welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Random News Stories of Note
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 742, 743, 744 ... 817, 818, 819  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TIAB



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 683

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't the GOP generally against unions?

So why are they striking and acting like one?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3315

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer has been a shill for the stupidest political ideology for years.

Why is his reaction to this surprising. He's a kool-aid drinker from way back, and a libertarian.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mindslicer



Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1835
Location: North of the People's Republic of Massachusetts

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Felgraf wrote:
Mindslicer, if the democrats had, say, when Bush was President, demanded the war in iraq be ended before they agreed to pass a budget or they'd cause a government shutdown, or demanded that capital gains be raised equal to income tax levels or they'd cause a government shutdown-

Would you have considered that a legitimate tactic?

Somehow I rather doubt this.


You'd be surprised then. For example, I mentioned the legislative gymnastics involved in passing the ACA, but I didn't say it was illegitimate. It was a legitimate, if convoluted, way to prevent a new vote by the Senate on the law because the Republicans had regained the ability to filibuster, which is another legitimate, if overused, procedure. A couple pages ago Wheels posted a method by which the Democrats can force a vote on a clean CR, and that's not illegitimate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10730
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer wrote:
And all those House Democrats who voted against those bills will have to do is explain that to voters a year from November. The Republicans failed to compromise by relinquishing all of their bargaining leverage, so the Democrats just had to go on record and vote against funding parts of the government that they nonetheless consider vital. It'll be interesting to see which team benefits more, assuming the shutdown and sequester are even remembered by enough of the voting public to matter. Considering what reelection rates are like for the House, I doubt many of them on either team will lose their jobs over it.

"Republicans wanted to trick you into thinking the government wasn't shutdown by re-opening parks and the VA, while leaving shuttered vital services such as food for women and children in need, research for children with cancer, and the ability of the CDC to track and respond to disease outbreaks."

I'm not sure it's going to be hard to live down not passing those bills.

Quote:
Seriously? If the services those websites provide are non-essential enough to not be updated, shouldn't the servers hosting those sites not be so 'essential' that they need to be on? A 'unable to connect to the website' message on a web browser suffices to inform the user that the website is unavailable. Having the servers on requires active security from hackers and the like, whereas shutting them off renders them immune from such attacks. Even when the government is shut down, they waste money because they need the people to see just how horrible life is going to be without them.

Funny, before you were annoyed that they were displaying a redirect that "pretty much" blamed Republicans, now you're annoyed that they're on at all. I don't really have the heart to argue your backup gripe. Though I guess it's inconceivable that websites for agencies like the CDC, FDA, and FBI might have vital information for people about things like how to protect themselves from disease.

Quote:
A budget the Democrats in the Senate had refused to even pass for four years (talk about people not doing their jobs, right?)

True, but this is a game played by both parties. It's annoying, and irresponsible, and to my mind a symptom of the partisan atmosphere on Capitol Hill. However, it's important to note that not passing a budget, while partisan, has not itself caused this shutdown. Because we didn't have shutdowns in any of the other three years in which we didn't have a budget.

Quote:
All I was pointing out is the spiteful way in which the government has responded to the shutdown.

I'm not sure I see the spite you're looking for. The thing with the highway was a little odd, but the rest of it seems normal-ish to me.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10730
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer wrote:
And all those House Democrats who voted against those bills will have to do is explain that to voters a year from November. The Republicans failed to compromise by relinquishing all of their bargaining leverage, so the Democrats just had to go on record and vote against funding parts of the government that they nonetheless consider vital. It'll be interesting to see which team benefits more, assuming the shutdown and sequester are even remembered by enough of the voting public to matter. Considering what reelection rates are like for the House, I doubt many of them on either team will lose their jobs over it.

"Republicans wanted to trick you into thinking the government wasn't shutdown by re-opening parks and the VA, while leaving shuttered vital services such as food for women and children in need, research for children with cancer, and the ability of the CDC to track and respond to disease outbreaks."

I'm not sure it's going to be hard to live down not passing those bills.

Quote:
Seriously? If the services those websites provide are non-essential enough to not be updated, shouldn't the servers hosting those sites not be so 'essential' that they need to be on? A 'unable to connect to the website' message on a web browser suffices to inform the user that the website is unavailable. Having the servers on requires active security from hackers and the like, whereas shutting them off renders them immune from such attacks. Even when the government is shut down, they waste money because they need the people to see just how horrible life is going to be without them.

Funny, before you were annoyed that they were displaying a redirect that "pretty much" blamed Republicans, now you're annoyed that they're on at all. I don't really have the heart to argue your backup gripe. Though I guess it's inconceivable that websites for agencies like the CDC, FDA, and FBI might have vital information for people about things like how to protect themselves from disease.

Quote:
A budget the Democrats in the Senate had refused to even pass for four years (talk about people not doing their jobs, right?)

True, but this is a game played by both parties. It's annoying, and irresponsible, and to my mind a symptom of the partisan atmosphere on Capitol Hill. However, it's important to note that not passing a budget, while partisan, has not itself caused this shutdown. Because we didn't have shutdowns in any of the other three years in which we didn't have a budget.

Quote:
All I was pointing out is the spiteful way in which the government has responded to the shutdown.

I'm not sure I see the spite you're looking for. The thing with the highway was a little odd, but the rest of it seems normal-ish to me.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10730
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer wrote:
Felgraf wrote:
Mindslicer, if the democrats had, say, when Bush was President, demanded the war in iraq be ended before they agreed to pass a budget or they'd cause a government shutdown, or demanded that capital gains be raised equal to income tax levels or they'd cause a government shutdown-

Would you have considered that a legitimate tactic?

Somehow I rather doubt this.


You'd be surprised then. For example, I mentioned the legislative gymnastics involved in passing the ACA, but I didn't say it was illegitimate. It was a legitimate, if convoluted, way to prevent a new vote by the Senate on the law because the Republicans had regained the ability to filibuster, which is another legitimate, if overused, procedure. A couple pages ago Wheels posted a method by which the Democrats can force a vote on a clean CR, and that's not illegitimate.

Umm... you compared the House Republicans shutting down the federal government pretty favorably to the "gymnastics" used to pass the ACA. Here's what you said:
Quote:
And considering the legislative gymnastics involved in getting Obamacare to the president's desk without a single Republican vote, it's pretty amusing to watch the Democrats cry about the audacity of the Republicans in response.

So, it appears as though you're showing equivalency between the actions of the parties above, and are now suddenly moving away from that position because it's kind of batshit crazy. Limber Democrats =/= Republicans burning the house down.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mindslicer



Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1835
Location: North of the People's Republic of Massachusetts

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dogen wrote:
Quote:
All I was pointing out is the spiteful way in which the government has responded to the shutdown.

I'm not sure I see the spite you're looking for. The thing with the highway was a little odd, but the rest of it seems normal-ish to me.


The Smithsonian is closed, but if you have tickets to shows at Wolf Trap or the Kennedy Center (both of which are on federal land), no problem! Public tours at the latter are closed due to the shutdown though.

Is that also 'a little odd'?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3315

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer wrote:
Dogen wrote:
Quote:
All I was pointing out is the spiteful way in which the government has responded to the shutdown.

I'm not sure I see the spite you're looking for. The thing with the highway was a little odd, but the rest of it seems normal-ish to me.


The Smithsonian is closed, but if you have tickets to shows at Wolf Trap or the Kennedy Center (both of which are on federal land), no problem! Public tours at the latter are closed due to the shutdown though.

Is that also 'a little odd'?


No, which costs more money, opening and staffing a museum, or arranging refunds for all the ticket holders at these venues? It is entirely possible that shuttering these shows would FURTHER screw these locations budgets.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Felgraf



Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 724

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, given Boehner said we should judge the success of this house by the number of bills *They haven't passed*, shouldn't it make sense that they should also get credit for this shutdown?
_________________
"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mindslicer



Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1835
Location: North of the People's Republic of Massachusetts

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Mindslicer wrote:
Dogen wrote:
Quote:
All I was pointing out is the spiteful way in which the government has responded to the shutdown.

I'm not sure I see the spite you're looking for. The thing with the highway was a little odd, but the rest of it seems normal-ish to me.


The Smithsonian is closed, but if you have tickets to shows at Wolf Trap or the Kennedy Center (both of which are on federal land), no problem! Public tours at the latter are closed due to the shutdown though.

Is that also 'a little odd'?


No, which costs more money, opening and staffing a museum, or arranging refunds for all the ticket holders at these venues? It is entirely possible that shuttering these shows would FURTHER screw these locations budgets.


Sorry, Wolf Trap and the Kennedy Center are public/private partnerships like the one I initially posted, and we see there that the government has no concern for the latter's budget problems because, hey, federal land. It seems the hoi polloi must be barred from visiting the memorial of President Kennedy while on vacation because of the shutdown, but that doesn't mean the Washington upper crust has to give up a night at the opera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WheelsOfConfusion



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 12208
Location: Unknown Kaddath

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mindslicer wrote:
Sorry, even you can't deny the selective nature of this.

For me to deny something, you'd have to present me with a coherent and rational explanation based on evidence. What I am is skeptical of your conspiracy theory. Can you tell me, right now without any Googling, who is doing all this shutting-down, how they are coordinating it, what criteria they are using to decide what gets closed off, and why they are doing it? I do not want your insipid speculation, I want facts. If your theory isn't based explicitly on facts from the start, I can dismiss it without effort and hold out for one that is.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Federal websites aren't just disconnected from the internet due to lack of funding; they're still up and running, just with redirect pages pretty much saying 'sorry, our website is totally down because Republicans.'

They don't blame the Republicans. Is that what you're reduced to in order to try and make this case? Blatant lies? Tell me you don't actually believe this.

I said they 'pretty much' say that. They say the site is down because of the shutdown, and the administration and MSM pick up where they leave off and blame the Republicans.

Okay, so now you admit that the website redirect notices actually do not say or even imply what you said they did. At all. Are you going to continue acting as though they do? Are you really going to do this whole charade knowing that it's a sham? At this point I don't know whether it would be best to assume that you are intentionally dishonest or merely stupid. Either way, you are just further marginalizing yourself.

Quote:
Quote:
Those redirect pages are up because the services that those websites would have provided are not being done. The people who would have maintained and updated the content and processed the forms on those sites are not there. Leaving the sites up as if normal, but unmanned, is worse than useless; it's misleading and dangerous. People need to know that they can't rely on those services.

And a 404 error would not do this how?

A 404 does not indicate that services are being cut off, or why something might be unavailable. It only means that a particular request cannot be understood or that a page cannot reached over the network from where you are. This can be for any number of reasons including a problem on the client end.
You may not subscribe to this philosophy, but in the real world some things have specific and objective meanings.
Perhaps you do realize what a 404 is, but assume that shutting down and bringing back up an important web service is as easy as turning your computer on or off. Thus you may think that restoring a web service that has been removed is a quick and relatively painless affair. Depending on complexity (and you yourself brought up the complexity inherent in the kinds of services the government provides through their websites), it can take weeks. Shutting down an actual datacenter and then bringing it back up to full operating status can even take months. This means that even after the government service in question gets funding restored and employees are sent back to work, those services can be out of commission for a very long time. It is far more cost efficient and, arguably, arguably, more responsible to keep the sites and some of their engines up and ready to run again but let people know that they're basically unusable at the moment. This helps ensure that delays in restoring services (if the government starts working again) are minimal and that fewer people slip through the cracks in the meantime.

Quote:
The final bill was a dramatic compromise between Pelosi and a few hesitant Democrats to make sure they'd all be on board, since the Republicans wanted nothing to do with the legislation.

This was only after the bill was shaped by Democratic efforts to court the Republicans by structuring it around their own previous policies.

Quote:
And, yes, the Republicans didn't give a crap about balancing the budget when they were in charge, although they did pass Medicare part D (somehow while simultaneously not caring a whit about healthcare) along the way.

Part D is a relatively terrible service that's extremely inefficient and basically a big government handout to drug companies. By using private insurance, Part D costs went up instead of down as expected. It was imagined that competition and insurance negotiations with drug would lead to lower prices overall, but that didn't work. It has a "donut hole" that is designed to let people fall through it (you might recall that shrinking this hole was part of Obama's healthcare reforms). It does almost nothing to lower drug prices, lowering them less than other Medicare plans for out-of-pocket beneficiaries. Private insurers cannot negotiate deals with drug companies as favorable as the ones Medicare itself gets. It would have been cheaper to make this public instead of private.
The benefits of Part D are nowhere near as significant as the benefits of the Affordable Care Act and do not even begin to address the system on the same scale. Even the ACA is terrible compared to the sane option: a single-payer public healthcare system like virtually every other Western democracy on the planet (and a ton who aren't Western democracies). These are proven to lower costs all around and increase the overall quality of care. Veterans love the VA, Medicare recipients love Medicare. Despite the outliers you are presented with in your right-wing echo chamber, Canadians, Europeans, Australians, et al. love their public healthcare. I am constantly bombarded with questions about how Americans are expected to survive with our private system. The answer I have to give is that a lot of us don't, even those with insurance. This is not just a huge drag on our economy, it's a human tragedy which is easily preventable.
It makes no sense to oppose the public option; not from a fiscal standpoint, not from an economic standpoint, not from a freedom standpoint, not from a national well-being standpoint, not from a quality of care standpoint, not from a quality of life standpoint. But the Republicans absolutely will not allow it to come to the table for discussion.

Quote:
And, yes, they didn't vociferously oppose Romneycare, passed by a Republican governor (who is about as conservative as Michael Bloomberg, once called a Republican as well) in one of the bluest states in the nation because it was a state-level policy and states theoretically got to handle that sort of thing on their own.

In theory and in practice (as determined by SCOTUS) the federal government is free to do the same. Elections after the passing of the ACA didn't change the makeup of Congress enough to cause its repeal either, so perhaps there really isn't anything to this "but only the states!" argument.

Quote:
The House attempted to pass two partial funding bills in which all Republicans voted yea, but since they needed a 2/3rds majority to pass, there were enough nay votes from Democrats to prevent it. Not that it would have mattered; Senator Reid has said such bills won't even be put to a vote in the Senate and the President says he would veto them anyway.

Because there is already a fix for these funding issues. The House can vote on the Senate version of the spending bill, and fund the whole fucking thing and bring the government back online. Trying to make this about national parks is just a delaying tactic to keep the government shut down as long as possible, and you are buying into it for some unfathomable reason. Instead of being more evidence that the Republicans are not interested in actually governing, you see it as more evidence that those evil Democrats are attacking the helpless, sightseeing public. Conveniently allowing you to ignore that THE REPUBLICANS SHUT DOWN THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT are putting actual people at risk for their livelihoods, and even their lives, every day that this goes on.
You want to bitch about closed parks and sightseeing spots while the CDC is on furlough, just as flu season is starting up. You want to talk about traffic cones alongside the highways across from Mt. Rushmore while the FDA and NIH cancels important drug trials, anti-cancer research, and food safety tracking. These are not just public-facing services, they are important sources of information that feed directly into public AND private efforts to cure diseases, prevent outbreaks, develop new treatments, and monitor the health of our nation. You bitch about a private entity not having access to their leased part of a federal park, but even the DC police who responded to the woman ramming the gates of the White House and Capitol building, as well as the guy who set himself on fire at the National Mall, are not being paid.

How can you sit there fuming over such petty fucking distractions? Even if you were right, which there is no evidence of, by far there are more important things to fund than open national parks at the moment. Your priorities are all kinds of fucked. Whether that is a symptom or a cause of your support for these incredibly irresponsible Republican efforts, I couldn't say.

Quote:
But it's cool, the president has said he's willing to negotiate -- but only after the Republicans give him upwards of $4 trillion and another debt ceiling raise...

Congress has to authorize this because it's money we've already committed to. It is basically spent already, that's why it's debt. The constitution demands that the US cover all its debts. It is unconstitutional of Congress to refuse.

Quote:
... the latter of which he quite eloquently railed against when he was a senator. Now Team Blue sycophants are hoping he'll just invoke the 14th Amendment and declare the U.S. to have a no-limit credit card forever. I wonder how Senator Obama and his cheerleaders would have felt about that if Bush had done the same thing in 2006...

What I wonder about is how you would react if this happens. Will you admit that the Republican party is no longer interested in any pretense of serving the country and the constitution?

Quote:
Also, the sequester was voted for by Democrats as well as Republicans, and signed into law by the president, a Democrat, but it's TEAM RED'S fault it actually happened?

Yes, it's their fault that it actually happened. Because they fucked over the negotiations that were supposed to avoid it just like they're doing now, when they've gone so far as to shut down the fucking government. They have been the cause of all these financial stand-offs by demanding concessions to their platform which they could not win in an open vote. They have done this in opposition to policies they themselves have championed. They wanted to deny Obama any political victories, and they have said so in their own words numerous times over the years of Obama's terms in office, around virtually every crisis they've manufactured by tying essential legislation to conditions advancing their politically unpopular ideologies.

Quote:
Ultimately, this may be a teachable moment for the country. The ZOMG SUHKWESTERR!! was preceded by so much doomsaying from various talking heads both in and out of government, from both sides of the aisle, but apparently the nation has managed to survive an eventual 2.4% percent reduction in overall funding. Surprisingly resilient for an economy that we hear is so desperately fragile despite the Messiah's gentle, magical touch lo these past five years.

It is becoming harder and harder to maintain the delusion that the sequestration is no big deal. For some people, it's a matter of making it or not. For others it's about how the sequester is opposing the economic recovery and prolonging the recession. For many government agencies, including the military, it means we are downsizing in a stupid and unintelligent way which does nothing to make us safer. In many cases it has actually increased waste instead of reduced it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/the-sequesters-devastating-impact-on-americas-poor/277758/
http://www.businessinsider.com/sequester-finally-hurting-2013-9
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/28/us-usa-budget-sequester-insight-idUSBRE98R05K20130928
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/467167/service-chiefs-detail-2014-sequestration-effects.aspx
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-27/world/42459536_1_comey-budget-cuts-fbi-agents-association

Quote:
It won't last forever. The last shutdown in the 90's didn't cause the planet to hurtle into the sun, and this one won't either.

Well by the criteria of hurtling into the sun, just about everything seems less negative. That doesn't mean it would be a good thing if we all started choking on a cloud of toxic chemicals that killed half the world's population either.
You seem incapable of relying on facts instead of hyperbole, or blatant lies, or conspiracy theories, in order to make your case. Perhaps recognition of that should trigger some self-reflection.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Felgraf



Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 724

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some Lincoln quotes which seem eerily applicable (save that the roles the various parties are playing has flipped)


"Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events. [...]

Under all these circumstances, do you really feel yourselves justified to break up this Government unless such a court decision as yours is, shall be at once submitted to as a conclusive and final rule of political action?

But you will not abide the election of a Republican president! In that supposed event, you say, you will destroy the Union; and then, you say, the great crime of having destroyed it will be upon us! That is cool. A highwayman holds a pistol to my ear, and mutters through his teeth, "Stand and deliver, or I shall kill you, and then you will be a murderer!" [...]

A few words now to Republicans. It is exceedingly desirable that all parts of this great Confederacy shall be at peace, and in harmony, one with another. Let us Republicans do our part to have it so. Even though much provoked, let us do nothing through passion and ill temper. "


From Lincoln's second inaugural:
"On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war-seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came."
_________________
"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Him



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 4189
Location: On edge

PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lee Terry Needs His Salary During Government Shutdown To Pay For His 'Nice House'
Fucking scum.
_________________
A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want? ~Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10427
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 07, 2013 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Him wrote:
Lee Terry Needs His Salary During Government Shutdown To Pay For His 'Nice House'
Fucking scum.

Quote:
"Whatever gets them good press," Terry said of members giving up their salary. "That's all that it's going to be. God bless them. But you know what? I've got a nice house and a kid in college, and I'll tell you we cannot handle it. Giving our paycheck away when you still worked and earned it? That's just not going to fly."

Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) also said on Wednesday that he would be keeping his salary, because he's "working to earn" it and even came in on the weekend.

Furloughed federal workers would also like to be able to work hard to earn their paychecks, but right now, Congress is prohibiting most of them from doing so.

Yeah, they're "working"
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://about.me/omardrake
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Heretical Rants



Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 5344
Location: No.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TIAB wrote:
Isn't the GOP generally against unions?

I opened this thread up and immediately read this as
"Isn't SGAP generally against unicorns?"
uhhhhhh
_________________
butts
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 742, 743, 744 ... 817, 818, 819  Next
Page 743 of 819

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group