Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you run inane ideas like this by anyone before you post? Do you ever say to someone, "Hey, does this sound logical, or do you think it sounds completely moronic?"?
You really might think about doing that. Seriously.
I actually do that a lot IRL. Just yesterday I was sending an email to a software company I use at work to complain about a recent upgrade that I felt took 3 steps BACKWARDS. I'm tech savvy but not a pro so I called my company IT dept and ran it by them and my exact words were, "am I crazy or am I right?". They confirmed I was right.
The whole think is just Dog n Pony. Has been non-stop theater of the absurd. I would be looking around at what the BIS, IMF et al seem to have planned.
The most bizarre was the stenographer who lost it, though this is right up there.
(or, outside of Alaska, is any park all that far from a FedEx Store or a Staples - even most WalMarts can produce a poster from an 8x11 easily designed in minutes on a laptop)
There was no money budgeted for printing the "closed" signs regardless of method. And if the parks were shut down, who was there to print (or have printed) and post the signs?
the shutdown ended with Mitch McConnell serving himself a $3 billion dollar slice of the federal pie for a dam
The shutdown ended with Reid having to bribe McConnell because the Bill couldn't pass on its own merits. Democrats buy voters with taxpayer money; why not buy legislation they can't pass, as well?
There was no money budgeted for printing the "closed" signs regardless of method. And if the parks were shut down, who was there to print (or have printed) and post the signs?
This just smacks of you actually be uninformed about how people work in the government.
We have an operating budget that carries us from year to year. With that, we have some leniency in it as far as what we can do day-to-day. The graphics department in my agency is open every day whether someone prints something or not. They have an operating budget, they have all different kinds of paper and ink, just sitting there. They especially have supplies for printing things of a standard size and color. They have ready-made graphics of our agency's banner--no one has to design that. You know, it's not 1975 anymore.
So, if I decide that on Friday I need to have a meeting and have nifty namecards printed up for 45 people at the conference, I can have that done. If I need some signs/placards big enough to mount on an easel and on very heavy presention board, I can also have that done. All in-house, all by government civilians and possibly some on-site contractors mixed in.
I don't need to draft and RFP, send it out, have bids, and pick a contractor to print my stuff. This process is true, though, for instance if I want to put a big granite and metal sign outside of my agency telling you it's the Department of XXXXXX. Sure, I probably need to go to a contractor for that.
And then, let's say I didn't have a graphics department in house? Well, then my already-funded contractor workforce (you know--there are 7 million of them--greater than the actual federal service) who have graphics departments in their facilities. Most of them actually stayed working during the shutdown because they had been awarded their funds which lasted through 31 Dec 13. They could have printed signs for me.
As for the shutdown, most agencies starting planning for it around 25 September. Yep, we had to STOP doing the work we were supposed to do prepare for what has to shut down. This involves planning who stays and who doesn't, getting all the administrative work done for the shutdown because, legally, the paperwork has to be done BEFORE you send someone home. It also involves printing signs and literature related to you closure that is given or presented to the public.
So, while I understand that you (the general you) want to find a conspiracy in every corner, especially to make you feel better about your party's horrible role in this--just stop for a minute and think about what makes sense. Quit believing every viral e-mail and Facebook rant/repost that you see because I think 100% of those types of things are always made up. There are very bored people out there in the world who are fame whores and love to impress simple minded people. They sit back and dream this $hit up and put it out there because it gives them a thrill. Any person who is truly involved in the government and knows how it works is not going to post what that idiot did because they'd be lying about how it actually works. That person either made that up because it made his nuts tingle to see his conspiracy theory go crazy in the Republican echo chamber, or he was a federal worker in 1975 and it really did take a contract to print out a sign like the ones we saw. Remember, in the 1970s, it wasn't easy to print "color" signs. That was special.
This just smacks of you actually be uninformed about how people work in the government.
We have an operating budget that carries us from year to year. With that, we have some leniency in it as far as what we can do day-to-day. The graphics department in my agency is open every day whether someone prints something or not.
Since signs were printed and posted and someone had to be there to do that work, what you're saying is that there really was no shutdown and the Obama Admin was punishing the public for no justifiable reason.
We know that the Obama admin wanted this shutdown in any case. Recall that the admin sent out an order that agencies were to be shut down even in cases where it cost more to close than to stay open (e.g. agencies collecting fines, user fees, etc). That wasn't a conspiracy theory, it was a WH memo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WH
The determination of which services continue during an appropriations lapse is not affected by whether the costs of shutdown exceed the costs of maintaining services....
Remember Rahm's dictum of "never let a crisis go to waste." Well, sometimes it becomes useful to create the crisis.
Yes clearly the White House is in a conspiracy with the Tea Party retards in congress to make this happen.
I plan for Christmas every year, that doesn't mean that I cause Christmas to happen. Sorry, but your friend is an idiot.
I think he meant the Democrats planned for this, along with Barrack Obama. It was they who caused the shut down, as we who are Republicans have said all along, and as evidenced by the Democrats refusal to negotiate on anything.
I think it's quite clear that they (the Democrats) wanted the shut down, because, a) they were certain they could blame it on the Republicans, and b) they knew in advance that the "exchange" Web sites weren't ready, and weren't going to work, and needed a distraction.
But, Democrats think we are stupid. You think we wouldn't figure it out. This is why you continue to hammer your "Republicans caused the shut down and brought us to the brink of default" meme (even though we all know there was never any danger of default).
I think it's quite clear that they (the Democrats) wanted the shut down, because, a) they were certain they could blame it on the Republicans, and b) they knew in advance that the "exchange" Web sites weren't ready, and weren't going to work, and needed a distraction.
Interesting point but you may be giving them way too much credit by implying they knew how fatally flawed the exchange websites are.
Quote:
But, Democrats think we are stupid. You think we wouldn't figure it out. This is why you continue to hammer your "Republicans caused the shut down and brought us to the brink of default" meme (even though we all know there was never any danger of default).
Exactly.
Only the underinformed believed the 'imminent default' lie.
Since signs were printed and posted and someone had to be there to do that work, what you're saying is that there really was no shutdown and the Obama Admin was punishing the public for no justifiable reason.
No, why would you think I said that. I am sure that whoever was deemed "excepted" in the NPS or whatever agency, was the one who had to post those signs.
The laws for shutdown have been in place for 143 years, I believe. There is a procedure to be followed for a shutdown and there are plans in place for who gets closed and who doesn't. Since society/government changes year after year, what might have been considered necessary in one decade is not necessary in another decade and vice versa. I believe Congress and the President have the flexibility to decide what gets shut down and what doesn't based on national concerns/needs.
The public was punished by all of our leaders:
1. Congress: the House who decided to use government shutdown as a means to get their way on the ACA. The Senate who decided that they would continue the shutdown that the House forced because to give in to such a contentious demand would set the precedent that the House could successfully use whatever means necessary to get what they wanted.
2. The President: who has the power to exempt anything and everything in a shutdown so long as Congress agrees but what's the point in that then? Why even HAVE shut downs? Why even HAVE appropriation bills?
Look, obviously you and I will never agree on this so I won't continue anymore arguing it. You believe that the House was correct in demanding that the ACA be delayed even if it cost shutting the government down to get their way and you think the Senate should have just went along with and contined to be the pu$$ie$ they've been for the last few years.
I believe that the ACA definitely needs reform; however, I disagree with the way the House went about it.
I also believe that if we have such things in place such as "shut downs" and "sequesters" that they are last resort occurrences but if they do occur, they should be carried out as designed.
It's sort of like saying to your teen: Your curfew is midnight--if you miss curfew, you will have your access to the family car taken away from you. You will ride the bus, you won't go out with your friends, you will stay home on weekends.
Two weeks later, teen breaks curfew. Parent starts out by restricting the car as stated but, since not letting Johnny drive impacts mom's ability to get to the 8:30 AM yoga class, she relents and lets Johnny drive to school. Then Johnny's being a really PITA being cooped up in the house so, just this once, she lets Johnny visit his friend Bill. After awhile, breaking curfew is not such a big deal, is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
