Blame Obama for the gub'ment shutdown

[Longermonger]

I know you're going to blame Democrats for the government shutdown in March. I just want you to hear why you blame them. Who are you going to blame more; Obama? Reid? Pelosi?

Or is it too early for you guys to get outraged? Do you have to wait until Fox tells you to get outraged? Or do you wait for Rush to get you worked up? Ummm...just pretend my post box on here is a miniature version of Glenn Beck's chalkboard...maybe that'll do it.

[Guest052813-01]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

I know you're going to blame Democrats for the government shutdown in March. I just want you to hear why you blame them. Who are you going to blame more; Obama? Reid? Pelosi?

I'll blame them all equally. And then I'll thank them all equally. The best thing that could happen is having the government shut down. The less the government does, the better it is for all of us.

[john_galt]

Outraged? Why so negative? This is sublime political Kabuki theater. Yes, the democrats have been cast as the clowns so far or the black hats if violence breaks out. Unfortunately violence is likely with some dems calling for violence with the unions. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...when-necessary. You know there was an election and the Governor ran on cutting the power of the public unions down so he is doing exactly what he was elected to do. Too bad Obama can't do the same. Oh, Reid is too busy worrying about prostitution in Nevada (why doesn't that make Longer's head explode) to care about the government and Pelosi has no power. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011...thel-industry/

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by fritz3552

The best thing that could happen is having the government shut down. The less the government does, the better it is for all of us.

Just remember that you typed that while the government was protecting your ass from a thousand ills. You posted it on the Internet that the government created. In fact the only reason you were able to live long enough to post it is because that government made sure you had clean water, safe food, and an education from a public school. To me, you sound like an ungrateful child...not a citizen.

[Guest052813-01]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

Just remember that you typed that while the government was protecting your ass from a thousand ills. You posted it on the Internet that the government created. In fact the only reason you were able to live long enough to post it is because that government made sure you had clean water, safe food, and an education from a public school. To me, you sound like an ungrateful child...not a citizen.

And you sound like a shit-stirrer, not a thoughtful respondent. It was Thomas Paine who wrote, in Common Sense, "That government is best that governs least", which was also attributed to Henry Daivd Thoreau in Civil Disobedience. I'll say it again, the less that the government does, the better off we all are. Keeping us safe from enemies, foreign and domestic, keeping the parks clean and maintained are the things that government does well. When the government tries to introduce social engineering or confiscate your wealth, that's when it's time to kiss your liberties good-bye.

[Cheaper2buyit]

Look as always I don,t have all the good links & info you guys have however intill repubs start taking from the rich & stop fucking the masses then shit will always be fucked. I like poor people they do things I wont. I mean theres not anything I will do for 8 a hour. And as for as taxes thats what a cpa is for. I hate states taxes & fees. Hate taxes donate stuff thats why the rich do it.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by fritz3552

And you sound like a shit-stirrer, not a thoughtful respondent. It was Thomas Paine who wrote, in Common Sense, "That government is best that governs least", which was also attributed to Henry Daivd Thoreau in Civil Disobedience. I'll say it again, the less that the government does, the better off we all are. Keeping us safe from enemies, foreign and domestic, keeping the parks clean and maintained are the things that government does well. When the government tries to introduce social engineering or confiscate your wealth, that's when it's time to kiss your liberties good-bye.

Oh, I guess you didn't really mean least when you excluded the $664 Billion per year defense budget.

I'm guessing the "social engineering" part is Social Security for old people so they don't die while begging in the street. Go tell the Greatest Generation you want to get rid of their Cadillac plan. Talk about your death panels...geez.

Is "confiscate your wealth" just plain taxes? It sounds like taxes. I know you guys hate taxes. You know the 16th Amendment allows Congress to "confiscate your wealth" as taxes, right? Why do you hate the Constitution of the United States?

Oh, and I checked out the Paine quote. He didn't say that and it wasn't in Common Sense. Nice try! Ahhh...summer soldiers and sunshine patriots...

Even if you just stand by the Thoreau quote, you've got to admit that we've come a long way since 1849. Heck! That 16th Amendment wasn't around until 1913. It's almost like the government has gotten better...

"I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government"– the direction of this improvement aims at anarchism"

I HEARTILY ACCEPT the motto, — "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, — "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.

That's the full quote. You'll note that it is progressive and conditional. It sort of sickens me that you twisted a quote about civil disobedience around like that. Civil disobedience is what Democrats are doing in Wisconsin. Yet your (mis)use of the quote makes it a tool for the Tea Party counter-protestors in Wisconsin. Tsk, tsk!

[KCJoe]

From Shep Smith of Fox News:

On Wednesday's "Studio B," Shepard Smith said the battle over union rights in Wisconsin was all about busting unions and securing Republican political power, not about the state's budget deficit.
It was a take that placed Smith squarely in agreement with people such as Rachel Maddow, who has repeatedly argued essentially the same thing on her show.
Speaking to a mostly-in-agreement Juan Williams, Smith said the fight was "100 percent politics."
"There is no budget crisis in Wisconsin," he said, adding that the unions "[have] given concessions." The real point of the fight, Smith said, could be found in the list of the top ten donors to political campaigns. Seven out of the ten donated to Republicans; the other three were unions donating to Democrats.
"Bust the unions, and it's over," Smith said. He then brought up the Koch brothers, the billionaires who have bankrolled much of the anti-union pushback in Wisconsin. The fight, Smith said, "started" with the Kochs, who he said were trying to get a return on the money they donated to Walker's campaign.
"I'm not taking a side on this, I'm just telling you what's going on...to pretend this is about a fiscal crisis in the state of Wisconsin is malarkey," Smith said.

[Longermonger]

Yeah. I saw that video. I fear for Shep's life. I hope he doesn't commit suicide while having a heart attack on a small plane during an ice storm.

Maddow (badass cool chick that she is) just did her show from the Free State Brewery in Lawrence, KS last night.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

Oh, I guess you didn't really mean least when you excluded the $664 Billion per year defense budget. We'd save tons of money if we let military professionals manage the Defense department, instead of funding it through earmarks and special interest legislation. Both parties guilty.

I'm guessing the "social engineering" part is Social Security for old people so they don't die while begging in the street. Go tell the Greatest Generation you want to get rid of their Cadillac plan. Talk about your death panels...geez. Good lord, Longer. So it is only because of government that people aren't lying in the streets dying of starvation. I thought a humanist like you would have a better opinion of humanity. People would only be kind if the government forces them?

Is "confiscate your wealth" just plain taxes? It sounds like taxes. I know you guys hate taxes. You know the 16th Amendment allows Congress to "confiscate your wealth" as taxes, right? Why do you hate the Constitution of the United States? No, when the government can draw guns, and force you to turn over something which belongs to you is not taxation, it is tyranny. The Constitution was fine until the 16th Amendment was enacted. It will be fine again when the 16th Amendment is repealed.

Oh, and I checked out the Paine quote. He didn't say that and it wasn't in Common Sense. Nice try! Ahhh...summer soldiers and sunshine patriots...

Even if you just stand by the Thoreau quote, you've got to admit that we've come a long way since 1849. Heck! That 16th Amendment wasn't around until 1913. It's almost like the government has gotten better...

"I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government"– the direction of this improvement aims at anarchism"

I HEARTILY ACCEPT the motto, — "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, — "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.

That's the full quote. You'll note that it is progressive and conditional. It sort of sickens me that you twisted a quote about civil disobedience around like that. Civil disobedience is what Democrats are doing in Wisconsin. Yet your (mis)use of the quote makes it a tool for the Tea Party counter-protestors in Wisconsin. Tsk, tsk!

No, civil disobedience is when the citizens use peaceful means to protest government action. When lawmakers flee to avoid their duty and thwart the will of those who elected them, it is called "cowardice." And "pandering to donors."

Longer, you crack me up. Keep up with your game. It's a lot of fun.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

No, civil disobedience is when the citizens use peaceful means to protest government action. When lawmakers flee to avoid their duty and thwart the will of those who elected them, it is called "cowardice." And "pandering to donors."

Lawmakers are citizens. What they've done is a peaceful act to protest government abuse. And yes, it is abuse. Walker is using the power of his office to pursue a political goal, not a budgetary goal.

You really need to tone down what you're saying about state lawmakers that go out of state to prevent a quorum. Because I will repeat them back to you verbatim when Republicans eventually do it in the future.

[deacon]

Just remember that you typed that while the government was protecting your ass from a thousand ills. You posted it on the Internet that the government created. In fact the only reason you were able to live long enough to post it is because that government made sure you had clean water, safe food, and an education from a public school. To me, you sound like an ungrateful child...not a citizen.
__________________
clean water?? i wonder why bottle sales are skyrocketing? safe food??lmao sure..education from a public school?? tell that to the 8th graders in wisconson who cant read.

[CuteOldGuy]

Longer, what makes you think I'm a Republican? If Republicans pull this kind of stunt, they are cowards and panderers too.

I am NOT a Republican! I love liberty, and will stand against all attempts to limit it whether from the Republicans, Democrats, Whigs or anyone else.

[Guest010418]

I thought KCJoes' comments were interesting. The Koch Klan certainly is devious.

[lacrew_2000]

"when Republicans eventually do it in the future."

The Republicans have already tried this, twenty years ago in the Senate. The democrat leadership had them hunted down like dogs, literally forcibly carrying one senator into the chamber to get a quorum.

And BTW, the Democrats tried it in TX not too long ago, to prevent re-districting.

Its not a new or original idea...yet this seems to be the first time it has been championed as some movement akin to the civil rights act.