Published: Friday, Sept. 20 2013 5:00 p.m. MDT
@Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahLiberal,I
don't know which article you read, but if you read the article that the
rest of us read, you certainly didn't understand it. You cided me for
bringing up Obama, because you said that the article was about the Republicans.
Did you even read the third and fourth paragraphs?Let me quote:
"This year, they believe a shutdown would strengthen their hand politically,
which is almost certainly true given the public outrage that would rain down on
Republicans."====== I read it, again, and I
didn't read "Obama" in there anywhere...again.It's your
myopic fixation with him.The article is about the chaos within the
Republican party, and mentions how the Democrats will exploit it to their
advantage, period.Obama had nothing to do with it.You keeping
reading "Obama" the bogggieman into every single discussion.It's sad really.
Liberal,How silly of me to think that you thought that Obama was the
President, you know, the man who sits behind the desk in the Oval Office. I
totally forgot that you still wish that Bush was sitting at that desk. Let me
quote a sentence from the article: "For the White House, not having to court
independents as much as they did before President Obama’s second election
frees them up to take more chances."Unless Obama is permanently
on vacation, or golfing, or bowling, or out campaigning for a impossible 3rd
term, he is still the man who sits behind the desk.The people have
directed their Representatives, including Matheson, to fund all parts of the
government except ObamaCare. The Democrats are talking about shutting down the
government. The Republicans have no interest in hurting the aged, the infirm,
the poverty stricken - but some Democrats will use those people for political
fodder. They will cause hardship and hurt on those who need help the most, and
then they'll lie and tell us that the Republicans did it.Which
is worse, their lie or their deed?
@Mike Richards - Your statement "The people have directed their
Representatives, including Matheson, to fund all parts of the government except
ObamaCare." assumes facts not in evidence. A recent poll from The Morning
Consul found that only 34% of Americans want the bill defunded. If
your case is built on the 2012 election, the results do not support your claim.
President Obama campaigned on the bill and won reelection - beating Mitt Romney
b 4% points. Nationwide, Democratic congressional candidates received 51% of
the votes cast, to Republicans 49%. In 2012, Republicans lost seats in the
House, although they retained a majority, it was a smaller majority. Democrats
retained control of the Senate against very long odds.Your claim
that Democrats want to shut down the government is patently false. It is
Republicans who are on record calling for a government shut down, including
Utah's own Mike Lee. Democrats are aware they may politically benefit from
a shutdown but they aren't causing it. If you wish to defend
the shutdown, please do so, but do so based on the facts.
If the GOP does shut government down, they are guaranteeing they will be out of
office for a long, long time.Hopefully American voters will be smart
enough to recognize total stupidity when they see it.(Even some Utah
voters might be smart enough . . . . )
@Mike Richards" The Republicans have no interest in hurting the aged,
the infirm, the poverty stricken "Yes they do, going after
Obamacare directly harms the infirm and poverty stricken.
The far right can't win on the merits in its battle against the Affordable
Care Act, so it tries an end-run by attaching an extraneous provision to a
necessary bill -- the bill to fund the workings of the federal government. What
should happen is simple -- the Senate should remove this extraneous provision
from the funding bill, pass it and send the "clean" bill back to the
House. The House, and especially its far-right members, can then determine
whether is more important to work for the good of the country (and pass the bill
funding the government) or play politics to appease its base (and shut down the
government). If the far right gives a fig about the country and its people, it
will approve the bill.I am waiting to see the far right
appropriately deal with the Affordable Care Act. Since they don't like it
they should come up with a plan that will accomplish what the ACA does --
provide universal insurance in a way they think is better. Maybe the (extremely
far right) Heritage Foundation could revise the plan they originally conceived,
since the ACA is originally their work.
Denial due to pre-existing conditions.When the Republicans can come
up with an answer that ONE condition,I'll give anything they say
consideration.Otherwise - No just means no. No ideas, No
alternatives, No plan, No suggestions, No, Nada, Zip.
The federal government pays the salary of lots of people in Utah. The shutdown
will directly hurt Utahns.
Yes, WRZ, apparently the president can choose which bills he will enforce and
which he will not.Remember all those "signing statements"
from GWBush? Statements he attached to bills he didn't like just before he
signed them because he knew he couldn't override a veto? In each statement,
he told us right up front that he would not obey the new law.Have we
had any "signing statements" from this president?
@one old man 1:12 p.m. Sept. 23, 2013Yes, WRZ, apparently the
president can choose which bills he will enforce and which he will not.Remember all those "signing statements" from GWBush? Statements he
attached to bills he didn't like just before he signed them because he knew
he couldn't override a veto? In each statement, he told us right up front
that he would not obey the new law.Have we had any "signing
statements" from this president?-------------------Yes, our President has issued signing statements. He has issued a total of 22
during all the time he has been inn office. GWBush issued more than that in
2001. He issued a total of 109 in his first term and 50 in his second term for
a total of 159. He really makes the president look like a piker, doesn't
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments