Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Um does no one read the Constitution any more?

Budgets are Congress' job, they can't pass one, the President cannot by law spend money.

You want to know who built this shutdown look at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave.

Uh, they have, the Democrat controlled Senate has rejected all of them. Nice try though!

That would be part of the whole READ THE CONSTITUTION thing. It takes both houses and the president to pass a budget. Holding your breath, stamping your feet, shutting down the government and risking default is the consquences of them not doing their job which includes compromise and deal making.

And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

Seeing as any comment that isn't insulting the president will be completely ignored, I'll just go ahead and past d-usa's post explaining why what you just said is a complete crock of gak.

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

Can you provide reference for this please? It's the first I've heard of it, so would like to see more details.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/05/harry-reid-shutdown_n_4050400.html

WASHINGTON -- It’s become a common House Republican talking point that Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama could end the shutdown of the government if they simply chose to negotiate.

“What we are looking at here again is an administration and president that seems to be unwilling to sit down and talk to us,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) bemoaned at a press conference on Saturday morning.

While Cantor is right that Democrats aren't exactly in the talking mood, the suggestion that they aren’t willing to negotiate ignores that they’ve already given Republicans a major win. The continuing resolution that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed to funds the government at sequestration levels. And even some members of Cantor's own caucus admit that they got the good end of that deal.

“It is a concession, I acknowledge that,” Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told The Huffington Post on Saturday. “I was glad to see that lower number. It didn’t take defense spending into account. We still have a big discrepancy between the House and Senate version. But there has been some compromise and I acknowledge that.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/326425-reid-boehner-backed-out-of-deal

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Thursday said Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reneged on a deal they hashed out in private earlier this year to pass a “clean” stopgap bill funding the government.
Reid said Boehner never wanted to wage a protracted battle over ObamaCare as part of the negotiations to keep the government running.
“I know that that’s not the path he preferred,” Reid said. “I know that because we met the first week we came back in September and he told me that what he wanted was a clean CR and the $988 [billion] number.
“We didn’t like the 988 number. We didn’t like it but we negotiated. That was our compromise,” Reid added. “The exact bill that he now refuses to let the House vote on. That was our negotiation.”
Many Democrats wanted to set the funding level in the continuing resolution at $1.058 trillion, rather than at the sequester level of $988 billion.
Reid said he didn’t have to twist Boehner’s arm to get a preliminary deal on a clean stopgap.
“He twisted mine a little bit to get that number,” Reid said.
“Now he refused to let his own party vote because he’s afraid to stand up to something he originally agreed to,” he added.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/03/reid-boehners-job-is-not-as-important-as-our-country/

Clearly agitated at the memory, Reid said the two met in early September and reached a compromise about the end-of-the month deadline to pass a spending bill. Reid said Boehner agreed to pass a $988 billion spending package, $70 billion less than what the senate leader wanted.

“That was really hard,” Reid said, referring his decision to drop $70 billion. “My caucus really didn't like that. We took a real hit.”

Asked if Boehner at the time promised to deliver a clean continuing resolution, Reid said: “That's why we did it. That's why we agreed to that lower number. So that's one of the largest compromises since I've been in Congress.”

PM received, d-usa. Thanks for the conversation!

No problem. That train of conversation could go on for a while but would drag this thread pretty OT.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

Any evidence for that?

 Goliath wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Um does no one read the Constitution any more?

Budgets are Congress' job, they can't pass one, the President cannot by law spend money.

You want to know who built this shutdown look at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave.

Uh, they have, the Democrat controlled Senate has rejected all of them. Nice try though!

That would be part of the whole READ THE CONSTITUTION thing. It takes both houses and the president to pass a budget. Holding your breath, stamping your feet, shutting down the government and risking default is the consquences of them not doing their job which includes compromise and deal making.

And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

Seeing as any comment that isn't insulting the president will be completely ignored, I'll just go ahead and past d-usa's post explaining why what you just said is a complete crock of gak.

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

Can you provide reference for this please? It's the first I've heard of it, so would like to see more details.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/05/harry-reid-shutdown_n_4050400.html

WASHINGTON -- It’s become a common House Republican talking point that Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama could end the shutdown of the government if they simply chose to negotiate.

“What we are looking at here again is an administration and president that seems to be unwilling to sit down and talk to us,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) bemoaned at a press conference on Saturday morning.

While Cantor is right that Democrats aren't exactly in the talking mood, the suggestion that they aren’t willing to negotiate ignores that they’ve already given Republicans a major win. The continuing resolution that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed to funds the government at sequestration levels. And even some members of Cantor's own caucus admit that they got the good end of that deal.

“It is a concession, I acknowledge that,” Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told The Huffington Post on Saturday. “I was glad to see that lower number. It didn’t take defense spending into account. We still have a big discrepancy between the House and Senate version. But there has been some compromise and I acknowledge that.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/326425-reid-boehner-backed-out-of-deal

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Thursday said Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reneged on a deal they hashed out in private earlier this year to pass a “clean” stopgap bill funding the government.
Reid said Boehner never wanted to wage a protracted battle over ObamaCare as part of the negotiations to keep the government running.
“I know that that’s not the path he preferred,” Reid said. “I know that because we met the first week we came back in September and he told me that what he wanted was a clean CR and the $988 [billion] number.
“We didn’t like the 988 number. We didn’t like it but we negotiated. That was our compromise,” Reid added. “The exact bill that he now refuses to let the House vote on. That was our negotiation.”
Many Democrats wanted to set the funding level in the continuing resolution at $1.058 trillion, rather than at the sequester level of $988 billion.
Reid said he didn’t have to twist Boehner’s arm to get a preliminary deal on a clean stopgap.
“He twisted mine a little bit to get that number,” Reid said.
“Now he refused to let his own party vote because he’s afraid to stand up to something he originally agreed to,” he added.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/03/reid-boehners-job-is-not-as-important-as-our-country/

Clearly agitated at the memory, Reid said the two met in early September and reached a compromise about the end-of-the month deadline to pass a spending bill. Reid said Boehner agreed to pass a $988 billion spending package, $70 billion less than what the senate leader wanted.

“That was really hard,” Reid said, referring his decision to drop $70 billion. “My caucus really didn't like that. We took a real hit.”

Asked if Boehner at the time promised to deliver a clean continuing resolution, Reid said: “That's why we did it. That's why we agreed to that lower number. So that's one of the largest compromises since I've been in Congress.”

Repeating lies doesnt make it any closer to truth...

Heard the Federal Prison Guards are getting the shaft.

 Goliath wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

Any evidence for that?

Yeah, google it your own damn self.

Tell that to the one million veterans at the rally and the speakers there...

“I call upon all of you to wage a second American nonviolent revolution, to use civil disobedience, and to demand that this president leave town, to get up, to put the Quran down, to get up off his knees, and to figuratively come out with his hands up,” said Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, a conservative political advocacy group.

I do think that you have managed to set a new standard for the OT though, congratulations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

Any evidence for that?

Yeah, google it your own damn self.

Your contributions to this thread are less productive than that Irish Muslim in the White House...

 Spacemanvic wrote:
And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

It must irritate you so much to know that the President was not only elected once, but twice by the people of the United States. Whether you like the man or not, the least you could do is respect the office.

Both sides have negotiated numerous times before the shutdown and both sides have non-negotiable items, but now the GOP has blamed the Democrats for not negotiating? Here is a list of 19 times the Senate Democrats tried to negotiate with Senate Republicans by introducing their budget to a bicameral conference committee:
1. 4/23 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked.
2. 5/6 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.
3. 5/7 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
4. 5/8 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
5. 5/9 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
6. 5/14 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.
7. 5/15 Senator Wyden asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.
8. 5/16 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
9. 5/21 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Paul blocked.
10. 5/22 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.
11. 5/23 Senator McCaskill asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
12. 6/4 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.
13. 6/12 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
14. 6/19 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Toomey blocked.
15. 6/26 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.
16. 7/11 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.
17. 7/17 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Mike Lee blocked.
18. 8/1 Senator Durbin requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.
19. 10/2 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked.

Neither the GOP nor the Democrats have clean hands in this, despite what you have been told. The Democrats of things to offer the GOP in exchange for keeping the ACA off the table and they need to do it. The bottom line is the ACA is law that passed through the House and Senate, signed by the President, and upheld by the Supreme Court. In other words, that is exactly how it is supposed to work. A handful of congressmen that personally have nothing to lose don't want to continue to fund an already funded law and in the process, will make things miserable for a lot of people all for what? The polls show that the American people think the the GOP is largely responsible for the shutdown and they will continue to think that. It will be the same thing that happened in the 90s. they main gain a couple seats here and lose a couple there and be proud about it, but in the end it will be a Pyrrhic victory because the public on the whole won't support them.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/09/news/economy/federal-employees-pay/

Oh please.

I just hope everyone doesn't forget about the NSA issues from before all this commotion.

 Spacemanvic wrote:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/09/news/economy/federal-employees-pay/

Oh please.

That doesn't say anything about the fact that none-of-them, furloughed or not, are getting a paycheck until the shutdown ends. Exempt employees earn pay right now, but they are not getting paid right now.

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

Dude no.

SOme feds, with multiyear appropriations are being paid their salaries, the rest are home or working without pay.

THey'll be paid once a budget is passed (or a continuing resolution since we've not had a proper budget in years) but as of now, they are not being paid.

And backpay for furloughed workers is not a done deal. It's up to COngress.

Sigh.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

It must irritate you so much to know that the President was not only elected once, but twice by the people of the United States. Whether you like the man or not, the least you could do is respect the office.

Both sides have negotiated numerous times before the shutdown and both sides have non-negotiable items, but now the GOP has blamed the Democrats for not negotiating? Here is a list of 19 times the Senate Democrats tried to negotiate with Senate Republicans by introducing their budget to a bicameral conference committee:
1. 4/23 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked.
2. 5/6 Senator Reid requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.
3. 5/7 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
4. 5/8 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
5. 5/9 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator McConnell blocked.
6. 5/14 Senator Warner asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.
7. 5/15 Senator Wyden asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator McConnell blocked.
8. 5/16 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
9. 5/21 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Paul blocked.
10. 5/22 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.
11. 5/23 Senator McCaskill asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
12. 6/4 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Rubio blocked.
13. 6/12 Senator Kaine asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Lee blocked.
14. 6/19 Senator Murray asked unanimous consent to go to conference, and Senator Toomey blocked.
15. 6/26 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Cruz blocked.
16. 7/11 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.
17. 7/17 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Mike Lee blocked.
18. 8/1 Senator Durbin requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Marco Rubio blocked.
19. 10/2 Senator Murray requested unanimous consent to go to conference, Senator Toomey blocked.

Neither the GOP nor the Democrats have clean hands in this, despite what you have been told. The Democrats of things to offer the GOP in exchange for keeping the ACA off the table and they need to do it. The bottom line is the ACA is law that passed through the House and Senate, signed by the President, and upheld by the Supreme Court. In other words, that is exactly how it is supposed to work. A handful of congressmen that personally have nothing to lose don't want to continue to fund an already funded law and in the process, will make things miserable for a lot of people all for what? The polls show that the American people think the the GOP is largely responsible for the shutdown and they will continue to think that. It will be the same thing that happened in the 90s. they main gain a couple seats here and lose a couple there and be proud about it, but in the end it will be a Pyrrhic victory because the public on the whole won't support them.

Not a bit. Especially when the dimwitted finally come to grips with what they voted for :

"Of course, I want people to have health care," Vinson said. "I just didn't realize I would be the
one who was going to pay for it personally."

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

 Spacemanvic wrote:

Yeah, google it your own damn self.

You know, I truly do respect people that stand by their convictions.

Spacemanvic wrote:Yeah, google it your own damn self.

Spacemanvic wrote:Repeating lies doesnt make it any closer to truth...

I was going to take it easy, and just post a short reply about Burden of Proof and similar, but for two things.

1. I'm a filthy heathen Liberal, so I'm A) too stupid and B) Too entitled and C) Too lazy to find the proof I need, I need a twu-patriot(tm) like yourself to illuminate me and pull me into the light.

2. Honest to god, the sheer insurmountable stupidity of both your comments made my laptop bluescreen. They were so stupid that loading them made my computer break

Now that I've gotten that out of the way....

Spacemanvic wrote:Repeating lies doesnt make it any closer to truth...

So you just sticking your fingers in your ears and going "NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH YOU'RE LYING CAN'T HEAR YOU!!" is considered a valid argumentative tactic these days? Seriously? Cause that post right there just lowered the level of discourse in this thread to "Nuh uh!" "Yeah too!" "Nuh uh!" "Yeah too!"

Do you not see the logical issue with those comments? I can say the exact same thing that you just said, and by your logic I will be winning the argument; after all we don't need to supply proof, the other person needs to supply our own evidence for us! and any evidence to the contrary is obviously just the filthy liberal media trying to sully the word of the patriots!

Just saying that something is a lie is meaningless unless you actually demonstrate that it is a lie otherwise you are, yet again, sticking your fingers in you ears and going "Nuh uh!"

Spacemanvic wrote:Yeah, google it your own damn self.

Hoo boy.

A) Did you wake up grumpy today or something? Cause that's quite an angry post for a polite argument on the subject of civil disobedience.

B) Learn to make an argument properly!

 Spacemanvic wrote:

And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

Why did you use the word "us"?

Are you an elected official who identifies as a Republican?

 Spacemanvic wrote:

Not a bit. Especially when the dimwitted finally come to grips with what they voted for :

"Of course, I want people to have health care," Vinson said. "I just didn't realize I would be the
one who was going to pay for it personally."

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

This...

As state- and federal-run health insurance exchanges debuted across the country offering a range of prices for different tiers of insurance coverage, the new online marketplaces -- which represent the centerpiece of Obamacare -- could greatly benefit more than 40 million Americans who now lack coverage. But an additional 16 million -- who buy individual health insurance policies on the open market -- are finding out that their plans may not comply with the new law, which requires 10 essential benefits such as maternity care, mental health care and prescription drug coverage.

...is also a quote from that article.

The only ones getting a full pay check are the "Fee" based Federal employee's. They're not part of a budget.


Other then that.


I thought I've seen ash trash bickering but Jebus. Talk about shattering the bed rock past the barrel. Quite a few of you all need to take a break a bit from posting.

People in the thread need to keep it civil, so we can have a mature debate. FFS please do this, I think most of us are adults. Take a break and step away from your computer if you're getting riled up.

OT:

I thought I had read earlier in the other thread "Harry Reid not negotiating thread" That the Executive branch determined where and what funding was cut from the government (see programs and locations closed) until Congress can get their act together and come to a compromise. Is this not the case?

I'm genuinely surprised there hasn't been more outrage at this...
I think it was another thread where someone pointed out this would cause rioting in most European countries...

 VermGho5t wrote:


OT:

I thought I had read earlier in the other thread "Harry Reid not negotiating thread" That the Executive branch determined where and what funding was cut from the government (see programs and locations closed) until Congress can get their act together and come to a compromise. Is this not the case?

Yes and no.

Agencies that are funded by fees or multiyear money keep going as normal.

The rest have to draw down to 'essential staff' who, as noted, are not paid, and can't opt out of this. They must work for free.

There are criteria spelt out in law for who has to work-security of lives, Federal property, something, something. There's wiggle room in there, but not much.

 VermGho5t wrote:

I thought I had read earlier in the other thread "Harry Reid not negotiating thread" That the Executive branch determined where and what funding was cut from the government (see programs and locations closed) until Congress can get their act together and come to a compromise. Is this not the case?

The Executive determines which government functions are essential according to criteria laid out in the Antideficiency Act.

This basically means any given Executive department can claim function X is essential so long as its termination threatens human life, or property. The caveat is that each department can only work from the funds they were previously allocated.

Spacemanvic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Interesting bit of trivia, those park police keeping people out of closed parks and monuments...

They're working without pay. They have been for 2 weeks.

And as 'essential' workers they can't opt to stay home or even take a day off.

But no tears for them and their families, nor blame for the one man in Congress who can call a vote tomorrow (if he wasn't on vacation).

Far be it for me to stop someone for blaming Blackman McMuslimName for all the ills of the world.

Unfortunately, the TRUTH doesnt back your fairytale. Those working are being paid, those furloughed are getting unemployment now that they dont have to pay back and backpay later when this blows over.

My sister and her husband are federal employees. They are still working without pay. The fact that they might get paid after this is all over doesn't feed their children or pay their bills now.

Maybe...I've said this before....they're protesting for being used as pawns in this political shoot out to give each side a black eye?

 Jihadin wrote:
Maybe...I've said this before....they're protesting for being used as pawns in this political shoot out to give each side a black eye?

And the folks organizing the protest and giving fancy "Obama is a Muslim that needs to get kicked out of the country when you all rise up" speeches aren't using them?

I would debate you D-USA but from previous above posts you have a serious dislike for Veterans. Yes I do know where you work but we all know money talks and BS walks. Right now though you are "tainted" by the comments you made and you know I am a Vet myself Perception a Mofo is it not.

 Jihadin wrote:
I would debate you D-USA but from previous above posts you have a serious dislike for Veterans. Yes I do know where you work but we all know money talks and BS walks. Right now though you are "tainted" by the comments you made and you know I am a Vet myself Perception a Mofo is it not.

Seriously?

So the people who point out the bullcrap of Republicans --who are saying they "don't want veterans being used as pawns"but then flock to make speeches with veterans as backdrops or to harass Park Rangers who are doing their jobs--suddenly have a serious dislike for veterans?

Money might talk and bullcrap might walk, but right now you've got some serious gall to try to say that D-Usa is "disliking veterans" for pointing out the nonsense stance that gets taken as soon as the term "veteran" gets thrown into the mix.

 Jihadin wrote:
I would debate you D-USA but from previous above posts you have a serious dislike for Veterans. Yes I do know where you work but we all know money talks and BS walks. Right now though you are "tainted" by the comments you made and you know I am a Vet myself

I don't have a single problem with vets. Love taking care of them.

I have a problem with people who think that they don't have to follow the rules because they are vets.

Huge difference, don't really care if you don't want to see it or not.

Perception a Mofo is it not.

A lot of people here have given you a lot of slack regarding "perception" because of your history. I wouldn't cast stones if I were you.

 Spacemanvic wrote:


And trying to get the Resident to compromise has gotten us nothing other than the man-child holding his breath, stomping his feet, and trying to stick it to the average citizen. He is an embarrasment.

Nope, that's you.

I am embarrassed at your replies.