Still, so far we've had no accidents. Perhaps they aren't as essential as we think.
Schumer Shutdown Question
- Thread starter 1srelluc
- Start date
Not according to Trump before he became the President
How does Trump get away with being such a hypocrite? Remember before he plead the 5th a million times he said anyone who pleads the 5th is guilty? How does he get away with doing this over and over again?
"If there is a shutdown... I think it would be a tremendously negative mark on the president of the United States. He's the one that has to get people together."
He emphasized that the president, regardless of who controls the House or Senate, has the ultimate responsibility to unite everyone in a room and lead to avoid a government shutdown.
During an October 2013 interview with Greta Van Susteren, Trump elaborated, stating that the president needs to be a leader, get key figures like the Speaker of the House in a room, and "make a deal" using various tactics. He echoed this sentiment in a September 2013 "Fox & Friends" interview, emphasizing that problems start and must be solved from the top, with the president taking the lead in bringing people together. These remarks were made while criticizing President Barack Obama's approach to the 2013 government shutdown.
Nah, we prefer just voting them out of office. They're pretty useless, just keep getting in the way. That's what Chuck U is doing, BTW.
Russia has nothing to do with this, just sayin'. Are you obsessed with Russia?
Not relevant to the topic, but since you insist, crazed killers around the world are easier to work with than democrats.
He's not involved in the negotiations. He doesn't even have a vote in the Senate. This is between Schumer and Senate Republicans, who have offered bills that would prevent SNAP and all those other programs democrats claim to care about from running out of money which Chuck U has refused. Any shortfall in SNAP is on Schumer. Chuck U values leverage more than he does people's lives.
Ah yes, the ol' "Citizen TRUMP! said different things" gambit. Presidents usually find out things are more difficult than they imagined. Why do you think Obama, aka The Fragile One, said he wanted to bring a gun to a knife fight? He found out his mastery of reading a script from a teleprompter wasn't making Republicans kneel in front of him like he expected.
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 90,099
- 81,886
- 3,615
I'm not concerned with how easily you Cult idiots are fooled by your handlers, Simp.
Answer this if you can....
If the Dimwingers are using the shutdown as leverage, how are they not the ones causing the shutdown?
None of you clowns have been able to answer that one.
Got anything?
Edgetho
Diamond Member
- Mar 27, 2012
- 22,794
- 15,996
- 2,405
We MUST re-open the goobermint so dimocrap FILTH can spend money on important things like this --
Ah...it's a trifecta of failure! Biden's magic touch at turning everything he does into a massive, jiggling pile of excrement, the government's fantastic, wide-ranging skill at being absolutely awful at everything it does, and the delightful frisson of DEI, which always injects additional failure points!
Frankly, I'm amazed that they only pissed away $42.5 billion!
Trump Administration Overhauls Biden's DEI Broadband Program that Connected Zero Households in 4 Years
It's amazing that proven technology was carefully rejected because of its yucky connection to Elon Musk who, even back then was suspect because of his outlandish ideas that merit and skill should be the drivers of employment.
Just do the math, and Starlink is by far the most efficient answer to providing connectivity to rural America.
But...why the hell are we spending one dollar on connectivity for anyone? Maybe I missed it in the Constitution, but as far as I can tell, it isn't the core mission of the United States government to make sure that every American has access to high-speed internet porn and cat videos. Why not also spend $42.5 billion on high speed trains, so people can get to work, or subsidize their cellular service and equipment? Oh...wait...we are doing that already.
We piss away oceans of money on stuff the government has no business supporting, while simultaneously doing a horrifically inefficient job at it. Welfare? Airport security? Education? Infrastructure? They are all fantastically expensive boondoggles that no doubt pump lots of money into the coffers of friendly corporations and fellow-traveler nonprofits.
But internet might be the silliest of the bunch! It is a perfect application of market economics, and the cost should be borne by the users. Why should I have to pay for someone else's access to the internet, when I am already paying for my own? Is it a natural right to surf busty lesbian porn and buy paper napkins and lipstick from Amazon?
What this typical mess of a government program represents is the inexorable creep of what government should do. We have moved from the basics in 1791, to an incomprehensibly complex labyrinth of spending for results that never come. President Trump's rational attempt to rein in spending is a laudable beginning, but it must accelerate and expand for it to have any long-lasting effect on our budgetary woes, and our ridiculous drift away from the core function of government.
Ah...it's a trifecta of failure! Biden's magic touch at turning everything he does into a massive, jiggling pile of excrement, the government's fantastic, wide-ranging skill at being absolutely awful at everything it does, and the delightful frisson of DEI, which always injects additional failure points!
Frankly, I'm amazed that they only pissed away $42.5 billion!
Trump Administration Overhauls Biden's DEI Broadband Program that Connected Zero Households in 4 Years
It's amazing that proven technology was carefully rejected because of its yucky connection to Elon Musk who, even back then was suspect because of his outlandish ideas that merit and skill should be the drivers of employment.
Just do the math, and Starlink is by far the most efficient answer to providing connectivity to rural America.
But...why the hell are we spending one dollar on connectivity for anyone? Maybe I missed it in the Constitution, but as far as I can tell, it isn't the core mission of the United States government to make sure that every American has access to high-speed internet porn and cat videos. Why not also spend $42.5 billion on high speed trains, so people can get to work, or subsidize their cellular service and equipment? Oh...wait...we are doing that already.
We piss away oceans of money on stuff the government has no business supporting, while simultaneously doing a horrifically inefficient job at it. Welfare? Airport security? Education? Infrastructure? They are all fantastically expensive boondoggles that no doubt pump lots of money into the coffers of friendly corporations and fellow-traveler nonprofits.
But internet might be the silliest of the bunch! It is a perfect application of market economics, and the cost should be borne by the users. Why should I have to pay for someone else's access to the internet, when I am already paying for my own? Is it a natural right to surf busty lesbian porn and buy paper napkins and lipstick from Amazon?
What this typical mess of a government program represents is the inexorable creep of what government should do. We have moved from the basics in 1791, to an incomprehensibly complex labyrinth of spending for results that never come. President Trump's rational attempt to rein in spending is a laudable beginning, but it must accelerate and expand for it to have any long-lasting effect on our budgetary woes, and our ridiculous drift away from the core function of government.
schmidlap
Platinum Member
- Oct 30, 2020
- 13,955
- 8,939
- 1,138
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 90,099
- 81,886
- 3,615
Online polls are as useless as you are, Shitlips.
schmidlap
Platinum Member
- Oct 30, 2020
- 13,955
- 8,939
- 1,138
Your childishness may be indicative of your inability to confront the truth:
.
Here are the facts:
• In January, premiums for Americans who buy health insurance on their own will skyrocket,
increasing by double in many states.
• Meanwhile, states across the country are proposing double digit premium increases as the
new reality of Trumpcare sets in, the highest in half a decade.
• Since Trump took office, Republicans have resumed attacking the Affordable Care Act,
putting up red tape to make it harder for people to get coverage.
• With steps like shortening the enrollment period, creating more verification hoops to get
covered, and reducing time to resolve paperwork mistakes, Republicans are making it
harder for middle-class Americans to get health care.
• Failure to extend the tax credits, on top of the damage Republicans have already done, will
send the individual insurance market into a death spiral, causing 7 million people to lose
coverage, and increase health costs for all Americans, even those who get health
insurance through their job.
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 90,099
- 81,886
- 3,615
If you want Republicans to fix the clusterfuck Barrycare Schumer needs to stop his temper tantrum and open the government.
CRs are not the vehicle for new programs and spending, Stupid.
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 90,099
- 81,886
- 3,615
The Republicans are under no obligation to fix the clusteruck Dimwinger forced on America, especially in a CR.
A CR is simply an appropriation of funds for programs that have already been negotiated, voted on, passed, and signed into law.
This is not a place to try to start new spending or programs. In fact, new spending is PROHIBITED in a CR.
Summary
The program activities of most federal agencies are generally funded on an annual basis through the enactment of regular appropriations acts. When those annual appropriations acts are not enacted by the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1), one or more continuing appropriations acts (commonly known as continuing resolutions or CRs) may be enacted to provide temporary funding to continue certain programs and activities until action on the regular appropriations acts is completed.
There are six main features of CRs.
First, CRs have provided funding for certain activities (coverage), which are typically specified with reference to the prior fiscal year's appropriations acts.
Second, CRs provide budget authority for a specified duration of time. This duration may be as short as a single day or as long as the remainder of the fiscal year.
Third, in recent practice, CRs have typically provided funds based on an overall funding rate rather than in specified amounts.
Fourth, the use of budget authority provided in the CR has been prohibited for new activities not funded in the previous fiscal year.
Fifth, the duration and amount of funds in the CR, and purposes for which they may be used for specified activities, may be adjusted through anomalies.
Sixth, legislative provisions—which create, amend, or extend other laws—have been included in some instances.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46595
A CR is simply an appropriation of funds for programs that have already been negotiated, voted on, passed, and signed into law.
This is not a place to try to start new spending or programs. In fact, new spending is PROHIBITED in a CR.
Summary
The program activities of most federal agencies are generally funded on an annual basis through the enactment of regular appropriations acts. When those annual appropriations acts are not enacted by the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1), one or more continuing appropriations acts (commonly known as continuing resolutions or CRs) may be enacted to provide temporary funding to continue certain programs and activities until action on the regular appropriations acts is completed.
There are six main features of CRs.
First, CRs have provided funding for certain activities (coverage), which are typically specified with reference to the prior fiscal year's appropriations acts.
Second, CRs provide budget authority for a specified duration of time. This duration may be as short as a single day or as long as the remainder of the fiscal year.
Third, in recent practice, CRs have typically provided funds based on an overall funding rate rather than in specified amounts.
Fourth, the use of budget authority provided in the CR has been prohibited for new activities not funded in the previous fiscal year.
Fifth, the duration and amount of funds in the CR, and purposes for which they may be used for specified activities, may be adjusted through anomalies.
Sixth, legislative provisions—which create, amend, or extend other laws—have been included in some instances.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46595
schmidlap
Platinum Member
- Oct 30, 2020
- 13,955
- 8,939
- 1,138
If you think that most folks will be happy to see Republicans succeed in causing millions of their fellow Americans to lose their healthcare coverage, I don't see it.
The House-passed reconciliation bill would take health coverage away from millions of people and dramatically raise health care costs for millions more. The so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” is anything but beautiful; it would cause widespread harm by making massive cuts to Medicaid, Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace coverage, and SNAP, which would raise costs on families and make it much harder for them to afford the high cost of groceries and health care.
^^ That's the million dollar question. The 2021 subsidies were supposed to be temporary to help people during the world wide pandemic.
Republicans must let Obamacare subsidies expire, even if it costs them | Opinion
If Republicans can't muster the backbone to let these subsidies expire now, the subsidized level of spending will become the status quo forever.www.usatoday.com
The government shutdown remains at a standstill, with the issue at the center being that Democrats demand that Republicans pass extensions for subsidies of the Affordable Care Act.
It makes no sense, I thought it was called the AFFORDABLE Care Act. If it is so affordable, why are subsidies needed?
The dems have some explainin' to do.
Honestly, I hate Chuck Schumer. Wish he would go away. He's not doing us any favors. We need new leadership that's for sure. Republicans leading the way they are will make it easier for them to win but it won't be Chuck Schumer Democrats. They are pathetic. Low energy. Even Hakeem Jeffries. He's been brainwashed by the liberal elites in Washington. We need more guys like the NYC Mayor Ramdani.
Schumer is an idiot. We clearly need to go younger and who does he endorse last week? Maine's 77 year old termed out governnor.
He is not listening and he doesn't have a clue. It's like Biden. Get him out of there!
Republicans demand Democrats sign on or they will shut down the government. And they refuse to make ANY changes to the bill. This has never been done before. Zero compromise? Is that the art of the deal? Then no deal.
Trump doesn't seem like a good negotiator.
MagicMike
Platinum Member
Remind me again who the Speaker of the House is? And which party is it again that controls both houses of Congress and The White House?
And there was a reason your 2016 Trump tax breaks were set to expire this year. But rich people's and corporate tax breaks were not. Why is that? Is it to make it a political issue? Notice they didn't play games with rich people's tax breaks or corporations. Those are forever.
Medicaid Cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act Leave 3 in 10 Young Adults Vulnerable to Losing Health Care Access
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will likely make it more difficult to apply for and maintain Medicaid, which could make it harder for young adults to successf…
www.urban.org
I don't think what you are saying is even true. I think Republicans are killing Obamacare which was made in 2010
Rawley
Diamond Member
- Sep 8, 2014
- 52,579
- 38,609
- 3,645
"Demand" is a odd way to look at it.. A CR gives the legislator a choice - vote YES to keep the gvt. open or vote NO to close. Democrats have chosen to vote NO and have shut down the goverment.
Uh, this bill was literally voted on and passed 13 times during the Biden administration.
You truly cannot be this ignorant.
Your TDS is showing. The votes in the Senate have nothing to do with Trump.
the watcher
Diamond Member
Pfizer announced that if the government shut down persists, they might have to lay off 300 Members of Congress.
That is false on its face. The democrats have already shut down the government because they didn't like a bill they were going to lose on. Republicans didn't shut down the government, Schumer did. Since he shut it down and can open it back up, what compromise is he proposing?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Father Awaiting Trial in Murder of Teen Daughter's Alleged Rapist Wins Primary for County Sheriff- Started by Mack The Finger
- Replies: 0
-
Court unanimously sides with government in immigration dispute- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 0
-
-
