Republicans!

[Nickman]

I grew up in a Republican household. Dad was a Hard Core Marine and avid O'Reilly viewer. He always told me that we were a Republican family and that they always look out for the working class and especially military. Now that I am a little older and concerned with politics, I see this may have been true back then (80s) but not so much now. The Republicans were the championed defenders of the military and DOD in general. Today, they are holding our paychecks hostage to negotiate against the Democrats. Democrats are now the champions of the middle class and military, while the Republicans are champions of the rich.

Have the Republicans changed their stance?
Do they care about military over the rich?
What is the reason behind this observation?
Were the Republicans really champions of the military back in the 80s?
Was I just fed BS in my youth?

[bluethread]

I think that Repubs were more military and middle class up until the early 90s. Then in the Bush admin, they seemed to be, now they have made an about face.

I think that is based on how you are viewing the shutdown. Literally, it is the President that is cutting the military. He has the discreation. Also, the House has sent legislation to Harry Reid to fully fund the military. It is Harry Reid who is refusing to approve that funding.

[keithprosser3]

I think that Repubs were more military and middle class up until the early 90s.

There may be a shift from the middle-class to the even richer elite. The notion of 'trickle-down' is surely a euphemism for having to live on the crumbs that fall from billionaires' tables.

Real power has drifted away from politicians. The world is now run by the bosses of mega-corporations. Whether a country or a region is rich or poor depends on where Nissan and Toyota want to put their factories, not on government policies.

Government policies are bids for those factories in terms of what tax breaks and other incentives they can offer.

[Nickman]

I think that Repubs were more military and middle class up until the early 90s. Then in the Bush admin, they seemed to be, now they have made an about face.

I think that is based on how you are viewing the shutdown. Literally, it is the President that is cutting the military. He has the discreation. Also, the House has sent legislation to Harry Reid to fully fund the military. It is Harry Reid who is refusing to approve that funding.

That is false. The Republicans are holding ransom the budget. They want Obama and the Dems to negotiate to defund the Affordable Care Act. The reason that Dems won't, is because the ACA has underwent 40 repeals by the Republicans and lost the vote everytime since 2008. The legal way to pass a bill is to have a majority in the House. The Repubs cannot get the votes legally, so they have decided to withold votes on the budget. Their plan is to make the Dems buckle, but they won't. Reason is, because this will cause us to default on our debt. The repercussions are the entire government shutdown. Like you have never seen. The corporations, who pay the Repubs, have now stepped in and said "whoa we only meant for you to appeal Obamacare." Now the entire economy is in danger. Learn your facts.

[youtube][/youtube]

Here is what the Republicans consider "essential."

[youtube][/youtube]

Here is how Obamacare "destroys" America

[youtube][/youtube]

[bluethread]

Learn your facts.

The Hill Sept. 30, 2013 -The Senate cleared the "Pay Our Military Act," which the House passed over the weekend.

H.R. 3210 would appropriate funds to pay the military at any time in 2014 when appropriations are not in effect, such as during a government shutdown. It also allows the government to keep paying civilian personnel and contractors that the Defense Department deems to be helping the military. The measure now heads to President Obama's desk for his signature.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) passed the bill through a unanimous consent agreement.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/s ... z2hMHBKwjG
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

What is not factual about that? That's H. R. (House Resolution)3210, Sept. 30, 2013, before the shutdown. The Presudent signed it on Sept. 30. I have a quote giving Obama the headline, but it is from FOX, so I presumed you would just poopoo it. The money is there, why is Obama withholding it? In fact, the house has passed bills to fund some 1/3rd of the discresionary spending.

"In addition to the Head Start resolution, the House has passed nine other short-term spending resolutions. They would fund the Washington, D.C., government; national parks; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the National Institutes of Health; the National Guard and reservists; the Women, Infants and Children program; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and the Food and Drug Administration.

The last is the Pay Our Military Act, which ensures payment of the military and their civilian supporters even during the shutdown. While not technically a continuing spending resolution, that is the one bill the Senate did take up and pass, and President Obama signed it into law"

Read more: http://thehill.com/video/house/327235-h ... z2hMLJwDrI
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So, why are Reid and Obama chosing to fund the military and nothing else? Could it be so that they can look like they are promilitary, while they continue to demigogue the others?

Mybe you need to start watching somthing other than The Young Turks.

[Nickman]

Learn your facts.

The Hill Sept. 30, 2013 -The Senate cleared the "Pay Our Military Act," which the House passed over the weekend.

H.R. 3210 would appropriate funds to pay the military at any time in 2014 when appropriations are not in effect, such as during a government shutdown. It also allows the government to keep paying civilian personnel and contractors that the Defense Department deems to be helping the military. The measure now heads to President Obama's desk for his signature.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) passed the bill through a unanimous consent agreement.

Which my civilian employees are greatful for. They have been out of work for over 8 days without pay. 3 of those days they have been working (not on leave). No idea if they will get reimbursed. Thanks for showing that Dems are looking out for the middle-class and military.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/s ... z2hMHBKwjG
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

What is not factual about that? That's H. R. (House Resolution)3210, Sept. 30, 2013, before the shutdown. The Presudent [sic] signed it on Sept. 30. I have a quote giving Obama the headline, but it is from FOX, so I presumed you would just poopoo it. The money is there, why is Obama withholding it? In fact, the house has passed bills to fund some 1/3rd of the discresionary spending.

Here is what the Republicans have decided is essential and nonessential. You didn't watch my video.

[Youtube][/youtube]

"In addition to the Head Start resolution, the House has passed nine other short-term spending resolutions. They would fund the Washington, D.C., government; national parks; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the National Institutes of Health; the National Guard and reservists; the Women, Infants and Children program; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and the Food and Drug Administration.

The House is run by who? Democrats. Democrats want to fund all of the government. Repubs want to hold the gov hostage until they can get leverage.

The last is the Pay Our Military Act, which ensures payment of the military and their civilian supporters even during the shutdown. While not technically a continuing spending resolution, that is the one bill the Senate did take up and pass, and President Obama signed it into law"

Yes, Democrats like our President signed it into law! Do you even read what you post! Who has the Senate? Democrats. They have the majority.

Read more: http://thehill.com/video/house/327235-h ... z2hMLJwDrI
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

So, why are Reid and Obama chosing to fund the military and nothing else? Could it be so that they can look like they are promilitary, while they continue to demigogue the others?

No, because they understand that DOD workers should not suffer because the Republicans are stupid.

Mybe you need to start watching somthing other than The Young Turks.

Like Fox news? Please. You vote for the ones who screw you while you sleep.

[Goat]

I grew up in a Republican household. Dad was a Hard Core Marine and avid O'Reilly viewer. He always told me that we were a Republican family and that they always look out for the working class and especially military. Now that I am a little older and concerned with politics, I see this may have been true back then (80s) but not so much now. The Republicans were the championed defenders of the military and DOD in general. Today, they are holding our paychecks hostage to negotiate against the Democrats. Democrats are now the champions of the middle class and military, while the Republicans are champions of the rich.

Have the Republicans changed their stance?

Yes, they have. There were talking about getting the votes to shut down the government in 2009, before the 2010 elections.

Do they care about military over the rich?

Well, their actions help the rich over the military personal. I remember in 2002, there was a huge vote in Congress about cutting health benefits to military personal, just as the wars, and threat in Iraq was heating up, and my very strong attitude was 'But, you are sending people to war, that's when they need medical benefits the most'. the bill to cut military benefits passed right along party lines.

What is the reason behind this observation?
Were the Republicans really champions of the military back in the 80s?
Was I just fed BS in my youth?

Well, the military was the Republican base in the 80's. and they were more respectful, and a lot more attention was given to military contrats. However, even then, it was more along the lines of defense companies, rather than military personal. The emphasis of the corporations over people intensified quite a lot (mainly because of propaganda from libertarian anarchistic billionaires).

[bluethread]

The Hill Sept. 30, 2013 -The Senate cleared the "Pay Our Military Act," which the House passed over the weekend.

H.R. 3210 would appropriate funds to pay the military at any time in 2014 when appropriations are not in effect, such as during a government shutdown. It also allows the government to keep paying civilian personnel and contractors that the Defense Department deems to be helping the military. The measure now heads to President Obama's desk for his signature.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) passed the bill through a unanimous consent agreement.

Which my civilian employees are greatful for. They have been out of work for over 8 days without pay. 3 of those days they have been working (not on leave). No idea if they will get reimbursed. Thanks for showing that Dems are looking out for the middle-class and military.

Yes, it appears that the Senate agrees that House Resolution should be passed and disagrees with funding nine other areas of government covered by House Resolutions that are sitting on Harry Reids desk.

What is not factual about that? That's H. R. (House Resolution)3210, Sept. 30, 2013, before the shutdown. The Presudent [sic] signed it on Sept. 30. I have a quote giving Obama the headline, but it is from FOX, so I presumed you would just poopoo it. The money is there, why is Obama withholding it? In fact, the house has passed bills to fund some 1/3rd of the discresionary spending.

Here is what the House has decided is essential and nonessential. You didn't watch my video.

[Youtube][/youtube]

Ok, don't answer the question. I'll take it that I have established that the Senate is the one not funding the government. I did watch the video and also checked it with another source. It is bogus.

Salt Lake Tribune.

"But both sides(National Guard and Mechanical Bull Sales) say the deal ended with last Tuesday’s shutdown.

"The National Guard called me first thing in the morning," said Mechanical Bull Sales owner Gracienne Myers. She said the Guard told her that they were voiding the purchase offer but that they may buy a lone bull in the future."

I agree that this pork should not be in the budget in the first place. Do you want to shut down the house fitness center, go ahead. This is a common political tactic, the Dems play all kinds of games and there is little outrage, however, when Republicans do it, we need to clean this up. Me thinks they dost protest too much. Believe me, I do not like this petty porkbarrel stuff either.

"In addition to the Head Start resolution, the House has passed nine other short-term spending resolutions. They would fund the Washington, D.C., government; national parks; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the National Institutes of Health; the National Guard and reservists; the Women, Infants and Children program; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and the Food and Drug Administration.

The House is run by who? Democrats. Democrats want to fund all of the government. Repubs want to hold the gov hostage until they can get leverage.

Yes, the Republicans think that certain things deserve some investigation, the Senate wants to hold the entire government hostage. Oh, except for the military, that is too hot an issue for the Dems to demigogue.

The last is the Pay Our Military Act, which ensures payment of the military and their civilian supporters even during the shutdown. While not technically a continuing spending resolution, that is the one bill the Senate did take up and pass, and President Obama signed it into law"

Yes, Democrats like our President signed it into law! Do you even read what you post! Who has the Senate? Democrats. They have the majority.

Yes, I did read that I pointed out that it was a House Resolution. I guess that was a nonessential detail, since you chose not to include it. On this issue, everyone did the right thing. What about the other nine House Resolutions? When can we expect them to be signed?

So, why are Reid and Obama chosing to fund the military and nothing else? Could it be so that they can look like they are promilitary, while they continue to demigogue the others?

No, because they understand that DOD workers should not suffer because the Republicans are stupid.

Oh, but it is ok if veterens, children waiting for medical research, the National Guard, single mothers and their babies, disaster victims and everyone who eats and uses prescriptions drugs can suffer because Harry Reid will not fund programs for them.

Mybe you need to start watching somthing other than The Young Turks.

Like Fox news? Please. You vote for the ones who screw you while you sleep.

You can always tell when someone is losing the argument, he starts pulling out the epithets and hyperbolie. I happen to be fair and balanced. Yes, I watch FOX news, but also MSNBC and, as I have shown, I will read The Hill, The Salt Lake Tribune, the Congressional Record, or any other source, even the Young Turks. I just refuse to drink the Kool Aid of any one source. I prefer mixed drinks.

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 17 by bluethread]

Okay, leading away from the "he said/she said" stuff for a bit, I wanna ask you, since you seem to follow several different news sources... I don't wanna sound like I'm just rigging the goalposts, but these questions are the most prevalent in my mind.

Do you consider the government shutdown to be the method that is most reliable, affordable, and beneficial to the American people?

Do you believe that the Republican's agenda and basis for the shutdown to be a better policy than what was already going on?

Do you think that the Republicans should get have their cake and eat it too? Keep the government on standby and still reap the rewards of implementing their policies, while at the same time depriving the opposite party of really anything?

Do you think the above question is so unbalanced that I should change it to say that the Republican party and Democratic party should gain equal compensation from this fiasco?

Do you think that giving into the demands of the Republicans will grant the Democratic party any leniency in the coming years?

Do you think the recent Democrat-based policies are inferior to recent Republican-based policies in some way or another? If so, is there personal bias in that you prefer to think the Republicans can do no wrong, or am I extrapolating?

PLEASE don't find this as anything else than inquisitive. I don't wanna lead you down a pre-oriented path, I just wanna figure out what your beliefs concerning the current governmental state accounts for, given that you seem to have sources behind you.

[Darias]

Well, the military was the Republican base in the 80's. and they were more respectful, and a lot more attention was given to military contrats. However, even then, it was more along the lines of defense companies, rather than military personal. The emphasis of the corporations over people intensified quite a lot (mainly because of propaganda from libertarian anarchistic billionaires).

Yeah, who could forget those anarcho-capitalists like Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan? Seriously, Goat?

If those folks were "free market champions," then President Obama must be the bees-knees for progressives.

[Goat]

Well, the military was the Republican base in the 80's. and they were more respectful, and a lot more attention was given to military contrats. However, even then, it was more along the lines of defense companies, rather than military personal. The emphasis of the corporations over people intensified quite a lot (mainly because of propaganda from libertarian anarchistic billionaires).

Yeah, who could forget those anarcho-capitalists like Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan? Seriously, Goat?

If those folks were "free market champions," then President Obama must be the bees-knees for progressives.

Ronald Reagan is when it started going to pot, because of 'supply side economics'.

And yep, it partly is because of Milton Friedman

However, it took 50 years before a good strong set of unions started deteriorating..

That's a heck of a lot better than appealing to some mythical 'free market economy'