Military Pay Delay, but Congress gets Paid...in a Shutdown

I'm sure that 'Fairness Doctrine Czar' is just Boner and company trying to be cutesy. The official title would be soething else, just as there is no such thing as 'ObamaCare Czar' on the books. And I'll keep saying Boner as long as he keeps claiming 'ObamaCare Czar' is an official job title.

I'm sure that 'Fairness Doctrine Czar' is just Boner and company trying to be cutesy. The official title would be soething else, just as there is no such thing as 'ObamaCare Czar' on the books. And I'll keep saying Boner as long as he keeps claiming 'ObamaCare Czar' is an official job title.

We'll just start calling obama Hussien then. nanabooboo.:clap::clap:

We'll just start calling obama Hussien then. nanabooboo.:clap::clap:

Fine, that is his real name. :clap:

Fine, that is his real name. :clap:

Then why does it drive liberals out of their minds when someone dares use it? :idontno:

So, with a gov shutdown, the military put on their uniforms and go to work and do their jobs...and have their pay stopped or delayed;

the congress members put on their suits and go to work and do nothing...but still get their paychecks!

What is wrong with this picture?

Are you that blind or partisan? The DEMOCRATS controled both houses of congress and the White House until January. They were supposed to pass a budget by October 1 and refused. They could have come back after the election and passed a budget. They failed. The House has passed H.R. 1 twice since the Republicans assumed control, which would fund the government and the DEMOCRATS in the Senate have yet to pass a finance bill. And the HOUSE needs maturity and intelligence? This all lays at the feet of the Democrats who refuse to accept any semblance of fiscal responsiblity.

and how soon we forget. The Republicans threatened a filibuster to the Budget to get their tax cuts for the wealthy. Also, why didn't Republicans balk when Bush was spending like a madman. Spending was up 70% over his reign. Yes, Yes, I know Dems voted for all this spending as well in the house, but, there wasn't a tea party yet to cowtow to, so now we, as a Country, have to deal with all this posturing for the 2012 elections, which includes cowtowing to who will eventually find their campaigns (via having greenhouse spending eliminated)
They are all a bunch of crooks. We, as Americans, should be pushing for a Bill that disallows any shutdown of our government. It's striking, and we should be able to fire them all. They want to take away the rights of unions to collective bargaining, then they should reap what they sow.

So, with a gov shutdown, the military put on their uniforms and go to work and do their jobs...and have their pay stopped or delayed;

the congress members put on their suits and go to work and do nothing...but still get their paychecks!

What is wrong with this picture?

Relax, it won't last very long if it even happens. Both sides have their little "patch last year's budget yet again" bills at the ready. At this rate we'll be into next year by the time we pass this year's budget.

I'd much prefer a situation like this to lobsided government where only one side gets it's way. It may not be pretty but ultimately they will all be forced to come to a consensus, and each side will receive some representation.

and how soon we forget. The Republicans threatened a filibuster to the Budget to get their tax cuts for the wealthy. Also, why didn't Republicans balk when Bush was spending like a madman. Spending was up 70% over his reign. Yes, Yes, I know Dems voted for all this spending as well in the house, but, there wasn't a tea party yet to cowtow to, so now we, as a Country, have to deal with all this posturing for the 2012 elections, which includes cowtowing to who will eventually find their campaigns (via having greenhouse spending eliminated)
They are all a bunch of crooks. We, as Americans, should be pushing for a Bill that disallows any shutdown of our government. It's striking, and we should be able to fire them all. They want to take away the rights of unions to collective bargaining, then they should reap what they sow.

The simple answer is that it's because Bush had revenue and a good economy to mask over most his wild and crazy spending. Obama is not as lucky, and his spending excesses are far greater.

On the IRS front, I have never understood the desire for people to receive a refund. That means you have let the government spend your money all year. Although I never want to pay the IRS, I would rather have access to my money throughout the year. Then again, if I truly was king of the universe I would implement the approach SJoe has mentioned a number of times which is for everyone to get their full check every week and then have to send in a check to the Treasury. By withholding money, it's out of sight, out of mind. Kinda like the "pay yourself first approach" to saving, except it's "pay the guvm't first."

Yep - interest free loan to the US Gov't! Would rather owe a little than receive a refund.

We currently have a 'Fairness Doctrine Czar'??

Also, just curious, did SoWal get invaded by five year olds or do people really not know the correct way to spell the last name of the Speaker of the House?

:lolabove: Cry Boner!

Then why does it drive liberals out of their minds when someone dares use it? :idontno:

Doesn't bother anyone I know but I love how conservatives believe a persons name defines who and what they are.:lol:

Doesn't bother anyone I know but I love how conservatives believe a persons name defines who and what they are.:lol:

:lolabove:...there ya' go, Poopy!

:lol: If you were going to be a US Czar, what type would you like to be? 😀

Common Sense Czar! :cool: