America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 38,011 comments
  • 1,486,051 views
How unusual is it to have a government shutdown when the government controls both houses?

I mean, part of me still finds it a bit weird that these things even happen in a country as powerful and prosperous as the United States. There have been eight federal government shutdowns since 1980; 1980, 1981, 1984, 1986, 1990, 1995, 1995/1996 and 2013.
Bear in mind it's only a partial shutdown, and even that hasn't taken effect yet since it's the weekend. Traditionally the shutdown has been part of the "horse trading" that is so beloved of the pols both between and within the two major parties. They seldom last very long or have any important effect.

Edit:
You should of course also be aware that the Senate has only a razor thin majority of "Republicans", some of whom are fiscal conservatives who actually think it's important to pay off debts and balance the budget. :lol:
 
Last edited:
How unusual is it to have a government shutdown when the government controls both houses?

I mean, part of me still finds it a bit weird that these things even happen in a country as powerful and prosperous as the United States. There have been eight federal government shutdowns since 1980; 1980, 1981, 1984, 1986, 1990, 1995, 1995/1996 and 2013.
What's even weirder is to recall the Democrat outrage at Republicans in 2013 when they were threatening to shut down the G. I recall the words "ideological crusade", "ransom", "sabotage" etc. being thrown around by the Democrats.
 
What's even weirder is to recall the Democrat outrage at Republicans in 2013 when they were threatening to shut down the G. I recall the words "ideological crusade", "ransom", "sabotage" etc. being thrown around by the Democrats.
Is it though? Adversarial politics is nothing new, and it's a flame that a certain someone hasn't merely warmed his hands by, but thrown kerosene upon.

The question presented is a valid one, and is deserving of more consideration than a "look at this, not that" response that is emblematic of the division.

It's in situations such as this where having an individual who hasn't shown a propensity to act petty and childish--walking around with his head up his ass and talking about "****holes" (pun intended), but instead is capable of acting PRESIDENTIAL--would work in favor of the "G" rather than play a significant role in the effort to shut it down.

I don't believe obvious (because they are) efforts to undermine...*shudder*...him...would be deemed "necessary" if...*shudder*...he...took...*shudder*...his...role seriously.
 
Well if the government is shut down, at least they can't do anything stupid.

How unusual is it to have a government shutdown when the government controls both houses?

I believe it never happened before.

Edit:
You should of course also be aware that the Senate has only a razor thin majority of "Republicans", some of whom are fiscal conservatives who actually think it's important to pay off debts and balance the budget. :lol:

I thought the hold up among some Republicans was the defense budget? They want to spend more as far as I know, which is incredibly dumb. We spend too much on defense, and if anything, that should be the first thing cut. Followed closely by Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.

My favorite quote from a news article comes from the BBC:

But essential services that protect "life or human property" will continue, including national security, postal services, air traffic control, inpatient medical services, emergency outpatient medicine, disaster assistance, prisons, taxation and electricity generation

I didn't realize theft was considered essential.

If taxation is essential to life or human property we've lost our way.
 
The measure failed in a procedural vote by a 50 to 49 margin. Five Democrats — Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Doug Jones of Alabama and Claire McCaskill of Missouri — had backed it. Four Republicans — Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah — opposed it. So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for procedural reasons.

The Republican majority is 51/49, but McCain is AWOL undergoing cancer treatment. 60 votes are needed for passage.
 
Is it though? Adversarial politics is nothing new, and it's a flame that a certain someone hasn't merely warmed his hands by, but thrown kerosene upon.

The question presented is a valid one, and is deserving of more consideration than a "look at this, not that" response that is emblematic of the division.

It's in situations such as this where having an individual who hasn't shown a propensity to act petty and childish--walking around with his head up his ass and talking about "****holes" (pun intended), but instead is capable of acting PRESIDENTIAL--would work in favor of the "G" rather than play a significant role in the effort to shut it down.

I don't believe obvious (because they are) efforts to undermine...*shudder*...him...would be deemed "necessary" if...*shudder*...he...took...*shudder*...his...role seriously.
Curious that you pivot to Trump when my example involves Democrats doing the exact opposite of what they accused the Republicans of just a few years ago. Pick any issue and you can find a slew of politicians on either side who say one thing and a few years later the exact opposite. By all means though, let's lay the blame at the President's feet even though this nonsense has been going on for decades:lol:.
 
Well if the government is shut down, at least they can't do anything stupid.
Don't get your hopes up, they are still working. Only thing I've read that are closed are the parks.
As usual a bunch of drama over nothing...
 
Curious that you pivot to Trump when my example involves Democrats doing the exact opposite of what they accused the Republicans of just a few years ago. Pick any issue and you can find a slew of politicians on either side who say one thing and a few years later the exact opposite. By all means though, let's lay the blame at the President's feet even though this nonsense has been going on for decades:lol:.
That's what I said.

It isn't so much a pivot as it is a slide, at the beginning of which lay an acknowledgement that it's not something that just started, and no mention of it resting on anyone's--past or present, left or right, Trump or non-Trump--shoulders.

Nothing...*shudder*...he...did created the division, but have any of...*shudder*...his...actions regarding party cooperation not been a detriment, let alone a benefit?

Does the shutdown mean we get a discount on our taxes owed? :D
I'm not aware it has in the past, so there's no reason it should now...but I like where your head is.
 
Don't get your hopes up, they are still working. Only thing I've read that are closed are the parks.
As usual a bunch of drama over nothing...

Which seems strange since the National Park's budget is fairly small and accounts for hardly any of the overall spending. They probably should recall the bombers from Guam, that'd probably save more money and reduce the risk of WWIII breaking out.

Does the shutdown mean we get a discount on our taxes owed? :D

:lol:

Thievery never takes a day off.
 
My favorite quote from a news article comes from the BBC:

"But essential services that protect "life or human property" will continue, including national security, postal services, air traffic control, inpatient medical services, emergency outpatient medicine, disaster assistance, prisons, taxation and electricity generation"

I didn't realize theft was considered essential.

If taxation is essential to life or human property we've lost our way.

Let's take that just a small logical step further and assume these essential services include not only paid employees and staff but also buildings, power lines, computers, server farms, data, etc. In other words, infrastructure; IRS facilities now become critical infrastructure.

Behold:
"A Pentagon report outlining an updated U.S. nuclear strategy suggests using nuclear weapons to respond to non-nuclear attacks on the U.S., according to The New York Times

The newspaper reported Wednesday that the draft document, the Nuclear Posture Review, provides for possible nuclear responses to devastating cyberattacks on U.S critical infrastructure.

The suggestion marks a dramatic expansion of what the U.S. believes warrants a first use of nuclear weapons, the Times noted. Only in narrow cases, such as in the event of a biological attack on the U.S., has Washington suggested that it could respond with nuclear force.

The U.S. typically views the use of nuclear weapons as appropriate in extreme circumstances. But the review expands the definition of what constitutes an extreme circumstance to "include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks," according to the Times.

That could include massive cyberattacks, it said.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/369283-pentagon-mulls-nuclear-response-to-cyber-attacks-report



To make such a nuclear first-strike against a massive cyber attack on the IRS more likely and more "useable", a new generation of smaller nuclear weapons is under development. These include sea-launched hyper glide cruise missiles and new, smaller nuclear warheads for submarine launched ICBMs.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/i...e/news-story/cda265f34a3205d9dec9f3b902655581

We may agree that "we've lost our way", as you say.

Coincidentally, in the last week or so there have been 3 false alarms of incoming missile attacks on Hawaii, Japan and Israel. In Hawaii, the alarm was not rescinded for quite some time. Long enough for people to start acting crazy, like stuffing kids down into storm drains and a professional golfer hiding under a mattress in his hotel bathroom.

Another curious coincidence in the last week or so are the 3 unexpected meteor/fireballs over 3 states resulting in blinding lights and booms loud enough to cause minor earthquakes.

One of these days there will be one too many coincidences and someone is going to get trigger-happy. Or some 300 lb hacker sitting on his bed in Waziristan is going to launch a successful cyber attack on the IRS office in San Francisco and get served a nuclear cruise missile for lunch.
 
Which seems strange since the National Park's budget is fairly small and accounts for hardly any of the overall spending.
It would seem strange if there were no intention of kneecapping the NPS as part of the long game. Doing it now just allows that base to point the [middle] finger at the Dems, saying, "You wanted a shutdown."

It's more than 9 and on a phone it is rather long to scroll by...
It really is...

Screenshot_20180120-130249.png
Screenshot_20180120-130321.png
Screenshot_20180120-130333.png
Screenshot_20180120-130356.png

Now obviously the GTP header floats so it's not quite as lengthy as represented, but it really does require some scrolling to traverse. Long-winded copypasta was a factor in my making use of the ignore function...not just content.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to decide what's more annoying, scrolling through a bunch of lines of something someone copy and pasted or scrolling through a bunch of screenshots of the bunch of lines someone had copy and pasted...

@Dotini, I think it would be helpful to all if when you quote sources you use the quote box so those that aren't interested can quickly scroll past and those that are can click to expand the content. Obviously just a suggestion or request.
 
I'm trying to decide what's more annoying, scrolling through a bunch of lines of something someone copy and pasted or scrolling through a bunch of screenshots of the bunch of lines someone had copy and pasted...
Fair enough.

:lol:

Should be better now.
 
I'm trying to decide what's more annoying, scrolling through a bunch of lines of something someone copy and pasted or scrolling through a bunch of screenshots of the bunch of lines someone had copy and pasted...

@Dotini, I think it would be helpful to all if when you quote sources you use the quote box so those that aren't interested can quickly scroll past and those that are can click to expand the content. Obviously just a suggestion or request.
Well, I feel very sorry for those folks who have to use a cellphone to participate in a forum of news and opinion which requires correct spelling, grammar, and usage of words and paragraphs to compose coherent thoughts and effective expression. With my arthritis, I could never do that. I don't even own a smartphone. :ouch:

When I quote another member, a quote box is automatically generated. But if I use a linked source for reference, which I often do in order to substantiate a novel or potentially controversial statement, I have always copied and pasted the relevant verbiage in addition to the link as a convenience to the reader. No one has complained about that until now - usually they complain when I don't do it. So, how do you put linked text into a quote box?
 
Last edited:
@Dotini - PM sent but for anyone else wondering (took me a second to find it myself) you can access the quote tool by clicking the icon with the arrow and two boxes which will bring up a drop down menu with a few more tools. Or you can put quote tags around the text you want to appear in a quote box.
 
Last edited:
You can also type it out. Image file below due to text affecting formatting (the "stricken" function command escapes me at the moment).

quote.jpg


Voila:

contents of quote

or

header you want for quote
contents of quote

Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box
Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box. Lengthy texts are contained within an expandable quote box.
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, excuse my idiocy, but what does the government shut down actually mean and do? Is it just none of them show up to work and no new laws etc can be passed?
 
Just out of curiosity, excuse my idiocy, but what does the government shut down actually mean and do? Is it just none of them show up to work and no new laws etc can be passed?
It means nothing like that. All essential jobs continue on as usual. All essential employees continue to work. The only thing immediately affected is government employee's pay is shut down, and lower level services like parks are curtailed.

Edit: CNN is reporting NASA's incoming asteroid monitoring system is shut down. But it's never done much good anyway, although there's always a first time.
 
Last edited:
It means nothing like that. All essential jobs continue on as usual. All essential employees continue to work. The only thing immediately affected is government employee's pay is shut down, and lower level services like parks are curtailed.

Edit: CNN is reporting NASA's incoming asteroid monitoring system is shut down. But it's never done much good anyway, although there's always a first time.
Thank you for the information. 👍
 
Just out of curiosity, excuse my idiocy, but what does the government shut down actually mean and do? Is it just none of them show up to work and no new laws etc can be passed?

What puzzles me is how they pass legislation to get themselves back to work if they're not at work? Seems like a self-perpetuating holiday to me.
 
The depth of American political knowledge in this discussion brings tears to my eyes.

IMG_1698_zpss3zvqz9s.jpg



It means nothing like that. All essential jobs continue on as usual. All essential employees continue to work. The only thing immediately affected is government employee's pay is shut down, and lower level services like parks are curtailed.

Like the military .. . .
 
Like the military .. . .
They are being furloughed and if I'm correct will receive back payment when ever this political bs is over.
So, they are still working. Sadly though, the Armed Forces Network has shut down for now, so the guys overseas can't watch the playoffs tonight.
 
Then I'm immoral, because I maintain that inaction in situations--particularly where an individual in need of assistance faces an imminent threat--should be punishable by rule of law.

Agreed, that is immoral. It is the initiation of force against an innocent person.

Whether action or inaction on the part of random individuals is or should be against the law is moot, though, because the topic is whether inaction due to religious beliefs on the part of those with a reasonable expectation to act should no longer be punishable by rule of law.

It's not super clear what we're talking about actually, because that particular administrative law wasn't covered in great detail. For example, I can't even tell whether I oppose or favor it based on the details I got.

One person's expectations of another person's actions do not entitle them to those actions. To be entitled, there would have to be a contractual obligation somewhere. Maybe terms of employment, maybe a health insurance contract, lots of possibilities.

Yeah, it's yet another hypothetical, but one can hope...

You should really be careful what you publicly hope for. My friend's neighbor was under investigation for similar comments on a similar platform.
 
Back