Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: Asinine, obama regime  
•       •       •

11584 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 6:28 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-10-05 05:48:27 PM  
6 votes:

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?
2013-10-05 07:41:33 PM  
5 votes:

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.
2013-10-05 07:27:23 PM  
5 votes:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN???????? It's a farking gorram government shutdown! That's kind of how they work, ya know?


DEA, ATF, NSA, would be a good start.

But blocking off the side of the road so you can't look at a farking mountain is about as petty and small minded as you can get.
2013-10-05 05:21:07 PM  
5 votes:
If you're pissed off, direct your ire to the House Republicans, this is entirely on them.
2013-10-05 06:30:48 PM  
4 votes:
But none of these closings are stunts, right?

Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365, so its security and closure must be airtight during the shutdown!  And lots and lots of money will be spent to make sure of that!
2013-10-05 08:39:10 PM  
3 votes:

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.


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.


www.motherjones.com

Here's the full article: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/01/chart-day-federal-gover n ment-pay-vs-private-sector-pay
2013-10-05 08:25:48 PM  
3 votes:

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.
2013-10-05 08:11:10 PM  
3 votes:

udhq: I, for one, am enjoying watching conservatives throw a fit because liberals failed to adequately protect them from the consequences of their own actions.


And I'm enjoying the spectacle of Obama showing how much of a petty little asshole he really is.

/not a Republican
2013-10-05 08:00:18 PM  
3 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: 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.

If by that you mean the truth, which is nearly always the case, then you're correct.

Also, the clean CR wasn't invented out of nothing, it's what should have been done from day 1.  The government was about to shut down due to lack of a budget, the obvious solution is to pass an extension on the current budget, not turn it into a hostage situation for political gain like the GOP attempted.

The clean CR benefits all people equally.


Hold'em up screw.  Would you care to enlighten me as to the last time a constitutionally-required budget was passed in the Senate?  Maybe if someone had actually passed a flipping budget we wouldn't need a continuing resolution to keep the government open.  Hell, even an annual appropriations bill would be nice, but NO, both parties enjoy this bullshiat political grandstanding that comes with these pissant continuing resolutions.
2013-10-05 07:58:08 PM  
3 votes:
If people haven't WOKE UP yet... All Obama and his "government" is going to do is punish the public more and more until they get their way.

They have now tried to close several privately funded places. This is not the first one. If the shutdown was "real", only federal stuff would get shut. They are going further and trying to shut down everything they can that provides recreation. They are about to go further.

They have already announced that Veteran's Benefits will NOT be paid if the shutdown continues. This probably means Social Security as well. Next, they will threaten welfare and food stamps (USDA).

But my question is.. If the government is shut down, we don't have to pay taxes right? I say we all threaten to not pay taxes. If everyone does that, they would have no choice but to show their true colors.
2013-10-05 07:57:48 PM  
3 votes:
2013-10-05 07:12:57 PM  
3 votes:

BullBearMS: It's completely petty as there would be plenty of real consequences of a government shutdown without going out of your way to create some.


Exactly.

WippitGuud: And to hell with the other 312 million people in the country.


If 312 million people depend upon non-essential federal workers for their day to day living, somethings wrong with your country.
2013-10-05 06:52:59 PM  
3 votes:

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


img.fark.net

Friends don't let friends be Frank.
2013-10-05 06:50:07 PM  
3 votes:
It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.
2013-10-05 08:46:23 PM  
2 votes:

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.
2013-10-05 08:28:16 PM  
2 votes:

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.


They've had months of warning that this might happen.  If they didn't plan for temporary unemployment, then they deserve what they get.  Besides, I consider the majority of Federal workers to be leeches upon society.
2013-10-05 08:18:29 PM  
2 votes:

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.
2013-10-05 08:16:20 PM  
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: They're not closing the parks just to close them, they're closing them because the park rangers and security have been furloughed and it would be negligent and irresponsible to keep them open without the proper support staff in place.


They forced the closing of a fancy restaurant in San Francisco (the Cliff House) that has existed pretty much since the state of California has been a state. Never mind that the access, parking and, well, everything actually, including law enforcement and EMS, all are the responsibility of, and owned by San Francisco. The only reason that the NPS is involved at all was because when they formed the GGNRA in 1977 they claimed that part of the restaurant sat inside it and therefore was a concession under NPS rules. It fronts a city street and has all of the parking spaces owned by the city. It costs them absolutely nothing to operate on a day to day basis, employ's people who don't get a paycheck from them, yet they forced them to close down over this. Absolutely pointless other than to play the "Make it hurt" game.
2013-10-05 07:57:20 PM  
2 votes:

ginandbacon: Not to mention all the people assigned to reducing the risk of terrorism


Raising the spectre of the terrorism boogeyman means you are reaching for anything you can to defend a losing position.
2013-10-05 07:26:05 PM  
2 votes:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN???????? It's a farking gorram government shutdown! That's kind of how they work, ya know?

Before about 1960; everybody kind of just ignored government shutdowns. Everything just kept going. Shutdowns happened a lot more often back then.

/ can we do that?

I'm game.


Or; and I know that this is crazy talk; pay the officers manning the barricades to, you know, man the actual park or whatever.

/ the shear hyperbole on both sides is starting to get annoying.
2013-10-05 07:05:23 PM  
2 votes:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.


They are running the same playbook they ran over the sequester.

Let's see how much we can fark over tourists while claiming it's the other guys fault.

It's completely petty as there would be plenty of real consequences of a government shutdown without going out of your way to create some.
2013-10-05 06:57:55 PM  
2 votes:

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


THIS.  Usual political bullshiat to keep the plebes busy while the problem continues.
2013-10-05 06:56:53 PM  
2 votes:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.


To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.
2013-10-05 06:56:21 PM  
2 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: 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!

That's just sad.


This ass is in every shutdown thread. Methinks he's getting paid per post.
2013-10-05 06:51:36 PM  
2 votes:

BullBearMS: poot_rootbeer: JohnAnnArbor: Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365

False.

True.

The open air memorials like the WWII memorial have always allowed tourists long after the park services people go home at night.

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 824x390]


Do you see how these two things are contradictory?
2013-10-05 06:42:52 PM  
2 votes:

poot_rootbeer: JohnAnnArbor: Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365

False.


True.

The open air memorials like the WWII memorial have always allowed tourists long after the park services people go home at night.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
2013-10-05 06:42:49 PM  
2 votes:
Doesn't matter if it's privately owned and funded becuz the people who have the responsibility to maintain and protect it are Guv employees.

Leave it unattended and it will become the world's nicest homeless shelter or just a dumpster.
2013-10-05 06:42:03 PM  
2 votes:
There's no funding for national parks right now so pay tons of cops to run out and put up barricades in the national parks.
2013-10-06 04:54:25 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: 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.

If by that you mean the truth, which is nearly always the case, then you're correct.

Also, the clean CR wasn't invented out of nothing, it's what should have been done from day 1.  The government was about to shut down due to lack of a budget, the obvious solution is to pass an extension on the current budget, not turn it into a hostage situation for political gain like the GOP attempted.

The clean CR benefits all people equally.


The term "clean CR" did not exist prior to the current dust-up. Dems decided that "clean CR" sounded like something good and pure and to be desired, so that's the term that's on every Dem's lips.

Dems are good at waging a war of words, especially when they create and control the words. Orwell is very proud.
2013-10-06 12:50:05 AM  
1 vote:

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: How many times do I have to say this before you get it

As many times as you are willing to tell the same lie, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to even pass a budget for four freaking years.


Go troll somewhere else with that shiatty debunked talking point
2013-10-06 12:47:16 AM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.

The Senate didn't pass a budget for four freaking years, numbnuts. They only got off their asses and passed one this year because it was required to protect the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

You know, the tax cuts the Republicans managed to pass with only 50 votes in the Senate?

How many times do I have to say this before you get it - the Senate could pass a budget at any point if they wanted to.  There's just no reason to do so because the budget they want won't be accepted by the House.  Until the GOP is out of power in the House, the President and the Democratically controlled Senate aren't going to get the budget they want.  Why then, would the Senate pass a budget that won't be accepted?

The Senate isn't the problem here.  The House is.  Two out of three, the President and Senate, can agree on the same budget, the House can't.  If you can't see how in this situation the House is the one holding things up, you're bring deliberately obtuse.


The Senate passing a budget would be highly symbolic.  Doing it wouldn't be a waste of time.  It would send the message, "we're hard at work, what about those other guys?"
2013-10-06 12:36:25 AM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: How many times do I have to say this before you get it


As many times as you are willing to tell the same lie, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to even pass a budget for four freaking years.
2013-10-06 12:23:16 AM  
1 vote:

udhq: What you're thinking of is actually the imaginary conservative victimization which gave us the "Chicago machine" myth when in reality, Chicago is simply one of the only municipalities in America that consistently holds its political leadership legally accountable.


So how many years did Dick Daley do for all the sweetheart deals he pulled and unethical crap? The man bulldozed an airstrip in the dead of night because he wanted a park. Didn't even bother to tell the FAA or the owners of the planes at the field. How's Daley's kids doing with those jobs he hooked them up with via his political patronage?

There's two types of people who swear Chicago isn't corrupt, those in on it and those naive enough to believe what they're told. I hope you're the former because the latter is just sad.
2013-10-06 12:03:21 AM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.


The Senate didn't pass a budget for four freaking years, numbnuts. They only got off their asses and passed one this year because it was required to protect the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

You know, the tax cuts the Republicans managed to pass with only 50 votes in the Senate?
2013-10-05 11:28:41 PM  
1 vote:

BullBearMS: ginandbacon: Stop being ignorant.

Again with the lies?

The Bush administration routinely passed budgets with only 50 votes in the Senate.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House scored a major victory Thursday by securing support from all 50 Senate Republicans for President Bush's budget, which contains his $1.6 trillion, 10-year tax cut and a $60 billion immediate tax cut this year.

Early Thursday, the White House had pledges from 47 of the 50 Republicans. Commitments from the other three were won late Thursday at a meeting called by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.

"We've got the votes," said a senior Senate Republican aide. "And it's because members understood this was about the president's agenda and our ability to control the floor."

60 votes are not required for a budget in the Senate and haven't been for decades.


HE HAD 65 VOTES YOU CRETIN!!!

OMG I am done with you.
2013-10-05 11:23:29 PM  
1 vote:
2013-10-05 11:22:47 PM  
1 vote:
Growing up in Illinois I thought holding stuff people want hostage until politicians get what they want was just how politics works. With a president trained in Illinois politics I've learned it might be as common a practice as I thought.
2013-10-05 11:16:07 PM  
1 vote:

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.

Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??

ginandbacon: The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes.

... and another lie...

This time I'll pull out the Washington Post's fact checker.

Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That's why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan (1,019). Lew's response: "One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something."

We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the "need to be honest."

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.

[www.washingtonpost.com ...


Not pass you fool, enact.

Stop being ignorant. 

I'm tired of correcting you. Do some research.
2013-10-05 11:12:06 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.


Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??

ginandbacon: The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes.


... and another lie...

This time I'll pull out the Washington Post's fact checker.

Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That's why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan (1,019). Lew's response: "One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something."

We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the "need to be honest."

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.


www.washingtonpost.com

Seriously, stop posting or stop lying, or stop claiming to represent liberals.
2013-10-05 11:08:25 PM  
1 vote:

Lost Thought 00: New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.


Alright, guys. It's now safe to go back to talking about his mother.
2013-10-05 10:57:25 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: The Senate would pass a budget in a heartbeat if they thought it would also pass the House.


That has nothing to do with your claim that the House was the body not passing a budget when it was the Senate that refused to do so.

Remember this?

TuteTibiImperes: 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.


If you can't make a point without lies, then stop posting.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
2013-10-05 10:31:46 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: 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.


Again, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to pass a budget quite literally, for years.
2013-10-05 10:20:11 PM  
1 vote:
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?
2013-10-05 10:11:52 PM  
1 vote:

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 10:03:33 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:41:44 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:37:40 PM  
1 vote:
thebestofthailand.files.wordpress.com
2013-10-05 09:33:48 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:30:45 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:30:12 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:23:35 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:20:13 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:20:09 PM  
1 vote:
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 09:16:09 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:14:18 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:11:22 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:08:18 PM  
1 vote:

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 09:05:57 PM  
1 vote:
This thread delivers. Much more fun than the politics threads.
2013-10-05 09:04:04 PM  
1 vote:

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 08:56:41 PM  
1 vote:

JohnAnnArbor: But none of these closings are stunts, right?

Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365, so its security and closure must be airtight during the shutdown!  And lots and lots of money will be spent to make sure of that!


Somebody in Congress should put forth a bill that states that any government element that has an equal or greater than number of government employees onsite is deemed to NOT be shutdown and is open to the public as it is during normal business hours.
2013-10-05 08:49:09 PM  
1 vote:

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.
2013-10-05 08:48:50 PM  
1 vote:
and even if the government owns the land...who owns the government?WE THE PEOPLE
2013-10-05 08:44:31 PM  
1 vote:

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.
2013-10-05 08:43:28 PM  
1 vote:

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?


And what is the cost of not closing the parking lot? Zero. Zilch. Not a penny. In the interest of saving money due to the shutdown, they've spent money closing a parking lot that it would have cost nothing to leave open.
2013-10-05 08:36:50 PM  
1 vote:

Mrbogey: Radioactive Ass: TuteTibiImperes: They're not closing the parks just to close them, they're closing them because the park rangers and security have been furloughed and it would be negligent and irresponsible to keep them open without the proper support staff in place.

They forced the closing of a fancy restaurant in San Francisco (the Cliff House) that has existed pretty much since the state of California has been a state. Never mind that the access, parking and, well, everything actually, including law enforcement and EMS, all are the responsibility of, and owned by San Francisco. The only reason that the NPS is involved at all was because when they formed the GGNRA in 1977 they claimed that part of the restaurant sat inside it and therefore was a concession under NPS rules. It fronts a city street and has all of the parking spaces owned by the city. It costs them absolutely nothing to operate on a day to day basis, employ's people who don't get a paycheck from them, yet they forced them to close down over this. Absolutely pointless other than to play the "Make it hurt" game.

You don't understand. They had to do it because [reasons].

TuteTibiImperes: 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.

You're fairly sure?

Why don't you google it so you can be certain.


Great, I did, and I was correct, there is no 'White House Portrait Photographer'.  There is an official White House Photographer and Photography Office, which makes sense given diplomatic duties associated with the President, but no 'Portrait Photographer'.  Also, the guy who took the portrait was not the official White House Photographer.
2013-10-05 08:31:45 PM  
1 vote:

BullBearMS: Nope. Federal employees receive back pay for the time they don't work once things start back up. They will only have a problem if they are living paycheck to paycheck and don't have credit cards.


Mostly all they need to do is contact their creditors ahead of time (like now while they have the time off anyway) and explain that they are a furloughed federal worker due to the current budget battles and they will be fine. The people who bill them can read a newspaper and they do understand the situation of the people that they bill. What they don't like is non-payment with no explanation. I once had a paycheck delayed during the 1986 budget battles and all of them that I contacted understood and let me slide for a few weeks with no hit on my credit report.
2013-10-05 08:31:34 PM  
1 vote:

ginandbacon: BullBearMS: ginandbacon: I honestly could not care less except that these good men and women are facing horrible financial crises.

Nope. Federal employees receive back pay for the time they don't work once things start back up. They will only have a problem if they are living paycheck to paycheck and don't have credit cards.

*Most* government employees are living paycheck to paycheck and are already deeply in debt.


Do you honestly think just because you are wiling to make shiat up everyone will believe it?

Citation needed.
2013-10-05 08:28:02 PM  
1 vote:

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.


You don't have savings for life's ups and downs? Poor people's problems, shouldn't be federal worker problems. Bummer.
2013-10-05 08:20:54 PM  
1 vote:
Atypical Person Reading Fark:

You're speaking of one group of Park Rangers.  There are several types.  One of them is the Old Type:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/nations-oldest-full-time-park-ran ge r-furloughed-20478856


That old lady works inside an indoor exhibit that has been shut down.

I spent Monday driving along the coast, 95% of which is the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, a National Park. I head out that way a few times a month, and I have never seen so many National Park Rangers driving around.
2013-10-05 08:18:49 PM  
1 vote:

Nutsac_Jim: 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.

the parking lot for the busses is.  Thats important to pay someone to put up barricades to the lot and stand there to make sure nobody uses the asphalt.

That costs money to use asphault, you know.

I wonder why they arent roadblocking interstates while they are trying to make it inconvenient for citizens.


I can't find anything that suggests the parking for busses is owned by NPS.  The only thing they appear to own is the handicapped/reserved spaces in one parking lot which double as VIP spaces if a dignitary visits.  Even then, they don't own the land its on, they just "service" it.
2013-10-05 08:18:15 PM  
1 vote:

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
2013-10-05 08:15:47 PM  
1 vote:
I don't give a shiat.  800,000 people are out of a job.  Cram the national parks up your ass.
2013-10-05 08:15:11 PM  
1 vote:

udhq: I, for one, am enjoying watching conservatives throw a fit because liberals failed to adequately protect them from the consequences of their own actions.


The doublespeak is mind numbing.  The "slimdown" (including loss of jobs and benefits) caused by the Teaparty isn't a big deal, but closure of national parks?  WELCOME TO OBAMA'S BERLIN.
2013-10-05 08:09:24 PM  
1 vote:
I, for one, am enjoying watching conservatives throw a fit because liberals failed to adequately protect them from the consequences of their own actions.
2013-10-05 08:03:32 PM  
1 vote:
Have to love the comments by the pathetically, uneducated Repukes and Tea Party nutjobs.... Or, is it hate them?  Yeah, hate them.
2013-10-05 08:00:27 PM  
1 vote:

ginandbacon: mr_larry:

For the last time: Park Rangers have not been furloughed nor have federal Park Police.

Liar.


You debate like a two year old.  Post a citation.  Put up or shut up.
2013-10-05 07:59:21 PM  
1 vote:

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.


the parking lot for the busses is.  Thats important to pay someone to put up barricades to the lot and stand there to make sure nobody uses the asphalt.

That costs money to use asphault, you know.

I wonder why they arent roadblocking interstates while they are trying to make it inconvenient for citizens.
2013-10-05 07:58:59 PM  
1 vote:
mr_larry:

For the last time: Park Rangers have not been furloughed nor have federal Park Police.

Liar.
2013-10-05 07:52:49 PM  
1 vote:

ginandbacon: Really? They have absolutely ZERO to do with the GW Parkway. Like NADA.


They didn't close the parkway, they closed parking lots that belonged to the Mt. Vernon Association.  Try to keep up.

The one "lot" that is still blocked is a public lot that belongs to the NPS, but it's actually four spaces provided for handicapped or VIP access.  The rest of them belong to the Mt. Vernon Association.  You're in Maryland, haven't you ever been to Mt. Vernon?

What NPS did was put barriers at the entrance to several lots even though they only own limited spaces inside one of the privately owned lots.  They overstepped, because that's what they were instructed to do.
2013-10-05 07:52:19 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: 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.

Well sure, because this went over so well the last time Obama cancelled White House tours over the sequester and tried to claim it was the other guys fault.

"It is a petulant, juvenile response," said one Democratic official close to the administration. "It totally undermines the harm that the sequester is actually doing to Americans. Now all we are talking about is the canceled tours and not about all the jobs lost."

What is it they say about taking the same petty little actions and expecting different outcomes?

All they had to do either time is wait for real consequences to occur and point those out, but no...

They're not closing the parks just to close them, they're closing them because the park rangers and security have been furloughed and it would be negligent and irresponsible to keep them open without the proper support staff in place.

This isn't being done to prove a point, this is just how things are when the government shuts down.  The GOP would be smart to stop trying to shift the blame and instead try to fix the problem they started.


For the last time: Park Rangers have not been furloughed nor have federal Park Police.
2013-10-05 07:35:19 PM  
1 vote:

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.
2013-10-05 07:33:36 PM  
1 vote:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN???????? It's a farking gorram government shutdown! That's kind of how they work, ya know?

DEA, ATF, NSA, would be a good start.

But blocking off the side of the road so you can't look at a farking mountain is about as petty and small minded as you can get.

Do you understand that every single department is mandated by sequestration to cut their budgets with no exceptions?


And your point?  Those highway pull-offs aren't manned.  There are no guards.  Most of the time they don't have even have a trashcan.  It's a spot to pull over for a moment to take a look and maybe snap a photo or two.  Leaving them open cost nothing.  Laying down a hundred highway cones to keep people out definitely cost something.
2013-10-05 07:31:04 PM  
1 vote:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.


This.
2013-10-05 07:30:20 PM  
1 vote:

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.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2013-10-05 07:29:37 PM  
1 vote:

GhostFish: BullBearMS: poot_rootbeer: JohnAnnArbor: Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365

False.

True.

The open air memorials like the WWII memorial have always allowed tourists long after the park services people go home at night.

Is it still being cleaned, maintained, and patrolled?


I don't think anyone would biatch if the cleaning and maintenance parts were suspended during the shutdown. But putting up barricades is unmitigated assholery.
2013-10-05 07:17:21 PM  
1 vote:

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

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

They are running the same playbook they ran over the sequester.

Let's see how much we can fark over tourists while claiming it's the other guys fault.

It's completely petty as there would be plenty of real consequences of a government shutdown without going out of your way to create some.

Oh yeah. That's totally it.


There are few in Washington who believe that the administration's hands are tied on the matter. On the face of it, the politics of canceling the tours seems pretty shrewd. The sequester is a slow-rolling cut, its pain real, but only apparent for most Americans over time. White House tours, meanwhile, are largely scheduled through the offices of individual congressmen, and it is the staffs of those members of Congress who have been forced to call constituents to tell them that their trip to the nation's capital will be without a visit to its crown jewel.

But the move has backfired on the White House, much as the rest of their sequester messaging has, and Obama finds himself on the defensive right at the start of his second term.

"It is a petulant, juvenile response," said one Democratic official close to the administration. "It totally undermines the harm that the sequester is actually doing to Americans. Now all we are talking about is the canceled tours and not about all the jobs lost."

This week, The Washington Post urged the White House to restart the tours immediately, calling the move a "kind of bureaucratic hostage-taking," and the blowback "a proper come-uppance." The thinking by many in Washington now is that the Obama administration is merely waiting for a moment when the world is otherwise consumed to announce that they are restarting the tours-say this Friday afternoon, or sometime over the weekend.

Democrats have been trying, without much success, to blame the cancellation on the Republicans' unwillingness to deal on fiscal matters:
2013-10-05 07:15:53 PM  
1 vote:

BullBearMS: Fluid: That's right. No one patrols our monuments, picks up trash, cleans or maintains them.

Oh stop being retarded about this.

Both parties are acting like petulant little children currently.

I'll shut down the government!

Oh yea! I'll intentionally fark over tourists and tell them it's all your fault!


This is not a move to intentionally fark over anyone.  There is no money to pay the staff to maintain order, protect the safety of guests, and prevent vandalism of the parks and monuments, thus they are shut down.

For a group that calls themselves the party of responsibility the GOP is doing an awful lot of whining about the results of their own actions.  There are effects of the government shutting down, either pass the clean CR so that we can get back to the way things should be or stop whining.
2013-10-05 07:09:45 PM  
1 vote:
ginandbacon:
SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN????????

What should be shut down? That's easy:

NOTHING! It's the farking government. Get off your asses, stop looking like asses on TV, and fix the farking thing. You're country is starting to look like a bunch of idiots to the rest of the world.
2013-10-05 07:03:28 PM  
1 vote:

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?


Can we just burn it all down, collect the insurance money and start over from the constitution and the bill of rights?
2013-10-05 07:03:09 PM  
1 vote:

ginandbacon: 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?


It's only funny because they shut down the whole parking lot instead of the 3 spaces they own.  The rest of the parking lots are owned by the Mt. Vernon Ladies Association.

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


Actually it seems to me that Fark Dependents are out today claiming government ownership of things that don't belong to it and then trying to justify mistakes because God for-farking-bid a government employee make a mistake.

Answer me this, chumpy mcfarkstick, if the NPS wasn't in the wrong, why did they remove the barricades?  I thought so.
2013-10-05 07:02:13 PM  
1 vote:

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

THIS.  Usual political bullshiat to keep the plebes busy while the problem continues.


Don't call your congressman, call Eric Holder. He's the one person who could stop this whole thing. All he has to do is reverse Civiletti's opinion.
2013-10-05 07:02:07 PM  
1 vote:

OgreMagi: poot_rootbeer: JohnAnnArbor: Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365

False.

True.  It's an open park.  There are no turnstiles or guards or ticket collectors of any kind.  The memorial has always been open 24/7 since day one.

The only time anyone official was there was during the busiest part of weekdays.


His disagreement is with the "unstaffed" portion, no doubt. They do have a maintenance staff during the daylight hours that pick up trash, clean the walkways and bathrooms, and do general maintenance. But it's a quibble on his part as the staff generally doesn't do much directly with visitors. Their absence is only a long term problem for the areas.

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


It's a tactical error by the administration. Had they closed down what was unable to be opened and let the shutdown build up bad press due to administrative absences, it would have started momentum against the shutdown. They got greedy and went for visible issues that were beyond the scope of a shutdown in order to hurt people. As a result the momentum is fixated on Obama kicking veterans to the curb.
2013-10-05 06:59:10 PM  
1 vote:

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

It's a good illustration of what the federal government provides, and therefore can deny, to the public.


So, why national parks? Why is that the focus of "OMG OH NOES!". Surely to God there is a lot of other government-run areas that are a lot more critical than being able to look at a bunch of faces blasted into a mountain.

Or... maybe, just fix the farking shutdown.
2013-10-05 06:56:42 PM  
1 vote:

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


I think that's kind of the point.
2013-10-05 06:56:01 PM  
1 vote:
While there are kids going without formula or milk, I could give a rats ass about the national parks or Mt. Vernon.
2013-10-05 06:55:56 PM  
1 vote:

I_C_Weener: This never would have happened if George Washington hadn't been shooting blanks.


George Washington was the greatest president we've ever had. He could have been King George I; he was that popular. He absolutely REFUSED to join a political party; he was smart enough to see that political parties were divisive as hell.

/ he was also 9 feet tall; with laserbeem eyes that never failed, to kill. He never told a lie. He was born on the 4th of July. And; Franklin, himself and his horse singlehandedly won the revolution
2013-10-05 06:55:22 PM  
1 vote:

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


It's a good illustration of what the federal government provides, and therefore can deny, to the public.
2013-10-05 06:51:31 PM  
1 vote:
Well, if the Repugs would just obey The One without question or hesitation, like a President-for-Life should be obeyed, this kind of accidental oppression wouldn't happen.

/so it's all the denialists fault
//they just keep destroying everything that requires 100% conformity of thought, no matter how wonderful it would have been
///like how they destroyed global communism, and made the deaths of all those Ukranian kulaks completely meaningless
2013-10-05 06:51:04 PM  
1 vote:

Fluid: That's right. No one patrols our monuments, picks up trash, cleans or maintains them.


Oh stop being retarded about this.

Both parties are acting like petulant little children currently.

I'll shut down the government!

Oh yea! I'll intentionally fark over tourists and tell them it's all your fault!
2013-10-05 06:43:24 PM  
1 vote:

ginandbacon: JohnAnnArbor: But none of these closings are stunts, right?

Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365, so its security and closure must be airtight during the shutdown!  And lots and lots of money will be spent to make sure of that!

That's right. No one patrols our monuments, picks up trash, cleans or maintains them. They just sit there and sparkle all on their own.


They radiate enough patriotism to be entirely unaffected by dirt.
2013-10-05 06:37:11 PM  
1 vote:
Trolltastic headline.
2013-10-05 06:34:09 PM  
1 vote:

JohnAnnArbor: But none of these closings are stunts, right?

Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365, so its security and closure must be airtight during the shutdown!  And lots and lots of money will be spent to make sure of that!


That's right. No one patrols our monuments, picks up trash, cleans or maintains them. They just sit there and sparkle all on their own.
2013-10-05 06:32:45 PM  
1 vote:

JohnAnnArbor: Remember, the WWII Memorial is open and unmanned at all times, 24-7-365


False.
2013-10-05 05:46:49 PM  
1 vote:
"Charter guides received a message from the National Park Service this week informing them that they are not permitted to take clients fishing in Florida Bay until the feds get back to work. That means that more than 1,100 square miles of prime fishing is off limits between the southern tip of the mainland to the Keys until further notice."

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/10/03/3668028_p2/shutdown-day-3-food- d istributor.html#storylink=cpy


The NPS is closing the ocean.  :)
2013-10-05 05:41:54 PM  
1 vote:

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?
2013-10-05 04:58:07 PM  
1 vote:
Wait until they close outer space!
2013-10-05 04:48:26 PM  
1 vote:
And you can't even LOOK at Mount Rushmore anymore!

i43.tinypic.com
 
Displayed 107 of 107 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report