Please OSA, tell me I misunderstood the news! Please!

[ChuckC]

As to JB's original question, this administration has gone out of it's way to willfully violate the Antideficiency Act in order to shut down open memorials and parks like the WWII Memorial. Can anyone reasonably explain why the WWI Memorial looks like this:

And the WWII Memorial looks like this:

Could it be because there are no scheduled Honor Flights costing $80,000-$100,000 filled with WWI vets to visit the WWI memorial? And there's not supposed to be any political motivation behind spending extra money and resources closing an open memorial park that was paid for with private funds and is normally not staffed, no admission charged or access restricted? Really?

So do you really think they're not so crass as to deny veterans access or benefits? It's not such a far leap...



Judge Napolitano would disagree with you. I'll take his opinion over yours any day of the week.

Every last one of them is responsible. What I haven't figured out is why half the population in this country hasn't marched on DC with torches and pitchforks. Personally? I wouldn't be a very benevolent dictator. There would be a fairly long row of heads on pikes by now...

100% correct. Obama and company want to make it as painful as possible.

I read earlier that a federally owned park that is staffed by volunteers and funded by private parties was also closed. The lady who ran it said it hasn't been closed in 40 years, made it through all the other "shutdowns" unscathed.

 

[uncle money bags]

I'd be all for this but only if we can do a full reset. By that I mean wipe every agency, rule, regulation, law, federal judge and court precedent off the books. We start completely fresh with the Constitution as originally adopted along with it's first 10 Amendments. We $hitcan everything after this point and start the hell over...

There is only one way this happens, and we arent mad enough yet to pledge our lives, fortunes and sacred honor. Yet.

 

[TerryMiller]

Just as a little perspective to all this, I'd like to mention that there has been one political party that for decades has wanted to cut the military. Say what you will, those cuts were to both the active and veterans. In fact, the last Democrat that did anything to "build up" the military was LBJ, and he was doing it to try to win a war so that he wouldn't get the blame. After LBJ, Carter, Clinton, and Obama have all cut the military. The Dems have the mistaken belief that negotiations and sanctions will be better than having a strong military. So, how is that working out for this President?

Whose administration is putting up barricades where there have never been barricades before? Who is threatening our veterans with arrest if they go beyond those barricades? Whose administration is perfectly willing to give handouts to folks who don't really need them, but cut benefits for the veterans and active military? Any word of stopping the nonsense called the Obama phone during all of this?

Also, should anyone be interested, the government has shut down something like 17 times in the past. This Washington Post article gives a lengthy explanation as to what will happen with the shutdown. It will take a bit of reading, but down toward the very end of the article is the notations about how many times the government has "technically" shut down and "physically" shut down.

Absolutely Everything You Need to Know About How the Government Shutdown Will Work

One other question for everyone to consider: in the list of effects of the shutdown, the Washington Post lists how many "non-essential" personnel will be "laid off" for the duration of the shutdown. Ask the question of yourselves, "If they are so non-essential that the government can still run necessary functions, why do we need to keep so many non-essential employees anyway?"

For those so quick to blame the Republicans and the Tea Party, after seeing how many non-essential employees there are, perhaps we should consider that they are right in fighting to make government smaller.

 

[farmerbyron]

I'd be all for this but only if we can do a full reset. By that I mean wipe every agency, rule, regulation, law, federal judge and court precedent off the books. We start completely fresh with the Constitution as originally adopted along with it's first 10 Amendments. We $hitcan everything after this point and start the hell over.

Edit: Here's the new 11th & 12th Amendments.

11th: No Congressman or Senator can serve more than two terms in their lifetime and they may not be consecutive.
12th: The phrase "common good" is banned from being used as any precept for any law, rule or regulation passed or adopted.

Well you can wish in one hand and **** in the other and see which one gets filled first.

In reality, the only way I see a "reset" button ever being a possibility is to have the govt. collapse under its own weight. It is going to happen at some point sooner or later so maybe we should all dogpile and spend this ***** into the ground and get it over with so we can get a fresh start. It would be akin to giving a heroin addict access to all the smack they want. The problem is self resolving.

 

[SoonerBorn]

See "The Liberty Amendments".

 

[farmerbyron]

Maybe some constitutional scholar can help me out here but how does congress and the executive exempt themselves from Obamacare and remain in compliance with the 14th amendment? Thought that one expressly says that all citizens are afforded equal protection under the law. So how does an effective ruling class get to play by different rules and exempt themselves from the laws they pass? Our constitution is dead.

 

[SoonerBorn]

Maybe some constitutional scholar can help me out here but how does congress and the executive exempt themselves from Obamacare and remain in compliance with the 14th amendment? Thought that one expressly says that all citizens are afforded equal protection under the law. So how does an effective ruling class get to play by different rules and exempt themselves from the laws they pass? Our constitution is dead.

Ask Ignernt. He's confident about the resolution of this law. So much so, he forgot to mention that the Executive branch changes it without using the guidelines in Article I.

 

[Shadowrider]

There is only one way this happens, and we arent mad enough yet to pledge our lives, fortunes and sacred honor. Yet.

Understood and agreed.

Well you can wish in one hand and **** in the other and see which one gets filled first.

In reality, the only way I see a "reset" button ever being a possibility is to have the govt. collapse under its own weight. It is going to happen at some point sooner or later so maybe we should all dogpile and spend this ***** into the ground and get it over with so we can get a fresh start. It would be akin to giving a heroin addict access to all the smack they want. The problem is self resolving.

Funny, I just told my wife that I didn't know what the better plan would be. What they are doing now fighting to fix it, or just not doing a damn thing and letting us turn into Cypress.

 

[TwoForFlinching]

Silly peasants... Don't try to hold the lawmakers to the laws they hold to you.

 

[ignerntbend]

:




Judge Napolitano would disagree with you. I'll take his opinion over yours any day of the week.

Judge Napolitano? Is he on the Supreme Court? Because it really isn't about people who don't agree with me.
The waitress at the TastyFreeze doesn't agree with me, but I'm not so sure her opinion has any bearing here.