Soon we can begin counting the shutdown in weeks rather than days. Now that we’re headed into a fresh week with gridlock still going strong in the nation’s capital, where do we go from here? The idea of playing the “blame game” is not very interesting to me. I’m more interested, at this point, whether or not the American people will begin to have the attitude of, “so what?”

Report from Politico:

The government shutdown is lurching into a second week after a fruitless weekend on Capitol Hill.

A rare Saturday session was dominated by now-familiar shutdown messaging from Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate, with each side trying to blame the other for keeping the government shuttered. Even House-passed legislation that would pay federal workers prompted an angry reaction from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

There were no signs of serious negotiations over the weekend, and the longer the standoff drags on the more likely the fight will bump up against the Oct. 17 deadline to raise the debt ceiling — setting the stage for a giant battle over fiscal policy in the coming weeks.

More than a dozen lawmakers took to the Sunday shows to keep making their rhetorical case about which side is being unreasonable in the congressional stalemate.

“The House has passed four bills to keep the government open and to provide fairness to the American people under Obamacare,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told ABC’s “This Week.” “Even after the Senate has rejected — they’ve rejected all four of them … we asked to sit down with the Senate and have a conversation. They said no.”

What if the government held a shutdown and nobody came? Is the public just that disgusted with Washington in general that some people, maybe only on the inside, are relieved that the place is shutdown? If the President’s approval rating continues dropping into the low 40s, and we know Congress is hovering around 10% approval, might the public simply be collectively yawning over the prospect of a bloated, dysfunctional federal body coming to a halt for a few days, maybe weeks?

Maybe it’s just me, but I’m failing to see much outrage other than from those inside the beltway or in the media.

Then again, “shutdown” is a relative term. Apparently 83% of the federal government is still open and functional. Does closing 17% of the federal government constitute a “shutdown” or maybe just a week of binge dieting?

40 COMMENTS

  1. It is remembered that Rome fell from decay within, not without. The hatred brewing in the breasts of the Canadian Senator, and the historically disenchanted South can and will destroy America if the voters don’t change things.

    • Tom – i believe it is the hatred of your ancient NV Majority Sen leader and your Kenyan born POTUS trying to destroy a Democratic Republic and replace it with a decaying Socialized Monarchy. And you are right it will be up to the voters starting in 2014 to what kind of country they want to live in.

  2. Possibly the reason that there isn’t much outrage is that the public broadly doesn’t see Washington as looking out for their interests. So who cares if pieces shut down. The military will still be there.

    Great example is Obamacare (the center of this debate). Currently, 77% of Americans do not want the mandate (which is the cornerstone of the bill). Additionally, when it was passed around 80% of Americans were *happy* with their current health care coverage.

    With such a large majority *against* it, and such a large majority not really even wanting (or needing) it…nobody knows why they even did it. So exactly why did the Democrats force legislation on the country when clearly no one wanted it?

    The House needs to keep sending the budge in chunks. It will reveal the democrats desire to impose their will at the expense of the American people. These 2 things are clearly telling:

    1. (noted above) Even House-passed legislation that would pay federal workers prompted an angry reaction from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
    2. (a video in another pose) The Democrats would rather have Obamacare forcing American’s to buy health insurance than to pay for cancer research for children. …and Obama is in this, too, he didn’t stand up for the children.

    (Note – item 1 was passed by the democrats, item 2 was not…which shows they would rather ensure financial security of government workers than save children’s lives)

  3. Mandating all people to purchase something for 13% of the population is NOT considered the best interest of “the General public”, but a specific segment.

    I tried to go on the ACA website to see how much my premiums would cost a month (my employer sent a letter telling us that we now have this option), only for the site to give me a pop-up saying that it was currently un-available, due to high usage. Most people aren’t they to buy, but to compare!

    My local newspaper ran a cost comparison and unless you are at poverty level, Obamacare will cost as much as a COBRA premium per month. How many people can afford $900-$1400 month for health care premiums? Nevermind the high deductables that we will encounter, before the coverage kicks in.

    It is un-constitutional to DEMAND that citizens pay for something that they don’t want. We all seen what politicians/presidents have done with our Social Security taxes ~ re-distribute them until there is nothing left for the next generation!

    Sheeple won’t get it until it starts costing them. Then it will be too late to repeal or change anything! I’ve already seen insurance premiums spike by 250% because of all the mandates in Obamacare!

    • I think that’s where the problem is. Boehnor gave a clean bill to Reid, who rejected it. Reid gave a clean bill to Boehner, who rejected it. Problem is, they both have a different definition of what clean is..and are at an impasse. Reid and Obama say clean means, mandate American’s buy health insurance or face taxation penalties…and then tax evasion if you don’t pay the penalties (not sure how else they could enforce that). Boehnor says, clean bill postpones the mandate so they can talk about it more to make sure its a good thing (he needs to resurrect the ‘repeal’ option…doesn’t have anything to lose at this point).

      To be honest, Obama and Reid should have jumped on the ‘delay’ – it would have made it go in place. Now, it is possible that Obamacare will get repealed.

      with a mostly free healthcare market with 80% of people happy with their plans, we don’t need government meddling to mess things up.

      Obama made the most ridiculous comment in this whole thing yet the other day. Basically saying ‘I’ll negotiate…after they pass the bill’

      that’s like negotiating for how much you’re going to pay for dinner after you’ve already made your order. only a low information voter could accept something like that from Obama.

      • Josh, you are absolutely correct in that most people (who really have thought through Obamacare) don’t want it! The risk ratio is adversely effected (insurance is based on spreading the risk and is polluted when the riskiest jump on) by the ACA mandates. It is the reason that our insurance premiums are going up. Insurance companies still need to make a profit, while absorbing more and more risk.

        Never in the history of our country, have we had a more devisive president who is hellbent on taking us down the road of Socialism. We either fight or roll-over.

        Germany drastically changed in 12 years during Hitler’s reign and he too was voted in. The elite are the ones who ushered him in and bought into his “plan of change”. No wonder after the war, many Germans were embarrassed and ashamed that they were duped by a despot.

      • Josh & Daisy — both of you are spot on!

        Keep on posting the truth — don’t let Obama shills like Tess Liehard have their way here with their pernicious anti-American propaganda go unchallenged!

        It’s Our Free Nation to save from Lil’ Hussein and his lackeys!

        • Josh and Daisy:

          Let’s get back to the English language, shall we? A “clean bill” is a bill focused on ONE item, without riders or muddiness.

          In this case, Tess is right, and you are wrong on this SPECIFIC point: the House did NOT offer a clean bill, to pass the budget which had already been negotiated.

          I’m NOT talking about whether Obamacare should be repealed–I’m NOT even arguing whether this is the time to do it. But PLEASE, let’s at least agree what is meant by a “clean bill.”

          • Goethe – the ‘clean bill’ comment is something from Harry Reid and Obama so they can avoid the normal negotiation process that happens with bills. It is normal for the house and senate to disagree on specifics, just like now. Reid and Obama are trying to control the debate by setting the terms used. Problem is they are denying reality of how negotiation happens, and are correct in that most Americans don’t know how the process works.

            Obama revealed it when he talked about how he wants to negotiate, essentially saying…pass the bill, then we’ll negotiate.

            The House is following normal procedure. They’re just using the power the people gave them, and following the will of the people. Obama, Reid, and the rest of the democrats who want Obamacare are also using the power people gave them…however they are *not* representing.

            • Josh: Nope. Maybe yer a kid. I’ve heard the “clean bill” term used by BOTH parties when they want to focus on one issue, without “muddying” it. The last time the term was used, it was by Republicans, but I don’t remember the issue right now.

              Anyway, it’s not just made up, as you suggest. It’s in the official Senate Rules:

              clean bill – Generally, after a committee has amended legislation, the chairman may be authorized by the panel to assemble the changes and what remains unchanged from the original bill and then reintroduce everything as a clean bill. A clean bill may expedite Senate action by avoiding separate floor consideration of each committee amendment.

            • I wasn’t referring to whether or not the term was official. It seems you do agree with me about what they’re doing, though.

              What Boehner is doing is normal negotiating. Obama and Reid are trying to avoid any compromise. That’s why Obama keeps saying he’ll negotiate after the bill is passed…he doesn’t want to negotiate. I think he should keep it going through the debt ceiling. The government has trillions coming in and will keep getting paid taxes. So they’ll have money to spend.

              It’ll be a real education to all of Americans. The ‘shutdown’ seems to not really be causing the havoc Reid and Obama said it would. I don’t think the debt ceiling will either. Boehner should call their bluff.

            • Josh: Well, yes and no. I agree that Reid is not negotiating, but that’s because he already DID. The vote is supposed to be on the budget, which was fully debated and agreed to. All it needs is passage.

              Then, out of nowhere, came this Obamacare debate, after the issue at hand had been decided. If I were in Congress, I’d be very wary of agreeing to ANY compromise on any issue, if the other side could then bring up an unrelated issue to block passage. Sounds like bazaar market “negotiation.”

              Now, please understand, I am not debating Obamacare. As I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t care. But I do feel that this way of going about repeal is not proper. Once something is decided, you vote on it, you don’t start over with unrelated issues.

              It seems as if Congress is working hard to destroy any chance of accomplishing anything–like splitting the farm bill from the food stamp program, and now neither bills have any chance of passage.

              I’m talking about process, and this process is just wrong.

    • Bama – why not vote for a Clean ACA that cleans up all it’s drooling regurgitation and surging stink out it anus – not to mention you may get thru in six week, but won’t know costs, and choice of Doctors or Hospitals as well as who and what will be covered.

      Ever heard of the expression, “How Nice!!!” kinda like, “cover your legs b 4 incinderary”

  4. Research surveys are only accurate when there is clarity of the questions being ask. Then, there must be an unbiased interpretation of the answers. The sentiment that is public opinion is very fickle, which is why we have so many surprises in our elections.

    CNN’s Dana Bash didnot have knowledge of a particular child (children) not getting medical attention…her question was about future cancer research. When Reid said “This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless”. Dana Bash’s defense:“I’m just asking a question”. Too bad Dana Bash wasn’t asking about children who are currently suffering without WIC (milk, eggs, cereal, peanut butter,etc) due to the shutdown. There is plenty of mistakes going on in each party.The Affordable Healthcare is the law of the land. If it needs to be changed..or going with the current trend of repeal…do so through the legal procedure. Donot hold our economy hostage.

    • Aw Tess – you are such a good bleeding heart Liberal. WIC – through the end of October and partially a States decision but mainly (just like the Sequester), “The details of a shutdown are left to the executive branch of government and the Office of Management and Budget . . .” So your beloved POTUS will determine what stays funded and what doesn’t and when and if funds will be transferred, so don’t blame anyone but your Monarch for stonewalling or choosing not to get milk to some of the poor mother’s babies.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/wic-funding_n_4044736.html
      http://www.komonews.com/news/health/WIC-receives-30-more-days-of-funding-during-government-shutdown-226377271.html

      • Well, Sam, I will have to spread the word to my bleeding heart Ladies Group because WIC signs have been removed from stores we have been in. Undernourished children should be a concern to everyone.

        • i ‘d say your state #1 has some issues, #2 – house has submitted a bill specifically for WIC, &3 – as i said earlier, “The details of a shutdown are left to the executive branch of government and the Office of Management and Budget . . .” So your beloved POTUS will determine what stays funded and what doesn’t and when and if funds will be transferred

          Has your Ladie’s Group contacted Reid and Obama? That is who has control and has put up an unyielding wall and has even said they want people to suffer in hopes Republicans will be blamed. Some Democracy, huh? Sounds like a Monarchy to me – change is what you wanted change is what your getting – a spoiled child who wants his way regardless of who gets hurt!

        • Tess Liehard —

          So you admit that Obama is going after the weakest to FORCE a “cry” for his PERNICIOUS Agenda against the American people — after all, he also shut down the “Free school children Touring the White House” when he was unhappy with the “budget cuts” at that time!

          And you still shill for him…WOW, what a good little apparatchik you are!

      • Sam & Tess: I found this:

        The National WIC Association, the advocacy arm of a nutritional food program for poor women, infants and children, strongly denounced a Republican-sponsored measure on Friday that would fund WIC while the rest of the government remains shut down.

        The WIC Association called H J Res 75, the Nutrition Assistance for Low-Income Women and Children Act, “a cynical ploy to use low-income nutritionally at-risk mothers and young children as political pawns for political ends.”

        “Funding the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) in this piecemeal, short-term, stop-gap manner is not an acceptable solution,” the association said in a statement.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/wic-funding_n_4044736.html

        • So the WIC wants to take money from poor women, infants and children just to ensure the security of an act that denies americans the right to choose ‘not’ to buy health care? As many are waking up to realize, like the AARP and NAACP, are really just groups whose job it is to elect Democrats and support liberal causes.

          Just because a WIC advocacy group is against funding WIC, doesn’t mean the Republicans shouldn’t fund them. It would be bad for Obama and Reid to reject it just so they can keep the federal insurance mandate.

          • Josh: I agree. I suspect that the head of WIC thought he was being magnanimous by saying he didn’t want piecemeal payment, but he should have kept quiet. It makes the program appear partisan, and on top of it, it would have NO impact in the real world, anyway.

            If he felt that way, he should have just said that “all departments deserve to be funded,” which is not the same as turning down money for his.

        • Goethe..I read your Huffington Post with deep interest…especially this :Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), the sponsor of the WIC funding measure, blamed Democrats for blocking the WIC funds. “The House has passed a funding bill previously to keep the WIC program operational, and the Senate said no,” he told The Huffington Post, referring to the House spending bill that would have defunded the Affordable Care Act as a price for keeping the government open. “We’ll pass a [WIC] funding bill today, and the Senate should take yes for an answer.”

          Representative Robert Aderholt voted to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, commonly known as the “food stamp” program) by nearly $40 billion over a decade. Yet, his wife, Caroline Aderholt, who is a 6.3 percent owner of McDonald Farms according to 2008 ownership records. McDonald Farms received $66,891 in direct payment farm subsidies in 2012. .

  5. Nate: I agree. What kind of a “shutdown” allows nearly all of the government to continue, and pay the rest for doing nothing? Who couldn’t use a paid vacation?

    But there’s danger in it.

    The Vietnam war became unpopular because it dragged on. Same for Iraq. The Afghan war was wildly popular–until we realized there was no apparent end in sight.

    And that’s the point. Americans have no patience. If the shutdown drags on, the boredom will turn to anger–not because they’ll feel the shutdown, but because they’ll just get sick of hearing about it.

  6. .
    “We are not going to pass a clean debt limit,” John Boehner said Sunday in an interview on ABC “ the U.S. might end up in default if Obama doesn’t negotiate. That’s the path we’re on.” Speaker Boehner insisted Obama’s refusal to give him a phone call is the reason government offices remain shuttered (George Stephanopoulos on ABC). Speaker Boehner, of course, could end the impasse all by himself simply by allowing a vote on the Senate-passed continuing resolution to fund the government. Asked if he’d consider putting a debt-ceiling increase without add-ons on the floor, Boehner said the House would not be “going down that path.” Unlike past fiscal feuds, this dispute is more about President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, and less about the amount of spending. Boehner also said President Obama needs to start a conversation about the drivers of the country’s debt — entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security — before he could pass an increase in the debt ceiling.

    President Obama has said he’ll be willing to negotiate after the shutdown ends and the debt ceiling is increased. The Obama administration included changes to cut the costs that come from Social Security and Medicare in the budget plan, which was released in April.

    Republican lawmaker Senator Tom Coburn,(R-Okla.), who has never voted for a continuing resolution, went out to the floor to offer a reality check to Cruz, Lee and Rubio. “Their motivations are absolutely pure. I’d love to defund Obamacare,” Coburn said. But “you cannot design a piece of legislation that would defund Obamacare.”

    So, Goethe, I think your assumption is correct. We, Americans, are an impatient and fickle bunch. Today it seems to be “Never mind the greater good, men, we have a president on the ropes”. Tomorrow, the president may become the underdog that finds salvation. It’s a very unpredictable situation.

    • Tess Liehard (the Obama shill) — reading your post, I find your usual mix of some truths, half-truths and imaginative speculations. The same old circumlocution that apparatchiks like you use to defend what is indefensible.

      Most revealing in your Obamanite agenda is: “Obama has said he’ll be willing to negotiate after the shutdown ends and the debt ceiling is increased.”
      ———————————————————————————————

      Let’s dissect this statement to discover exactly what it means:

      1) “he’ll be willing to negotiate” — to be willing indicates an intent, NOT an absolute commitment. As such, this is an empty phrase, that lacks contractual merit.

      Since you have displayed lack of reasoning abilities here, let me give you an example of how logic works in the real world:

      I want my house painted for $5000 and advertise. A painter comes and looks at it and says: “I’ll be willing to paint it for $5000”. Several days pass and the painter has not come to start the job. I call him and ask what’s going on, he replies: “I was willing to paint your house for $5000, but finally decided the money was not enough, so now I won’t”.
      ————————————

      2) “negotiate After the shutdown Ends and the debt ceiling is Increased” — there are no possible words to describe this other than IDIOTIC ARROGANCE.

      But let’s give it a try, anyway.

      Obama wants to put the cart in front of the horse and then say to the people: “Giddy up Horsey”.

      Obama wants to eat his cake before is baked.
      —————————————————————————————–

      Now let’s logically read the true meaning of this statement, “Obama has said he’ll be willing to negotiate after the shutdown ends and the debt ceiling is increased”:

      *Obama says he may or may not negotiate, and the possibility whether he may negotiate is based solely on his dictates that the shutdown Ends and the debt ceiling is Increased are DONE FACTS prior to any possible negations on his part.*

      Tess Liehard, you won’t be earning your 30 pieces of silver from your boss, by posting this.

  7. Nate: “Then again, “shutdown” is a relative term. Apparently 83% of the federal government is still open and functional. Does closing 17% of the federal government constitute a “shutdown” or maybe just a week of binge dieting?”

    LOL, good one!

  8. “If the President’s approval rating continues dropping into the low 40s…”

    LOL — where are these polls taken…downtown New York…?!

    Go to America’s Heartland and see if Barrack Hussein breaks 5%…!!!

  9. What can you do to save our Free Republic — simple, get your Reps to Save America by STARTING an IMPEACHMENT PROCESS of Obama NOW!

    Yes, I know that actual Obama impeachment has slim-to-none chance in succeeding. But that’s not the point. The merit of impeachment proceedings is that it will stop Obama cold in his tracks in his further destruction of our Nation (he’ll solely concentrate in defending himself, and devote few energies for anything else…such as his goal in destroying the US Constitution ….it will be akin in result ala Clinton)!

    Barrack Hussein Obama’s published fake birth certificate could be the starting point. His swear-in pledge to defend the US Constitution, while he is overtly trying to destroy it, could be another powerful reason to start his immediate IMPEACHMENT.

    Call your Congressmen and Senators — Tell them: “Own up keeping America FREE by starting the Impeachment Process NOW, or opt out LATER from politics come next election”!

    Here are just a few of MANY charges that make Barrack Hussein Obama unfit to be a US President.
    ——————————————————————————————

    Does anyone with a functioning brain think that Obama’s goal from day one has been anything but the destruction of our Free Republic, by eliminating the US Constitution as the ONLY TRUE AND INDISPENSABLE framework on which our Nation MUST be based?!

    Barrack Hussein has done much damage to the Constitution already — his NADA signature (which he lied that he’ll NEVER sign) into law allowing any US Citizen to be whisked away, without due process or representation, to some secret Military Base on MERE suspicion (not actual proof) of being a “terrorist”!

    Barrack Hussein also wanted armed drones to fly all over America (but Rand Paul’s heroic stand finally elicited a response from the White House — not Barrack Hussein directly– that such drones wont kill Americans on American soil)!

    Barrack Hussein has started more “treason trials” on whistle blowers than all other presidents combined in US history!

    Barrack Hussein has finalized the NSA Spying on All Americans at the Utah Center — that is up and running already, AND collecting all possible DATA on ALL Americans!

    Barrack Hussein and wife Michelle Obama have publicly stated that they have attended US Flag burnings, because: “We feel that the US Constitution was written in Colonial Times and no longer applies to today’s world, being an archaic document …therefore, we do not think the US Flag represents what America should be today”! Meaning they want the US Constitution abolished!

    These are just a few of the horrendous examples Obama has perpetrated against the American people — but they are very narrow, few will suffer from them today.
    ————————————————————————————————–

    Here is THE BIG ONE — Obama’s Coup d’état of our Republic!

    “Obamacare” affects EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN, our Entire Nation — and as SUCH is nothing else, but the ultimate illegal weapon that ENDS the US Constitution, and thereby our Nation as Free People!

    The US Constitution PROHIBITS the mandate of anyone (whether private or public entities) from FORCING their goods or services on the Free American People upon the threat of penalty! (Example: If Verizon tells you: “You must subscribe to our service, or be penalized”. If Verizon tries to force that upon you, any Court of Law would find them guilty of EXTORTION, and give them jail time)!

    Thus, why would Obama’s “Obamacare” be treated differently, and not as the illegal UNCONSTITUTIONAL EXTORTION that it is?!
    ————————————————————————————————–

    Save America — Impeach Insane Hussein!

  10. Surfisher…
    You wrote: Barrack Hussein has started more “treason trials” on whistle blowers than all other presidents combined in US history!
    Truth: the United States has not officially charged an American with treason since the end of World War II until President George W Bush, in 2006, charged Adam Gadahn, an American-born convert to Islam who joined al Qaeda, became the first American to be indicted on federal charges of treason. (not a whistleblower) He remains in hiding overseas. Anwar Al-Awlaki, John Walker Lindh, Bradley Manning were not charged with treason. Julian Assange, Edward Snowden have not been charged with treason.

    You wrote:Barrack Hussein and wife Michelle Obama have publicly stated that they have attended US Flag burnings, because: “We feel that the US Constitution was written in Colonial Times and no longer applies to today’s world, being an archaic document …therefore, we do not think the US Flag represents what America should be today”! Meaning they want the US Constitution abolished!
    Truth: The beginning of this fabrication came from John Semmens, a columnist, who wrote a satirical “Semi-News ” column for The Arizona Conservative. It can be found on the their website. Later,John Semmens said it was a mock explanation meant in zest. Supposedly, it was presented on Meet The Press by retired General Bill Ginn as fact. Dale Lindsborg printed it in the Washington Post. Dale Lindsberg said he found the material on the internet, not from any interviews or visual knowledge.

    You wrote: Barrack Hussein has finalized the NSA Spying on All Americans at the Utah Center — that is up and running already, AND collecting all possible DATA on ALL Americans!
    Truth: The National Surveillance Agency (NSA) has always monitored our communications but mostly had to do with foreign communications. This was largely expanded to cover all communications after the 9-11-2001 attacks.
    President George W. Bush and a conservative controlled Senate and House in our Congress passed the Patriot Act in October 2001 for 10 years. President Barack Obama and a liberal Senate & conservative House signed a 4 year extension in 2011. In other words, Congress has to first agree and pass these bills for spying on Americans before it even reached either President’s desk. President Obama didnot wave a wand and create the Utah Center…he had accomplishes from both sides of the aisles.

    You wrote: Barrack Hussein also wanted armed drones to fly all over America (but Rand Paul’s heroic stand finally elicited a response from the White House — not Barrack Hussein directly– that such drones wont kill Americans on American soil)
    Truth: Spying, or killing, by the use of aircraft is not new. In the 1950’s,under President Eisenhower, Aquatone; a plan for the CIA to develop and deploy a long-range spy plane capable of flying beyond the reach of Soviet interceptors and surface to air defenses. This became the U-2 with the ability to sustain 2.5gs with a maximum speed of Mach 0.8 or 460 knots at a service altitude of 70,600 feet carrying a payload of 450 lbs. When did America know of this spying detail? On May 1,1960 when the Russians shot one down. In the second Gulf war drones really came into their own by sending live pictures back to the command post. Unfortunately, drones are here to stay unless our Congress decides to protect us with a law. There are 327 certificates of operation for drones active in the United States. Arlington,Texas police department, same for Houston,Texas, and Miami, Florida.

    More later

  11. Goethe, I never commented on the “clean bill”, all I commented on was why the American people want to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

    While the democrats scream “It’s the law of the Land, the people have decided” isn’t true. The senate used the reconcilation process instead of the filibuster process when they lost Teddy Kennedy and gained Scott Brown. The only way that they got the bill passed was to say it was a “budgetary reconcilation bill”. The senate needed only 56 votes instead of the usual 60!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/health/policy/26health.html?_r=0

    So it is only proper that the Republicans fight funding this bill and the “law of the land” can be repealed. One only has to look at slavery; public hangings; prohibition of alcohol/mixed marriages and abortion to know that the “law of the land” can be changed if enough people demand it!

  12. Let us not forget the votes that the democrat senate bought: The “cornhusker kickback”; the “Lousianna purchase”; and the “green mountain care” in Vermont. Three more votes to make the ACA bill pass!

  13. With Obama’s DISAPPROVAL rating climbing through the roof — now is the perfect storm to go after all of Barrack Hussein’s perfidies full throttle!

    Let’s get this anti-American Usurper of our White House impeached, and hopefully send to jail for a long, long time.

    This will be a good start:

    Contact Texas congressman Steve Stockman and urge him to start an immediate investigation of Barrack Hussein’s failure to provide naught but a forged Birth Certificate online!

    Texas congressman Steve Stockman:

    326 Cannon House Office Building
    Independence Avenue
    Washington, DC 20515
    Phone: 202-225-1555
    Fax: 202-226-0396
    Hours: M-F 9-5:30pm

    420 Green Avenue
    Orange, TX 77630
    Phone: 409-883-8075
    Fax: 409-886-9918
    Hours: M-F 8-4:00pm

    web page:

    http://stockman.house.gov/contact
    ———————————————————————————-

    Make this short video VIRAL!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px9XtjUAIzs

Comments are closed.