Perspective, supported by facts, ROCKS! ~ I do, however, believe that #10 below goes much deeper than just "... fighting to make sure the working poor don't have access to affordable health care" ~ Sooz

The Shutdown in 10 Infuriating Sentences
—By Kevin Drum | Fri Oct. 4, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

At its core, the dispute over the budget and the debt ceiling isn't complicated at all. But it is full of misconceptions and urban myths. Here are the 10 facts worth remembering past all the obfuscation:

1. Democrats have already agreed to fund the government at Republican levels.

2. Despite what you might have heard, there have only been two serious government shutdowns in recent history, and both were the result of Republican ultimatums.

3. Democrats in the Senate have been begging the House to negotiate over the budget for the past six months, but Republicans have refused.

4. That's because Republicans wanted to wait until they had either a government shutdown or a debt ceiling breach as leverage, something they've been very clear about all along.

5. Republicans keep talking about compromise, but they've offered nothing in return for agreeing to their demands—except to keep the government intact if they get their way.

6. The public is very strongly opposed to using a government shutdown to stop Obamacare.

7. Contrary to Republican claims, the deficit is not increasing—it peaked in 2009 and has been dropping ever since, declining by $200 billion last year with another $450 billion drop projected this year.


8. A long government shutdown is likely to seriously hurt economic growth, with a monthlong shutdown projected to slash GDP in the fourth quarter by 1 percentage point and reduce employment by over a million jobs.

9. No, Democrats have not used debt ceiling hostage taking in the past to force presidents to accept their political agenda.

10. This whole dispute is about the Republican Party fighting to make sure the working poor don't have access to affordable health care.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/shutdown-debt-ceiling-explained

You may have heard that quite a few Senators and Representatives are forgoing their paychecks during the shutdown. Some are even planning to donate their salaries to charity. And then there are some who aren't (video at the link):

http://freakoutnation.com/2013/10/03/house-republican-says-i-need-my-paycheck-during-the-government-shutdown/

House Republican says, “I need my paycheck” during the government shutdown
October 3, 2013
By Anomaly

An estimated 800,000 workers have been furloughed due to the government shutdown and are worried about making ends meet, meanwhile some politicians are opting to defer their paychecks. But not Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC) who told a local television station that she would not be deferring her pay during the government shutdown because she said,”I need my paycheck.”

She continued, “That’s the bottom line.”

Ellmers spoke with WTVD in Raleigh, N.C., adding, “I understand that there may be some other members who are deferring their paychecks, and I think that’s admirable. I’m not in that position.”

Talking Points Memo reports, “According to Ellmers’s official website, she was a registered nurse for 21 years before being elected to Congress. Her husband Brent, the website says, is a general surgeon.

Democratic Rep. G.K. Butterfield also told WTVD that he wouldn’t be deferring his pay. “I don’t think there should be a shutdown,” he said. “I didn’t create the shutdown.”

Well the workers certainly didn’t.

For fuck’s sake. They should both defer their paychecks. But to say that she needs her paycheck, while dismissing the needs of 800,000 workers, is over the top.

I think people are missing the point. The ACA question was asked and answered in the last election. The majority of the people in every poll taken support it. They elected Obama over McCain at least in part over this issue--and then reelected him over Romney, again with this issue being a key part of election debate. The American people have spoken. by holding the government function hostage over an issue that has already been brought to a vote TWICE is to subvert the democratic process upon which the United States was founded. The tea party does not have a voter blessed mandate to take the actions they are now taking.

In Canada, if a government fails to pass budget, the government falls and we automatically go into a new election. I think that is what should happen here. Presidential, congressional, and senatorial. Go to full election based on the issue, and put people in government who understand that their job is to form a functional government.

Alaska National Weather Service begs for pay in code. Notice the highlighted letters:

Ridicule ROCKS ~ no one, NO ONE, could make up this stuff ~ ~ there are "live links" to more/corroborating info accessible via the end link ~ Sooz

GOP Geniuses Seek Cause Of Government Facility Closures After Voting To Shut Government Down
Author: Randa Morris October 6, 2013 8:24 pm

After voting to shut down the federal government, members of the GOP are now at a loss to understand why there are government facility closures. They’re probing into why certain federal buildings and monuments are not open. Seriously. On October 2nd House Republicans launched a probe into the closing of the federally operated World War II Monument in Washington. No, this is not the Onion, but I bet they wish they’d have thought of it first.

I Know! Let’s See Why There’s Government Facility Closures When Government Is Closed…

Darrell Issa’s Spokesman, Frederick Hill, told Politico that Issa is “in the early stages of examining it.” “It” in this case, meaning the cause of federal facilities, like the World War II Monument, not being open. Seriously? It doesn’t resonate why there’s government facility closures during a government shutdown? Darrell Issa, who is the Republican Chairman of House Oversight and Government Reform, needs an official probe to figure this one out? He can’t just make a guess?

It’s not just Issa investigating the ever so elusive cause of federal government facility closures. According to Politico Republicans on the Senior House Natural Resources Committee are also baffled, just baffled, regarding the reason federal buildings are shut down. They say that they are “considering an oversight hearing in the very near future.” Two Republican lawmakers heading up that pending investigation, Doc Hastings (WA) and Rob Bishop (Utah,) are also bound and determined to figure out this mystery. Republicans Eric Cantor and Reince Priebus have both thrown fine temper tantrums for the folks at Fox News. They’re outraged, just outraged, that the shutdown they demanded has resulted in, well, things being shut down.

Let’s look at the evidence shall we? In 2011, the last time the Republicans in Congress threatened to hold the entire country hostage if they didn’t get their way, all federal agencies were directed to make contingency plans. The plans describe in detail how each government facility will handle a government shutdown. The US Department of Interior, which oversees the World War II Memorial, first posted the contigency plan for facilities they manage on April 7th, 2011.

Contingency Plans For Government Facility Closures During Shutdowns Publicly Accessible

These plans have been available for the public to look at for the past two and a half years. Even if they don’t make interesting reading, anyone who really wanted to know what government facility closures could possibly happen during a shut down, could have easily accessed the information.

Reporters did. Federal workers did. Concerned citizens did. Apparently members of the Republican party couldn’t be bothered, especially not in the busy weeks prior to actually voting to defund federal government, causing just such a shut down. I mean why bother to consider in advance how your actions will affect the lives of every person in the country, right?

On September 30th Congress refused to pass a budget, knowing full well their actions would lead to a shut down of federal facilities all across the country.

Then they celebrated.

So Who’s Going To Figure Out Why There’s Government Facility Closures?

Two days later, on October 3rd, Republicans were outraged that for some reason (entirely unknown to them) the World War II Monument was closed. They were demanding answers! Probes! Investigations!

What could have caused this calamity?

Why were there government facility closures?

Don’t worry America, these super sleuths are on the case.

They’re bound to get to the bottom of it.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/10/06/government-facility-closures-confuse-gop/

Surely, this isn't a serious piece.
No one who is still breathing could be that dumb.

Agreed, but it IS a serious piece [of ridicule] ~ the "live links" in the original corroborate real reactions/words of the GOP/TPers ~

Sooz

We are all that dumb. You know of course that all of the people who have been furloughed will be paid for their time off.

They always are. It's how it goes. We just paid for Jeff's friend M to go waterskiing on the Delaware and for my friend R to go look at leaves in Vermont with her new boyfriend.

The shut down costs us all and it's stupid and a reprehensible tactic.

What's really ridiculous is that those so-called "fiscally responsible" GOPers are determined to pay goverment employees for NOT doing that for which they are being paid.

I again note that those with working brain cells who find themselves at the bottom of a deep hole they dug and cannot get out of usually ... STOP DIGGING! ~ ~ there are "live links" to more/corroborating info accessible in the original ~ Sooz

GOP sets trap, falls in, seeks way out
By Steve Benen - Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:00 AM EDT

Just a few weeks ago, congressional Republicans had high hopes about pending showdowns in Washington. They'd target an unpopular health care law; the public would rally behind them; Democrats would splinter; Republicans would unify; and President Obama would cave. It'd be ... awesome.

We now know, of course, that none of these things actually happened. Indeed, as Rachel noted last night, yesterday seemed to mark a turning point -- Republican leaders started moving away from their "Obamacare" demands; powerhouse conservative groups publicly distanced themselves from GOP strategies; and polls pointed to a flailing and failing party.

Last week, the consensus in Republican circles seemed to be, "We can win this thing." Yesterday, party officials transitioned to, "We need to get out of this thing."


It'd be an exaggeration to say a resolution is near. Rather, yesterday marked the point at which the prevailing winds started changing direction -- Republican leaders who've pushed aggressive demands and made unprecedented threats shifted their posture, looking for a way out of the mess they created for themselves.

Part of the problem in ending this fiasco is that Republican lawmakers still don't know what they want or reasonably hope to achieve. Presumably, raising the debt ceiling "for a few weeks" would both lower the temperature and give the party time to figure out the point of their own hostage strategy.

And why would the White House agree to such an extension, when Democrats want to push the deadline until late 2014? By all appearances, President Obama is willing to give House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) a face-saving way out -- a "clean" debt-ceiling extension, even for a short while, would reduce the likelihood of a crisis, offer the GOP an escape route, and hopefully make a sovereign debt catastrophe less likely (Republicans are reportedly reluctant to threaten to crash the economy on purpose twice in two months).

Of course, it really would have to be "clean." A Senate Democratic aide told Greg Sargent, "Democrats won't accept any kind of structure that forces negotiations to be tied to the debt ceiling. No matter how short a clean debt limit increase is, it doesn't change the fact that Democrats aren't going to negotiate on the next debt limit."

Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are kicking around some ideas of their own.


We can evaluate the details of the various proposals once they come into sharper focus, and consider whether they have any chance of success. The point, however, is that Republican lawmakers (a) are suddenly interested in finding a solution; (b) are completely abandoning the demands they were pushing just a couple of weeks ago; (c) seem well aware of the fact that they're fighting from a position of weakness.

Instead of sprinting towards the cliff, GOP officials are suddenly interested in stopping and changing direction. Given recent developments, it's offered the first glimmer of hope we've seen in a while.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/10/10/20897296-gop-sets-trap-falls-in-seeks-way-out?lite

The chief lemming wants to follow the Pied Piper?

Does Boehner really believe that calling his posse "negotiators" will force Obama's hand? ~ ~ Sooz

Obama poised to meet with (some) House Republicans
By Steve Benen - Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:57 AM EDT

President Obama extended an invitation to the very House Republicans responsible for the government shutdown and looming debt-ceiling crisis. How many GOP House members is the president prepared to visit with? All of them.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) accepted the invitation, but took it upon himself to narrow the guest list.


Boehner will instead dispatch 18 House Republicans -- whom the Speaker has designated "negotiators," despite the fact that the meeting is not a negotiation -- chosen to represent the caucus.

And why couldn't the entire caucus join Obama at the White House, as per the president's request? According to Boehner's spokesperson, "a meeting is only worthwhile if it is focused on finding a solution," and that's why "the House Republican Conference will instead be represented by a smaller group of negotiators."

There are a few problems with this.

First, when the president of the United States requests a meeting with members of Congress, congressional leaders really shouldn't say no -- ever.

Second, Boehner's office can continue to pretend negotiations are set to begin -- negotiations in which Democrats will present concessions, offered in exchange for nothing, in the hopes that Republicans will finally consider completing basic governmental tasks -- but they're not.

And third, if today's meeting should be "focused on finding a solution," why would Obama spend time with a feckless House Speaker and his hand-picked allies? One of the key lessons of 2013 is that Boehner is Speaker In Name Only and has very little control and/or influence over what actually happens in the chamber he ostensibly runs.

Assuming that Boehner is in control is one of the main reasons the government shut down in the first place -- Democratic leaders set aside their own policy goals because the Speaker agreed to move on a "clean" spending bill that would keep the government's lights on. The trouble started when House Republican members told the House Republican leadership that the agreement wasn't good enough.

It's the underlying problem in having such a weak Speaker: the White House doesn't really have a Republican leader to talk to. It's presumably why the president asked to speak with all of the House Republicans, since Boehner clearly isn't in a position to deliver.

But like it or not, Obama will have to settle for 18 House Republicans. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 4:30 eastern and I'll let you know what happens.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/10/10/20898398-obama-poised-to-meet-with-some-house-republicans