Will Democrats Cause A Government Shutdown, Then Blame Republicans

House Republicans passed a bill that would defund Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) but would allocate funds to keep government running. How then, if Senate Democrats defeat this bill could the House Republicans be blamed for the democratic negative vote that would cause a government shutdown. This is typical logic for the Obama Administration. He wants his cake and eat it too.

What is so affordable about the Affordable Care act. Unions, Businesses, citizens, doctors and yes, even democrats are joining the fray against Obamacare. What does the Obama Administration not understand about an overwhelming vote in the House to defund Obamacare.

When all is said and done, the question is: Will the House Republicans hold the line and force the Democrats to accept their mistake, or will they break ranks and fold like an old beach chair on a sandy beach? I applaud Sen. Cruz’ unofficial filibuster and wish the Republican Party had more like him but unfortunately they don’t.

If the Republicans hold the line and refuse to budge, The Obama Administration will get the blame and pay for it in the 2016 elections. It has been made excruciatingly clear that the American people do not want the unAffordable Care Act.

79 thoughts on “Will Democrats Cause A Government Shutdown, Then Blame Republicans”

  1. I’d like to know how it can be the Democrats fault for this shutdown, it is easy to see that about 30 Republicans have caused this shutdown and they should be held accountable for it. This Affordable Health Care Plan has passed and the Republicans need to realize that this is what America wants and will have and THAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE!!!!! It’s unfortunate that they are willing to destroy this Country before they do as the People of this Country want to do.

  2. “That’s the trouble with people; somebody must always get the blame!!”

    Don, earlier you said the shutdown is what you were hoping would happen.

  3. The ACA is already fully funded and subject to mandatory funding. The shutdown doesn’t affect it one bit. In other words, the failure to pass a CR shuts down the government, and keeps the ACA.

    Congratulations.

  4. Countryboy on September 30, 2013 at 18:52 said: “I’d like to know how it can be the Democrats fault for this shutdown”

    Because the U.S. House passed 3 different Continuing Resolutions funding the entire government and the US Senate controlled by the Democrats refused to pass ANY of the Continuing Resolutions passed by the US House.

    The Republican House voted to fund the entire government.

    Now, did you really not know that, Countryboy?

    Curious: Where do you get your news?

  5. Nobody on September 26, 2013 at 06:59 said: “Polling shows 80% of Americans do not want a government shutdown over Obamacare”

    And if we believed in polls, most elections would have turned out differently, and Mitt Romney would be President.

    Polls BEFORE a leader states his case and explains the argument are meaningless.

  6. becca on September 29, 2013 at 18:02 said: “I’ll blame the Republicans if the government shuts down. Why? Because the Republicans are the minority party that is insisting on holding the fund the government hostage, unless they get their way.”

    Becca, the Republicans controlling the US House passed 3 different plans funding the entire government.

    The US Senate refused to pass ANY of the 3 different plans for funding the entire government that the US House passed.

  7. “The US Senate refused to pass ANY of the 3 different plans for funding the entire government that the US House passed.”

    You ever think that maybe, just maybe, that could be because of the end run around the proper way to repeal a law that they tried to sneak in there?

  8. Falcor, one of the 3 versions passed by the US House was to (a) fully fund Obama Care, but (b) make the law apply equally to everyone and not create exemptions or special treatment for Members of Congress and Congressional staff.

    So explain to us why the US Senate did not pass that version of the Continuing Resolution.

    ANOTHER version of the CR that the US House passed was to repeal the tax on medical devices, which the US Senate had previously voted FOR (the repeal) by 79 votes in favor of the repeal.

    So the US Senate would not vote a repeal of the medical devices tax WHICH THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY VOTED FOR.

    So yes the behavior of Democrats in Congress is atrocious, shows no willingness to compromise, and is not the proper way to approach a budget.

  9. Yes, I’m sure President Obama ordered this in his morning briefing. Right in between ordering lunch and ordering the Navy SEALS to go into Libya and Somalia…

    One decision in keeping with a shutdown that could have been made at the enormous number of levels in between a park ranger and the President of the most powerful country on Earth was clearly made by the most powerful man on Earth.

    Jon, I really wonder what planet you live on.

    As far as the decision to shut down a national park. Well, things get shut down during shut downs. Why would you want to stop people from going into preserved areas? Because you don’t have the staff to preserve them.

  10. Falcor on October 5, 2013 at 23:30 said: “As far as the decision to shut down a national park. Well, things get shut down during shut downs.”

    These have NEVER been shut down before. Obama is the first demagogue insane enough to shut these open-air memorials, privately-funded businesses, and ocean areas down.

    No Administration has ever been so ridiculous before as the Obama Administration now.

    So, no, they don’t get shut down.

    Falcor on October 5, 2013 at 23:30 said: ” Why would you want to stop people from going into preserved areas? Because you don’t have the staff to preserve them.”

    There is no staff there at any other time. The only Federal funds being spent are to put up barricades and close the open-air parks and memorials.

    The US Congress did not appropriate funds to put up barricades and block people from using open-air parks and memorials. So it is the actions of the Obama Administration that violate the lack of Federal funds.

  11. “The US Congress did not appropriate funds to put up barricades and block people from using open-air parks and memorials. So it is the actions of the Obama Administration that violate the lack of Federal funds.”

    The jump you make here is absurd. It is not an either or, nor do you have any information how how the funding is being implemented.

    They also shut down Joshua Tree Nat’l Park, herp durp durp how can teh Obummer Adminustayshun close down der desert???!1!

    The answer is pretty simple, you don’t want people in protected areas that cannot be protected.

    “These have NEVER been shut down before. Obama is the first demagogue insane enough to shut these open-air memorials, privately-funded businesses, and ocean areas down.”

    Jon you don’t get to pick and choose what non-essential things stay open during a shut down. You believing that the rules don’t apply to you does not mean that they actually don’t apply to you. That may be hard to accept, but it is reality.

  12. Falcor on October 6, 2013 at 12:47 said: “Jon you don’t get to pick and choose what non-essential things stay open during a shut down.”

    False assumption.

    There is nothing to close down.

    You can’t close down the ocean. You can’t close down an open field. You can’t close down an open-air walk-through monument.

    Once again, we see how liberals are loons.

    Actions and arguments by the Obama Administration and liberals generally are manifestly preposterous, and Obama is losing this fight because he doesn’t understand how foolish his arrogance looks to the average person.

    When there is nothing to close, the attempt to close something that is PERMANENTLY OPEN is (a) impossible and (b) more costly than doing nothing.

    However, this does illustrate the communist mentality of the Left: You think that the entire country depends upon the government. You think that the ocean depends upon the government. You think that an open field depends upon the government. You think that the government upholds and sustains everything.

  13. “You can’t close down the ocean. You can’t close down an open field. You can’t close down an open-air walk-through monument.”

    Cool story Jon. Well, lots of military bases are comprised of a number of large open fields. I guess random citizens should have the right to just wander into the impact area of a live fire range as they please. I mean, you can’t close down a field.

    Have you heard of fences Jon?

    “When there is nothing to close, the attempt to close something that is PERMANENTLY OPEN is (a) impossible and (b) more costly than doing nothing.”

    Really, so the price of putting up a fence would be more expensive than the price of removing vandalism?

  14. Falcor on October 6, 2013 at 14:19 said: “Really, so the price of putting up a fence would be more expensive than the price of removing vandalism?”

    These are UNATTENDED locations during normal conditions. So under normal operations, there are NO personnel there to stop vandalism.

    And if someone were going to break the law, they wouldn’t be stopped by waist-high barricades.

    What WOULD stop vandals is the presence of lots of law-abiding tourists who would be witnesses.

    But if the place is deserted, the chance of someone climbing over or setting aside waist-high barricades is greater, not less.

    Falcor on October 6, 2013 at 14:22 said: “And what exactly is the cost of putting up a couple of barricades Jon?”

    MORE than the cost of normal operations for open-air places that normally have NO ONE on site.

    So Obama wants to spend MORE money shutting down open-air, walk-through locations than what it costs to leave the locations open during normal operations?

    Spending MORE money in a shutdown than under normal conditions make sense to you?

  15. “MORE than the cost of normal operations for open-air places that normally have NO ONE on site.”

    But less than the cost of cleaning up graffiti. Thanks for playing.

  16. “These are UNATTENDED locations during normal conditions. So under normal operations, there are NO personnel there to stop vandalism.”

    That’s simply inaccurate. You can’t just make stuff up because you’re wrong Jon. Well, I guess you can because you frequently do. But, nobody is going to take you seriously.

  17. Falcor on October 6, 2013 at 15:15 said: ““These are UNATTENDED locations during normal conditions. So under normal operations, there are NO personnel there to stop vandalism.”

    “That’s simply inaccurate. You can’t just make stuff up because you’re wrong Jon. ”

    I lived there for over 20 years, Falcor. I have walked around the Iwo Jima memorial in the middle of the night, sometimes with friends sometimes alone.

    There is NO ONE THERE under normal conditions.

    Except in the sense that, like every other part of the city, if there is a disturbance police may respond when called.

    But these open-air parks are UNATTENDED, and are open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

    I used to live in Washington DC near the riverfront, and I could bicycle to the Jefferson Memorial. You can walk in any time, day or night, at 3 AM, any day of the week and there is nobody there, as a worker.

    The Vietnam Memorial “wall” is simply a wall along a public sidewalk. It is unattended and uncontrolled. There may sometimes be volunteers there to answer questions and provide information.

    But if you walk over to the Vietnam Memorial (wall) at 3 AM on Saturday night under normal conditions, there will be NO ONE THERE, as an employee or worker. Maybe other tourists or people out for a stroll.

    The World War 1 memorial — the flaming sword. Nobody is there ever, working there. It is simply next to the public sidewalk along Constitution.

    I not only lived there, I have actually WALKED on those sites late at night, such as on a date with a woman after dinner or when my friend Matt Dentino was in town and wanted to see the sights.

    I used to walk around praying late at night at the Iwo Jima Memorial.

    In terms of dating, forget the submarine races. The view of Washington, DC, from the Iwo Jima memorial park is absolutely stunning. You can’t go wrong taking a gal after dinner to the Iwo Jima.

  18. Falcor on October 6, 2013 at 15:12 said: “But less than the cost of cleaning up graffiti.”

    Deserted areas are more likely to be vandalized by graffiti. Locations open to the public, with tourists and visitors and DC residents enjoying the area will be LESS likely to experience graffiti.

    An abandoned house is more likely to be vandalized than a house that someone is living in.

    You lose. But thanks for playing.

    PLUS, we don’t get graffiti in Washington, DC. We aren’t New York.

  19. Does anyone know who established the phrase United We Stand Divided We Fall? I’m sure who ever it was might have seen our current problem or one like it coming. It does seem to be very true in this situation we have now.

  20. Countryboy, I wonder: If you have a friend who wants you to rob a bank with him, and you say no… should you compromise and meet him half-way by robbing a liquor store?

  21. Let’s say there were 5 friends and 1 wanted to rob a bank and the other 4 did not, what do think the outcome would be? I think that’s a better scenario than the one you made, if comparing our Government situation to robbing a bank/liquor store.

  22. “PLUS, we don’t get graffiti in Washington, DC. We aren’t New York.”

    I’ve been to Washington plenty of times. Yes, you do.

  23. Countryboy on October 6, 2013 at 21:01 said: “Let’s say there were 5 friends and 1 wanted to rob a bank and the other 4 did not, what do think the outcome would be? ”

    The argument being made by Democrats, liberal Republicans, and the mainstream media is:

    1 friend wants to rob a bank

    4 friends don’t want to rob anything.

    THEREFORE, the group of friends must COMPROMISE by robbing a SMALL store or a small bank branch rather than a full size bank.

    The correct approach is that robbing banks is illegal, and the correct answer is:

    NO!

    Not let’s compromise, but NO, HELL NO, and NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

    But that would be “obstructionist” and “terrorist” and “the party of no”

    The correct approach is that we NEED to say NO to a great many things. There are a great many things to which the only right response is: NO!

    How about this?

    1 friend wants all the friends to gang-rape the hot chick across the hall.

    4 friends don’t want to rape anybody.

    THEREFORE, the liberal Democrat approach is that the group of friends must COMPROMISE — in the liberal Democrat mentality — by sexually groping the hot chick across the hall, only to a small extent.

    The correct approach, the conservative approach, is that any of those actions are CRIMES and WRONG and the proper response is: NO! HELL NO, and if you mention it again I am calling the cops.

    Countryboy, we are STEALING from our children and grandchildren.

    The example of robbing a bank was not accidental.

    What is at stake is THEFT: Stealing from our children and grandchildren.

    How much stealing is acceptable from our children and grandchildren?

  24. We have had a national debt since Andrew Jackson. For a person who wants to pretend to know history, you’re incredibly poorly informed.

Comments are closed.