If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Inquisitr)   National Park police close Mt. Vernon, find out after the fact that it is privately owned and funded. OOPS our bad, whodathunkit?   (inquisitr.com) divider line 331
    More: Asinine, obama regime  
•       •       •

11482 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 6:28 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



331 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-05 09:04:04 PM

OgreMagi: TuteTibiImperes: OgreMagi: Radioactive Ass: OgreMagi: Nope. Excluding military (which is notoriously low paid), you are going to make more working for the Feds than in the private sector, unless the job requires a PhD.

The social contract there is that you are paid less for a more stable job. Private sector jobs rely upon the economy (local and national) while government jobs usually perform services that are paid for out of taxes and thus are immune to a lot of that economic pressure.

Go back and read that chart again.  You get paid MORE working for the Feds.

Only after benefits are considered.  Federal jobs typically have lower salaries but better benefits packages.  If you want to compare salary vs salary, the private sector pays more most of the time.

The chart shows that.  The difference seems miniscule to me.


To slip into non-snarkiness for a moment (though somewhat fueled by a nice Willamette Pinot), I will say that I personally don't mind paying for quality, as long as we are comparing apples to apples and the result is measurably better. If we are comparing state college degrees to Ivy League degrees, or English degrees to Petroleum Engineering degrees, though, salary and benefits comparisons tend toward silliness.

/hmm, the Pinot seems to be making my cheeks flush. I hope I haven't said anything indefensible. :)
 
2013-10-05 09:05:26 PM

ginandbacon: eltejon: So is the whole damn GW Parkway.

They also closed the parking and picnic pavilions at Claud Moore Colonial Farm:

Um you do realize those are under Federal jurisdiction, right?


And thus why I mentioned them. You know the GW starts at the front door of Mt Vernon and is NPS. And while they are at it they could close the BW too.

As for Claude Moore, yes, I also realize it is NPS. Kind of why I linked the article.
 
2013-10-05 09:05:57 PM
This thread delivers. Much more fun than the politics threads.
 
2013-10-05 09:05:59 PM

OgreMagi: udhq: super_grass: udhq: super_grass: ginandbacon: OgreMagi: WippitGuud: PanicMan: I don't give a shiat.  800,000 people are out of a job.  Cram the national parks up your ass.

A law passed the House today, 208-0, that those 800,000 will receive 100% of their back-pay once they are back to work. So, they are simply on vacation.

So if you're a government worker, you should be hoping for a very long shut down.

Because not paying bills on time usually works out well for most people.

Should have saved money then.

Federal workers earn more than private sector workers, with better benefits to boot.

That is absolute streaming bullshiat.

The rule of thumb is 10-20%, the last actual comparison I read says that a federal worker makes 17% less t than someone doing the same job in the private sector.

That goes up exponentially if you look just at executive leadership.

The only way it works is if you compare total averages, ie including the army of minimum wage earners in the private sector.

My heart goes out to those poor, poor executive leaders.

Obama makes about 450k.

If he led an organization of similar size and scope I'm the private sector, he'd make about 60million in total compensation (most of which would be in VERY lightly taxed stock options), and he's not even the highest paid employee of the federal government. That honor goes to the football coaches at the military academies.

I'm not saying the president should get paid more, I'm mostly pointing out the complete and utter failure of free market capitalism at the top end.

They make up for the low compensation by having the inside track on what to buy and sell in the stock market.  And lets not forget those sweet lobbyist bribes gifts.


I may be wrong, but isn't the president specifically required to put his portfolio in a blind trust while he's in office?
 
2013-10-05 09:06:15 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Mrbogey: Teekno: Well. no, not really. There's nothing to back up the claim that that's why the shoulder was closed.

Why do you think they put cones up?

Why should I believe you over what the NPS says?

Because the NPS said (quoting from the article, not the NPS), "the cones were a safety precaution to help channel cars into viewing areas rather than to bar their entrance"?


That picture with all of the cones is specifically blocking a pullout on the road that's there for viewing Washington's profile. And just off to the right is another pullout for traffic in the opposite direction.
 
2013-10-05 09:08:18 PM

udhq: OgreMagi: udhq: super_grass: udhq: super_grass: ginandbacon: OgreMagi: WippitGuud: PanicMan: I don't give a shiat.  800,000 people are out of a job.  Cram the national parks up your ass.

A law passed the House today, 208-0, that those 800,000 will receive 100% of their back-pay once they are back to work. So, they are simply on vacation.

So if you're a government worker, you should be hoping for a very long shut down.

Because not paying bills on time usually works out well for most people.

Should have saved money then.

Federal workers earn more than private sector workers, with better benefits to boot.

That is absolute streaming bullshiat.

The rule of thumb is 10-20%, the last actual comparison I read says that a federal worker makes 17% less t than someone doing the same job in the private sector.

That goes up exponentially if you look just at executive leadership.

The only way it works is if you compare total averages, ie including the army of minimum wage earners in the private sector.

My heart goes out to those poor, poor executive leaders.

Obama makes about 450k.

If he led an organization of similar size and scope I'm the private sector, he'd make about 60million in total compensation (most of which would be in VERY lightly taxed stock options), and he's not even the highest paid employee of the federal government. That honor goes to the football coaches at the military academies.

I'm not saying the president should get paid more, I'm mostly pointing out the complete and utter failure of free market capitalism at the top end.

They make up for the low compensation by having the inside track on what to buy and sell in the stock market.  And lets not forget those sweet lobbyist bribes gifts.

I may be wrong, but isn't the president specifically required to put his portfolio in a blind trust while he's in office?


I'm not sure. I remember in a Clancy novel that he did it voluntarily.  But Clancy fiction no way represents reality.  I know that senators don't do that.  They are also exempted from insider trading laws.

It should be the law that all elected officials and their immediate family must have all assets managed by a double blind trust.  Ain't gonna happen.
 
2013-10-05 09:11:22 PM

Summercat: fullyfarked: TuteTibiImperes: brimed03: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A large part of that is due to the GOP media machine manufacturing outrage over this and trying to paint it as a deliberate Democratic Party move to hurt people instead of the reality that these moves are just to ensure the just public safety and integrity of federal property.

The GOP has no plan to fix this shutdown, and they're refusing to do the one fair thing that would end it right now - pass a clean CR.  They're trying to obfuscate the issue, which is par for the course.  They don't actually do anything, they just obfuscate and obstruct.

^^^^^^^
100% pure, unedited top-shelf Democrat party talking points... right down to the "Clean CR" reference, which was invented out of nothing just to have something high-and-mighty sounding to spice up sound bites.

Except that these 'talking points' have the side benefit of being ground in reality.


Except there should NOT be a clean CR. Nor should there be a dirty CR. There should be a BUDGET passed that the Dems have blocked every year since Bummer took office. If that had happened, we wouldn't be in the spot we're in now. In fact, if the different appropriations bills were to be passed separately like they used to be before some lazy ass Congress started rolling them up into Omnibus bills, there never would be any such thing as shutting down the whole government because some dick in office is having a hissy fit.
 
2013-10-05 09:13:01 PM

Benjimin_Dover: Summercat: fullyfarked: TuteTibiImperes: brimed03: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A large part of that is due to the GOP media machine manufacturing outrage over this and trying to paint it as a deliberate Democratic Party move to hurt people instead of the reality that these moves are just to ensure the just public safety and integrity of federal property.

The GOP has no plan to fix this shutdown, and they're refusing to do the one fair thing that would end it right now - pass a clean CR.  They're trying to obfuscate the issue, which is par for the course.  They don't actually do anything, they just obfuscate and obstruct.

^^^^^^^
100% pure, unedited top-shelf Democrat party talking points... right down to the "Clean CR" reference, which was invented out of nothing just to have something high-and-mighty sounding to spice up sound bites.

Except that these 'talking points' have the side benefit of being ground in reality.

Except there should NOT be a clean CR. Nor should there be a dirty CR. There should be a BUDGET passed that the Dems have blocked every year since Bummer took office. If that had happened, we wouldn't be in the spot we're in now. In fact, if the different appropriations bills were to be passed separately like they used to be before some lazy ass Congress started rolling them up into Omnibus bills, there never would be any such thing as shutting down the whole government because some dick in office is having a hissy fit.


The dicks you're searching for are in the House, they're the ones proposing budgets that don't adequately fund the government and the necessary programs it runs.  Let the House pass the budget that Obama and the Senate propose and there will be smooth sailing.
 
2013-10-05 09:13:30 PM

TuteTibiImperes: hasty ambush: mr_larry: TuteTibiImperes: mr_larry: TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes:

"Excepted employees" include employees who are (1) performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the property.

Where does the White House portrait photographer figure into this?

President Obama Gets Portrait Taken on Oct. 3, During Government Shutdown

First of all he isn't the White House Portrait Photographer, I'm fairly certain that isn't an actual position.  He's a guy Obama hired to take a portrait photograph, and was likely scheduled well in advance of the shutdown and paid for out of Obama's pocket.


citation?
 
2013-10-05 09:14:18 PM

OgreMagi: Go back and read that chart again. You get paid MORE working for the Feds.


I should have said that "The way it used to be is that"...

That's what I was saying in my head when I typed that but I got distracted. Govt. jobs should almost never pay better than their civilian equivalents unless it's a critical position. The last "Government" job that I had (local, literally burning poop) was roughly 1/2 wage and 1/2 benefits (they counted all expenses that I cost them as benefits including the 7.5% that they paid into my SSA account and so on in that calculation. In other words, if I were a private contractor what would I have to include in my overall estimate to do the job for them). They didn't want to tell us that information but I once saw a log book that had it in them (the log was there to split costs between several different municipalities based upon where the work was being done). I was being paid ~$11 an hour (mid-90's in central PA so not too bad for the area at the time) but the cost to them was ~$21 an hour once all things were taken into account.
 
2013-10-05 09:16:09 PM

Radioactive Ass: OgreMagi: Go back and read that chart again. You get paid MORE working for the Feds.

I should have said that "The way it used to be is that"...

That's what I was saying in my head when I typed that but I got distracted. Govt. jobs should almost never pay better than their civilian equivalents unless it's a critical position. The last "Government" job that I had (local, literally burning poop) was roughly 1/2 wage and 1/2 benefits (they counted all expenses that I cost them as benefits including the 7.5% that they paid into my SSA account and so on in that calculation. In other words, if I were a private contractor what would I have to include in my overall estimate to do the job for them). They didn't want to tell us that information but I once saw a log book that had it in them (the log was there to split costs between several different municipalities based upon where the work was being done). I was being paid ~$11 an hour (mid-90's in central PA so not too bad for the area at the time) but the cost to them was ~$21 an hour once all things were taken into account.


That used to be the case.  Lower pay, but killer benefits and the best job stability around.  It was a reasonable compromise.
 
2013-10-05 09:18:56 PM

anyQTmovie: Alphakronik: While there are kids going without formula or milk, I could give a rats ass about the national parks or Mt. Vernon.

Sorry, but that's the parent's job not the gov't.


Americans don't let other Americans starve.
You just bought yourself a ride, little one.
 
2013-10-05 09:20:09 PM
Instead of dollar amounts, why isn't the federal budget apportioned as a percentage of tax revenue? Sure, you would need a dollar amount to buy a new tank or federal building, but you could prioritize spending within that percentage -- "We apportion 19% of the federal income to defense and security, and hey, if we get more than $689 billion we will buy another tank!" or whatever.
 
2013-10-05 09:20:13 PM

hasty ambush: TuteTibiImperes: hasty ambush: mr_larry: TuteTibiImperes: mr_larry: TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes:

"Excepted employees" include employees who are (1) performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the property.

Where does the White House portrait photographer figure into this?

President Obama Gets Portrait Taken on Oct. 3, During Government Shutdown

First of all he isn't the White House Portrait Photographer, I'm fairly certain that isn't an actual position.  He's a guy Obama hired to take a portrait photograph, and was likely scheduled well in advance of the shutdown and paid for out of Obama's pocket.

citation?


This is the guy who took Obama's portrait.   This is the official White House Photographer (notice how they're not the same guy.  Also notice how there is not an official White House Portrait Photographer).  Personal expenses are supposed to come from the President's own money.  Since this doesn't seem to be an official portrait, that means it was likely paid out of the President's own accounts, if payment was required at all.  There's a good chance that the photographer requested the opportunity to have a session with Obama pro-bono just for the notoriety and to add to his own portfolio.
 
2013-10-05 09:21:13 PM

Snarfangel: Instead of dollar amounts, why isn't the federal budget apportioned as a percentage of tax revenue? Sure, you would need a dollar amount to buy a new tank or federal building, but you could prioritize spending within that percentage -- "We apportion 19% of the federal income to defense and security, and hey, if we get more than $689 billion we will buy another tank!" or whatever.


Because that would make sense.  What are you thinking?
 
2013-10-05 09:23:05 PM

TuteTibiImperes: The dicks you're searching for are in the House,


John Boner.
John Boner.
John Boner.

You do realize that John Boner is the only person causing this right now, right?
John Boner won't be humiliated bu Barack Obama.

Boner could order the vote for the clean CR and this would end.
 
2013-10-05 09:23:35 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Benjimin_Dover: Summercat: fullyfarked: TuteTibiImperes: brimed03: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A large part of that is due to the GOP media machine manufacturing outrage over this and trying to paint it as a deliberate Democratic Party move to hurt people instead of the reality that these moves are just to ensure the just public safety and integrity of federal property.

The GOP has no plan to fix this shutdown, and they're refusing to do the one fair thing that would end it right now - pass a clean CR.  They're trying to obfuscate the issue, which is par for the course.  They don't actually do anything, they just obfuscate and obstruct.

^^^^^^^
100% pure, unedited top-shelf Democrat party talking points... right down to the "Clean CR" reference, which was invented out of nothing just to have something high-and-mighty sounding to spice up sound bites.

Except that these 'talking points' have the side benefit of being ground in reality.

Except there should NOT be a clean CR. Nor should there be a dirty CR. There should be a BUDGET passed that the Dems have blocked every year since Bummer took office. If that had happened, we wouldn't be in the spot we're in now. In fact, if the different appropriations bills were to be passed separately like they used to be before some lazy ass Congress started rolling them up into Omnibus bills, there never would be any such thing as shutting down the whole government because some dick in office is having a hissy fit.

The dicks you're searching for are in the House, they're the ones proposing budgets that don't adequately fund the government and the necessary programs it runs.  Let the House pass the budget that Obama and the Senate propose and there will be smooth sailing.


The House is the house that is responsible for determining what and how much gets spent not the Senate and not the President. Why? Because that is the house that represents the people and does the people's work. Only a Dem would have a problem with what the people want.
 
2013-10-05 09:23:51 PM

ginandbacon: Lsherm: cameroncrazy1984: Oh and here's the contingency plan. Nowhere does it state that there is a difference between NPS grounds. It states that ALL NPS property is to be shut down:

http://www.doi.gov/shutdown/fy2014/upload/NPS-contingency-plan.pdf

Mt. Vernon isn't NPS property.

No but "Designated accessible parking spaces are available at the front of the East and West Visitor Parking Lots on each side of the George Washington Memorial Parkway, which are owned and maintained by the National Park Service" so it's funny how reality doesn't really support this narrative, hmm?

Does it seem like a lot of GOP trolls are out today spreading lies?


Today?
 
2013-10-05 09:27:34 PM

Mrbogey: By LAW they have to shut down anything that is open to the public. It says right there in the Declaration of Independence, ipso facto QED!


You better listen to him, he's pre-med.
 
2013-10-05 09:30:12 PM

TuteTibiImperes: If you're pissed off, direct your ire to the House Republicans, this is entirely on them.


Of course its the Democrats who are making public displays on closing things down, even if they are unmanned or never close, or in this case don't even own it.


All Obama has to do is sign the budget the house sent him, you see its Obama who is shutting the government down by his inaction.
 
2013-10-05 09:30:31 PM

EnderX: Mrbogey: By LAW they have to shut down anything that is open to the public. It says right there in the Declaration of Independence, ipso facto QED!

You better listen to him, he's pre-med.


Or pre-medicated.
 
2013-10-05 09:30:45 PM

TuteTibiImperes: OgreMagi: Radioactive Ass: OgreMagi: Nope. Excluding military (which is notoriously low paid), you are going to make more working for the Feds than in the private sector, unless the job requires a PhD.

The social contract there is that you are paid less for a more stable job. Private sector jobs rely upon the economy (local and national) while government jobs usually perform services that are paid for out of taxes and thus are immune to a lot of that economic pressure.

Go back and read that chart again.  You get paid MORE working for the Feds.

Only after benefits are considered.  Federal jobs typically have lower salaries but better benefits packages.  If you want to compare salary vs salary, the private sector pays more most of the time.


Here is a good trivia question: 6 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the US are suburbs of what city?
 
2013-10-05 09:33:48 PM

udhq: 'm not saying the president should get paid more, I'm mostly pointing out the complete and utter failure of free market capitalism at the top end.


Because the bribe money doesn't come in until later?

As former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embarks on her new career as a paid speaker, she joins a lucrative family business that already has earned her husband more than $100 million since leaving office in 2001.
 
2013-10-05 09:34:13 PM
If they really wanted to piss a  bunch of people off, shut down the civilian side of GPS or at least enable Selective Availability for 24 hours. Geocachers would be storming the palace gates in no time.

/dither them last few decimal points
 
2013-10-05 09:36:37 PM

fusillade762: ginandbacon: Lsherm: cameroncrazy1984: Oh and here's the contingency plan. Nowhere does it state that there is a difference between NPS grounds. It states that ALL NPS property is to be shut down:

http://www.doi.gov/shutdown/fy2014/upload/NPS-contingency-plan.pdf

Mt. Vernon isn't NPS property.

No but "Designated accessible parking spaces are available at the front of the East and West Visitor Parking Lots on each side of the George Washington Memorial Parkway, which are owned and maintained by the National Park Service" so it's funny how reality doesn't really support this narrative, hmm?

Does it seem like a lot of GOP trolls are out today spreading lies?

Today?


Oh FFS, I must have blinked.
 
2013-10-05 09:36:47 PM

OgreMagi: I'm not sure. I remember in a Clancy novel that he did it voluntarily. But Clancy fiction no way represents reality. I know that senators don't do that. They are also exempted from insider trading laws.


Members of Congress have never been exempted from insider trading laws, but they recently broadened the definition so the laws explicitly do apply to them. And high level executive branch employees, President included, are required to put their assets in a blind trust.
 
2013-10-05 09:37:40 PM
thebestofthailand.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-10-05 09:38:28 PM

BullBearMS: udhq: 'm not saying the president should get paid more, I'm mostly pointing out the complete and utter failure of free market capitalism at the top end.

Because the bribe money doesn't come in until later?

As former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embarks on her new career as a paid speaker, she joins a lucrative family business that already has earned her husband more than $100 million since leaving office in 2001.


Not a fan of free market capitalism, are you?
 
2013-10-05 09:39:23 PM

BullBearMS: udhq: 'm not saying the president should get paid more, I'm mostly pointing out the complete and utter failure of free market capitalism at the top end.

Because the bribe money doesn't come in until later?

As former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embarks on her new career as a paid speaker, she joins a lucrative family business that already has earned her husband more than $100 million since leaving office in 2001.


In Bill's case, that's pretty much all from his book and paid speaking fees. Amazingly, when you're a President, people are willing to give you a few hundred thousand dollars a pop to come and give a lecture somewhere. Bill charges anywhere from nothing to a million bucks depending on who you are. Good work if you can get it.
 
2013-10-05 09:39:26 PM

cptjeff: OgreMagi: I'm not sure. I remember in a Clancy novel that he did it voluntarily. But Clancy fiction no way represents reality. I know that senators don't do that. They are also exempted from insider trading laws.

Members of Congress have never been exempted from insider trading laws, but they recently broadened the definition so the laws explicitly do apply to them. And high level executive branch employees, President included, are required to put their assets in a blind trust.


You are wrong.  They were exempt, at least the Senate was.  They temporarily changed that because it was an election year.  They have since rolled that law back because they didn't like having to follow laws meant for us peasants.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congress-quick ly -quietly-rolls-back-insider-trading-rules-itself.shtml
 
2013-10-05 09:41:44 PM

TheMega: Have to love the comments by the pathetically, uneducated Repukes and Tea Party nutjobs.... Or, is it hate them?  Yeah, hate them.


I like your informative, insightful post.  It has helped me change my opinion.   You must have stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
 
2013-10-05 09:42:40 PM
After a little research, it seems very plausible that there were lots of rangers in the Point Reyes/GG area today.  The unpaid rangers volunteered to staff the road entrances and try to keep people out.

They are irritated, for some reason.
 
2013-10-05 09:45:20 PM

cptjeff: Amazingly, when you're a President, people are willing to give you a few hundred thousand dollars a pop to come and give a lecture somewhere.


Yea... Not so much people as banks...

In 2004, Clinton got $250,000 from Citigroup and $150,000 from Deutsche Bank. Goldman paid him $300,000 for two speeches, one in Paris. As the bubble peaked, in 2006, Clinton got $150,000 paydays each from Citigroup (twice), Lehman Brothers, the Mortgage Bankers Association, and the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was Goldman again, twice, Lehman, Citigroup, and Merrill Lynch.

All he had to do was kill Glass Steagall, prevent derivatives from being regulated, and enable the filthy rich to screw the middle class by allowing them to move the manufacturing jobs out of the United States without any of those nasty financial penalties you had before the days of free trade agreements.
 
2013-10-05 09:46:55 PM

a particular individual: BullBearMS: Both parties are acting like petulant little children currently.

Yes. The GOP and the Tea Party are both acting like petulant little children.


Aren't you the clever one....now that you've proven yourself to be so smart...isn't it time you make a poopy in the potty instead of your diaper.
 
2013-10-05 09:48:20 PM

InternetSecurityGuard: If they really wanted to piss a bunch of people off, shut down the civilian side of GPS or at least enable Selective Availability for 24 hours. Geocachers would be storming the palace gates in no time.


If they could find them.
 
2013-10-05 09:51:14 PM

OgreMagi: cptjeff: OgreMagi: I'm not sure. I remember in a Clancy novel that he did it voluntarily. But Clancy fiction no way represents reality. I know that senators don't do that. They are also exempted from insider trading laws.

Members of Congress have never been exempted from insider trading laws, but they recently broadened the definition so the laws explicitly do apply to them. And high level executive branch employees, President included, are required to put their assets in a blind trust.

You are wrong.  They were exempt, at least the Senate was.  They temporarily changed that because it was an election year.  They have since rolled that law back because they didn't like having to follow laws meant for us peasants.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congress-quick ly -quietly-rolls-back-insider-trading-rules-itself.shtml


If my BA% is .06, am I "exempted" from drunk driving laws? They weren't exempt, what they were doing was simply not considered to be insider trading as a matter of definition. The "exempt" language was deliberately chosen to drum up outrage. It is not an accurate description of what the case was. An exemption is when the law says, "even when X person is doing these things, they don't have to answer to this law". Until the late 90s, IIRC, that was the case with employment laws- Congress explicitly said that those laws did not apply to them. That was not the case with the insider trading rules. They always applied to Congress, but what Congress was doing did not meet the definition of the crime.

The rollback, BTW, didn't affect that change. It changed reporting requirements for staff and a lot of agency employees that would have forced tens of thousands of workers to release of a lot of sensitive financial information- including those in foreign assignments where the release of certain information like mortgages could have put them and their families at significant personal risk. The rollback you're ranting about was a fix to an incredibly badly conceived and written part of the law. Unless you want terrorist groups to be able to find the home address of our Ambassador to Columbia on Google.
 
2013-10-05 09:52:52 PM

Benjimin_Dover: The House is the house that is responsible for determining what and how much gets spent not the Senate and not the President. Why? Because that is the house that represents the people and does the people's work. Only a Dem would have a problem with what the people want.


You're wrong on several counts.

The House, as it sits currently, does not represent the people.  Due to rampant gerrymandering the House has a Republican majority, when in fact the majority of votes for House of Representative members went to Democrats.  The majority of the people would obviously prefer a liberally inclined House, but the Republicans have gamed the system such that we do not have that.

Next, the President writes the budget, and then sends it to the House and Senate for approval.  Once the House and Senate agree on a budget, it becomes binding and can go to appropriations.  The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout, and the one causing trouble, resulting in these repeated CRs.
 
2013-10-05 09:56:49 PM
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has officially rebuffed a request from National Park Service to close several state park sites.
 
2013-10-05 09:57:20 PM
Due to the Nat'l Parks being closed, the leaves with not change color this year.  Nope.  Not going to do it.
 
2013-10-05 10:00:04 PM
So the Senate is likely to pass the "let's pay the furloughed" bill, but apparently some of them have the common sense to require them to also go back to work.

Duh.
 
2013-10-05 10:01:32 PM
What a bunch of manufactured drama queenery.  The dumb-and-dumber act in congress is reaching new lows.  Though maybe some good will come of this when we discover we don't need most of the non-essential government employees in the first place.
 
2013-10-05 10:02:06 PM

InternetSecurityGuard: If they really wanted to piss a  bunch of people off, shut down the civilian side of GPS or at least enable Selective Availability for 24 hours. Geocachers would be storming the palace gates in no time.

/dither them last few decimal points


If they could find the gates.
 
2013-10-05 10:03:33 PM

TuteTibiImperes: The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout


Do you honestly think blatant lies help make your case?

PolitiFact

This seems to be a real problem for you.
 
2013-10-05 10:03:52 PM

Atypical Person Reading Fark: After a little research, it seems very plausible that there were lots of rangers in the Point Reyes/GG area today.  The unpaid rangers volunteered to staff the road entrances and try to keep people out.

They are irritated, for some reason.


Volunteered, Voluntold. Same thing.

"So, you want a full time ranger job next year do ya? Well, we need to keep people out because my boss told me that we do. So I'd really appreciate it if you man a gate today for a job tomorrow. Totally up to you of course and I can't make you do it but I will remember who did and didn't do it...".

Not to different from one of my old boats COB who essentially said:

"Donate to a charity? We totally can't tell you to do that but if you don't want to get a good evaluation in the initiative category and perhaps a more critical review of you in the comments section then by all means don't give 20 bucks to the Navy Relief\UNICEF\My wives charity that she runs that feeds homeless orphans in a very wealthy part of Connecticut. Totally up to you.".
 
2013-10-05 10:05:28 PM

Danger Avoid Death: InternetSecurityGuard: If they really wanted to piss a bunch of people off, shut down the civilian side of GPS or at least enable Selective Availability for 24 hours. Geocachers would be storming the palace gates in no time.

If they could find them.


Dammit
 
2013-10-05 10:06:01 PM
[To-Too-Two.jpg]
 
2013-10-05 10:09:57 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout

Do you honestly think blatant lies help make your case?

PolitiFact

This seems to be a real problem for you.


FTA: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who decides which bills will be considered, told reporters on July 10, 2012, that no spending bills were likely to be approved this year because of an ongoing dispute with House Republicans over how much the federal government should spend.

The bills passed the House and Senate budget committees, but Reid realizes that there's no point in the Senate voting for something the House will never accept.  The Senate doesn't want to waste it's time debating and voting on a bill with no change of passing the House.  The House on the other hand, apparently has no problem trying to repeal the ACA 33 times despite knowing that it will never pass the Senate.  It's not inaction for inaction's sake, it's pragmatism.

That being said, I'd love to see a budget passed, but it should be the budget that Obama proposes, not some cut-down austerity fantasy out of the House.
 
2013-10-05 10:10:16 PM

Radioactive Ass: Atypical Person Reading Fark: After a little research, it seems very plausible that there were lots of rangers in the Point Reyes/GG area today.  The unpaid rangers volunteered to staff the road entrances and try to keep people out.

They are irritated, for some reason.

Volunteered, Voluntold. Same thing.

"So, you want a full time ranger job next year do ya? Well, we need to keep people out because my boss told me that we do. So I'd really appreciate it if you man a gate today for a job tomorrow. Totally up to you of course and I can't make you do it but I will remember who did and didn't do it...".

Not too different from one of my old boats COB who essentially said:

"Donate to a charity? We totally can't tell you to do that but if you don't want to get a good evaluation in the initiative category and perhaps a more critical review of you in the comments section then by all means don't give 20 bucks to the Navy Relief\UNICEF\My wives charity that she runs that feeds homeless orphans in a very wealthy part of Connecticut. Totally up to you.".


Good points.  I agree, most of the rangers I know have been very worried about every performance report and all up in each other's asses about every little internal regulation and infraction.  Used to be a great job.  The sequester already cut down on the number of summer positions.

And there are a lot of fairly young, new hires in California, working at the low end of the ranger totem pole to begin with.

/too lazy to get the preposition off the end of that sentence
 
2013-10-05 10:11:52 PM

Atypical Person Reading Fark: And there are a lot of fairly young, new hires in California, working at the low end of the ranger totem pole to begin with.

/too lazy to get the preposition off the end of that sentence


That is a heresy up with which I shall not put.
 
2013-10-05 10:20:11 PM
Why the hate on the NPS? They're the most visible, immediate effect of the shutdown (slimdown for our less  informed brothers and sisters), but do you think they had a choice? Jon Jarvis, the director (maybe even all the way up to Secretary Jewell) was told to close. Period. Close the parks. Close everything. Don't worry about what Fox News says, close the parking lot. Don't worry that it might be spun into something bigger (while people should be looking at other, more important issues) close the pull offs. Blame congress, blame Obama, blame Harry Reid, blame whoever, but when your check is signed by someone else (as is the NPS's) when you're told to close, you close. Stupid, maybe, but are there those that really just don't get it?
 
Displayed 50 of 331 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report