Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Thelma and Louise

September 27, 2013

Refusing to raise the debt ceiling does not restrict Congress from spending more money....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(74)

gavinf56

Sep-28-13 1:29 PM

The left is blowing something, and it ain't smoke.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Sep-28-13 1:13 PM

It is clear the right doesn't deal with reality. They don't understand government and how it functions. They also clearly do not believe in care for others.

They keep saying Drink! but the truth is they are in a smokey haze of their own doing.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Sep-28-13 8:54 AM

"Do you object to the governmentally mandated programs, Social Security and Medicare or just to selected ones like Obamacare?"--Monkeywrench

+++

In general, yes I object to them. I think that people should save a portion of their income for retirement and then they can retire as whatever age they want, if ever. Same with Medicare. The problem is that people have put money into SS for 30 or 40 years and it is wrong to just terminate the program. Life expectancy is 78 yrs as compared to 67 yrs when the program was started. I believe that we need to tell people they cannot receive SS benefits until they reach age 73+-.

We are at a juncture with ACA to start or stop before it becomes a big yoke around our necks. Once it starts, it is unsustainable. Jobs will continue to leave the US and the middle class will become the poor class. Kiss the Age of Enlightenment good bye.

It is time to stop increasing the debt. It just turns us all into slaves.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MonkeyWrench

Sep-28-13 8:33 AM

Enigma: I refer you to today's copy of the Tampa Bay times: "The 16 Top Myths about Obamacare." Your :objections" are well represented. One last question: Do you object to the governmentally mandated programs, Social Security and Medicare or just to selected ones like Obamacare?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-28-13 5:49 AM

If reality clashes with your belief, then the problem clearly is reality.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Sep-28-13 12:53 AM

If the debt ceiling needs raised to cover money already spent, that means Congress passed—and the president signed—spending bills which they new would go over the legal limit at a given time. The debt ceiling is therefore meaningless.

$17 trillion in debt ($90 trillion in unfunded liabilities) and Obama wants a clean CR and then maybe a budget will be debated and then the debt ceiling will be raised again, waste, fraud, corruption, cronyism...who better to run healthcare.

Drink.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Sep-27-13 11:45 PM

The right keeps blowing smoke!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-27-13 9:02 PM

What parts of Obamacare do I oppose? I don't oppose any of the things you stated, only that they are government mandated. I know you don't care about that, so let me continue. Government panels to ration care (death panels). 300 new taxes. National health database. Doctors mandated to ask personal questions having nothing to do with your care and reporting them to the government. National ID card with RFID chip. There are pages and pages in the law that have nothing to do with healthcare and are just there to either collect data on citizens or funnel money to non healthcare groups. Here's my favorite. Taxing healthcare to pay for healthcare. How does that work? Are you really willing to give up all of your privacy and freedom to get a few perks? A few perks that I might add will bankrupt the system. Maybe next time the government presents a 2000 page bill and tells you about nine things that it does, you'll look a little deeper.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Sep-27-13 8:53 PM

" I got a bottle of cabernet on the ride home, so I'm off to find the bottle opener."

***

I thought those box wines had a built in plastic spout.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Sep-27-13 8:22 PM

Hi enigma, yes, being drawn and quartered doesn't sound very pleasant. I was going to respond much as monkeywrench did, so I'll live vicariously though he. (her?) Just got back from mma class, only 7 of us tonight but I got a bottle of cabernet on the ride home, so I'm off to find the bottle opener..

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MonkeyWrench

Sep-27-13 7:56 PM

Ok, enigma...you think Obamacare is a bad idea . So...What provisions of Obamacare do you oppose? 1. Coverage for pre-existing conditions? 2. Coverage for children until they are 26 under their parents insurance? 3. The elimination of lifetime caps. 4. Requirement that 80% of healthcare premiums be spent on actual care? 5. Charging women the same as they do men. 6. Payment for preventive care/donut hole drugs for seniors. 7. Website market exchanges. 8. Individual mandate/employee mandate.

9. Coverage for the poor through the expansion of Medicaid? 10. Something else specifically? What exactly? If you were to write a healthcare bill, would you include any of these provision in it? Thanks, Enigma.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-27-13 5:50 PM

“To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.” —Thomas Jefferson

I choose economy and liberty. We need to cut up the national credit card and send the government to rehab.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-27-13 5:33 PM

Buff, I've never tried being drawn and quartered, but I'm and 100% certain that I wouldn't like it. I've read most of the ACA bill and it is a bad bill. Even if you like the idea of government run health care, this bill is bad for everybody, except of course those who are exempt from it, which just happens to be the very people who are forcing it on the rest of us.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Sep-27-13 5:13 PM

Hi Gavin, how are you, my friend? Yes, I thought that descriptor was quite noteworthy too..

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MonkeyWrench

Sep-27-13 4:55 PM

Thanks Enigma. You are right: "No congress can obligate the next congress to spend anything." In fact, no Congress can spend anything on its own. The only way the United States Government can obligate itself to spend money is to have the House and the Senate each vote to approve the same bill and for the President to sign it into law. Once that happens, the Government is mandated to spend and provide the funding to support the expenditures called for by the law. That's what happened in the case of Obamacare. No future House of Congress on its own can undo this funding mandate either alone or with the approval of the other body without the signature of the President. That's why forty successful votes in the House to defund Obamacare had no practical effect. the only way to defund Obamacare is for the House and the Senate to agree to such a defunding bill and for the President to sign it into law.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Sep-27-13 4:43 PM

The Dems spent a whole lot of money to seriously expand social programs to anyone who could breathe air and also expanded the gov't payroll to an all time high. If the debt limit isn't raised, how will all these programs continue? Maybe they should have thought of that BEFORE they spent all the money!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-27-13 4:37 PM

"vitriolic diatribe" - Buff

Really?

...for the record, he read the story to his children for their nightly bedtime story.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Sep-27-13 4:33 PM

Hello all.. read this elsewhere but it is true and quite funny. During Ted Cruz's recent vitriolic diatribe, he quoted or read the book, Green Eggs and Ham.. apparently not realizing the irony in the fact that it is a heart warming tale of someone who claims to not like something until he actually tries it, and then professes to love it. Priceless..

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-27-13 2:21 PM

MonkeyWrench, You are wrong. No congress can obligate the next congress to spend anything. That's why they are required to pass a budget every year, so that each Congress can do what it wants. Historically, every Congress has honored the commitments made by the previous Congress, but it is not because that are bound to do so. At some point, some Congress will have to stop the madness or it will be stopped for them. When the money is not there, it cannot be spent. To be fully Constitutional, a law which requires spending must be fully funded at the time of passage and have a finite life. That would make most of our spending unconstitutional. Thinking like yours is what has us headed into financial oblivion.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-27-13 2:14 PM

"this spot is not a comment section. It is a chat room"--MonkeyWrench

Is that why it's labeled "Comments" and says to "Post a Comment" and then right above the box where you type your comment, it says "Comment"? But it is not a comment section. I agree that we should stick to the issues and keep the insults to a minimum, but your comment goes way off the rails from their. BTW a chat room is much more interactive and usually a lot more raucus that this.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-27-13 2:06 PM

"..incoming Speaker Pelosi said in a statement last month that the party is committed to "no new deficit spending." She said Democrats intend to restore pay-as-you-go rules, which require increases in the federal budget to be offset by either tax hikes or cuts in spending elsewhere."

Anybody remember the Democrats "pay-as-you-go"? They don't.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-27-13 2:03 PM

...and just for clarity, then Sen. Obama was one of the Democrats who voted no.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-27-13 1:59 PM

WASHINGTON, March 16 — The Senate voted narrowly today to raise the national debt limit to nearly $9 trillion, averting what would have been the first default ever on United States Treasury notes and giving Democrats an opportunity to portray Republicans as reckless with the people's money.

The 52-to-48 vote, with all Democrats and a handful of Republicans voting "no," increased the debt limit by $781 billion. The increase was the fourth since President Bush took office, prompting Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic minority leader, to declare that "years of Republican mismanagement" have driven the nation deep into the red.

"Any objective analysis of our country's fiscal history would have to conclude this administration and this rubberstamping Republican Congress are the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of our country," Mr. Reid said. "In fact, no other president or Congress even comes close."

NYT - March 16,2006

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MonkeyWrench

Sep-27-13 1:29 PM

Last try: Please everyone: discuss policies and issues and avoid personal insults, labels and name calling. this spot is not a comment section. It is a chat room with a predictable and low number of participants who all too frequently try to one-up each other with one line gotchas but seldom exchange fact-base reasons for their divergent views. Unless you do, many potential newcomers, of whatever political persuasion would rather not participate.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

Sep-27-13 1:26 PM

'You mean the my way or the highway Republicans.'

yea, and how is that working out?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 74 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web