that out as well.

    • nytw

      There is nothing to negotiate. She is right and the wave of the future.

      • Seldoc

        If a complete unwillingness to listen to anyone’s else point of view, a rigid adherence to ideology in lieu of common sense and a willingness to do untold damage to the country and to the economy in order to impose one’s will on the majority is the wave of the future, then America’s future is bleak, indeed.

      • jefe68

        No, the tea party is going to be marginalized.
        This is going to cause a huge rift in the GOP and the tea party is going to get the boot. They might form a third party which would be fine with me. Let all the loony tunes keep digging those holes.

    • jefe68

      You can’t negotiate with zealots or idiots.

  • HonestDebate1

    As the folks around here tell us how righteous Obama is, his approval rating slips to 37% in the real world.

    • jefe68

      And the house GOP is going down to single digits.

      • HonestDebate1

        Maybe it has something to do with his disrespecting WWII vets by locking them out and arresting them while allowing illegal aliens to party down. Or shutting down the Amber Alert website. Or denying death benefits to families of the fallen.

        • TJPhoto40

          Talk about distortions of the truth. Your line of complaints is from outer space. False and ignorant as well as staunchly partisan.

        • ExcellentNews

          OMG! The George W. Bush Terror Alert Color Code system is down!!! I am running to hide under my bed !!!!!!

  • nytw

    The problem is not Obama. The problem is RINOs like Vin Weber and John Boehner. They need to resign and get out of the way of progress.

  • Cutler Hamilton

    When you’ve got a Republican and Democrat agreeing that the Tea Party guest (Ms. Pierson) is wrong about a few issues discussed on this program, you know somebody or some party doesn’t belong in the discussion about the nation’s full faith and credit. Pierson’s whole logic on the possibility of default is just mind-blowing to me. I’m not even an accountant, nor have taken any major finance classes but I have read enough into this issue to know that the country cannot afford a default. If she thinks that paying interest only on a credit card is the way to go, it wouldn’t surprise me to know that she has a below average credit score and has to pay a double-digit interest rate on everything she finances. Just no plausible, real-world logic to her arguments.

    • jefe68

      She’s not very smart or so it would seem. If she had done a little research on the subject she would see that the US has never defaulted on it’s debt obligations. I repeat, the US has never defaulted on its debt obligations.
      US Treasury Bonds are considered the safest investment for a whole lot people on this planet and nations. From China to pension plans invest in them. To undermine that trust for political gain is pretty dumb. Why the GOP leadership does not put a stop to the tea party nihilist is beyond me.

  • jefe68

    How there be common ground when the GOP, who’s agenda is guided by a small handful of hostage-taking radicals, is hell-bent on causing chaos to ruin the presidency of Barack Obama.

    How?

    • fun bobby

      literally?

  • OnPointComments

    Someone else agrees with my assessment that President Obama’s speech was not the way to start a negotiation.

    Bernie Marcus, founder of Home Depot, on President Obama’s speech yesterday (10/8/2013):

    “The first thing in a negotiation: you don’t vilify your opponent. You don’t demonize your opponent. If you do, the odds of making a deal in good faith, and it’s got to be a compromise by both sides, and both sides have to work on the deal, is it’s not going to work, and any businessman will tell you this is not the way you negotiate. But I think that this president, who has never had any business experience, who really is not prepared for this kind of thing, is really standing on his philosophy of running the business, and I don’t think he’s willing to get in the trenches and really do the kind of things that negotiators do.”

  • pete18

    Can any of the defenders of Obamacare either tell me what this article has wrong or why all the false promises used by President Obama to sell the program are acceptable? Is it that Obama has “a fundamental economic illiteracy” or “a deeply troubling readiness to mislead?” Or maybe you have a way of blaming Tea Partiers for why the program isn’t working and will never work as promised?

    “Looking back, it is amazing that Obama wasn’t laughed off the stage at the outset. His central claim — that premiums would drop for the typical family by $2,500 — could literally have been taken from the back of an envelope. As the New York Times explained back in 2008, the $2,500 number came from economist David Cutler, who predicted that Obamacare would reduce all health-care spending by $200 billion a year.
    Candidate Obama, looking for a good sound bite, simply divided this number by the number of families in the United States; then, calculating inexplicably that total health-care spending and family health-insurance premiums were exactly the same thing, he concluded that all money saved would be returned to the people. That Obama considered this a reasonable way of selling a plan that reorganized one-sixth of
    the economy betrays either a fundamental economic illiteracy or a deeply troubling readiness to mislead.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/360617/obamacare-snake-oil-charles-c-w-cooke

    • ExcellentNews

      Yeah, we should have continued the Bush/Gingrich healthcare policies, wherein

      - 30% of all medical costs go in the pockets of insurance companies that have nothing to do with health
      - the said insurance companies use the same predatory gouging practices of credit card lenders and banks
      - employer insurance shackles workers in place in the same way indentured servitude kept the peasants tied up.

      Upon his election, Obama correctly focused on healthcare reform as a key for rebuilding the middle class. In an effort of bipartisanship, he abandoned his preferred solution (national system equal for all) and pursued a REPUBLICAN proposal.

      Is that REPUBLICAN healthcare model, now called Obamacare good? Who knows – for sure, it is inferior to a true national single-payer system. Is it better to the chaos that existed previously? You bet!

      Given this is really their baby, why are the Republicans so hot to deny and kill it? Simple – if this President (who was elected by true popular will) succeeds, the redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the top may start reversing itself. And the billionaire oligarchy cannot allow that to happen…

      • pete18

        So in short, you can’t point out anything the article has wrong.

  • ExcellentNews

    Let’s see… On one hand, we have a President who grew up in a working poor family, and whose mother died from cancer due to lack of insurance.

    On the other, we have a small club of billionaire oligarchs who fly in private jets to get the best care in private clinics largely funded by taxpayer dollars. Who were rich to begin with, and got richer than Croesus by exporting your jobs to slave-labor dictatorships, and shackling you with predatory loans.

    Who will you stand for, people?

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 31, 2014
Russian President Vladimir Putin heads the Cabinet meeting in the Novo-Ogaryovo residence, outside Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, July 30, 2014.  (AP)

The US and Europe face off against Russia. Are we looking at Cold War II? Something hotter?

Jul 31, 2014
A comical sign suggest the modern workplace is anything but collegial . (KW Reinsch / Flickr)

When the boss is a bad apple. How some pretty dark traits can push some to the top.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 30, 2014
Janitta Swain, Writer/Exec. Producer/Co-Director Dinesh D'Souza, John Koopman, Caroline Granger and Don Taylor seen at the World Premiere of 'America: Imagine The World Without Her' at Regal Cinemas LA Live on Monday, June 30, 2014, in Los Angeles, CA. (AP)

Conservative firebrand Dinesh D’Souza says he wants an America without apologies. He’s also facing jail time. We’ll hear him out.

 
Jul 30, 2014
Smoke and fire from the explosion of an Israeli strike rises over Gaza City, Tuesday, July 29, 2014. Israel escalated its military campaign against Hamas on Tuesday, striking symbols of the group's control in Gaza and firing tank shells that shut down the strip's only power plant in the heaviest bombardment in the fighting so far. (AP)

Social media is changing how the world sees and talks about Israel and Gaza, Israelis and Palestinians. We’ll look at the impact.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
This 15-Year-Old Caller Is Really Disappointed With Congress
Tuesday, Jul 29, 2014

In which a 15-year-old caller from Nashville expertly and elegantly analyzes our bickering, mostly ineffective 113th Congress.

More »
4 Comments
 
Our Week In The Web: July 25, 2014
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

Why the key to web victory is often taking a break and looking around, and more pie for your viewing (not eating) pleasure.

More »
Comment
 
The Art Of The American Pie: Recipes
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

In the odd chance that our pie hour this week made you hungry — how could it not, right? — we asked our piemaking guests for some of their favorite pie recipes. Enjoy!

More »
1 Comment