Barack Obama will win the 2012 electionFollow

I would like to believe that, but honestly? Chances are they have direct pay and their money is just put into their account regularly. It would be nice to believe that since they fucked up they should suffer as well, but even if the resolution should pass, there will probably be a passage stating that once its all said and done they'll just get the pay in a future check.

They're not going to suffer, in the least. I just hope that someone in that giant building full of fucktards has the sense that the government workers losing out on pay will similarly get the money in future checks. But, if it isn't obvious, my faith in either party is nonexistent.

Nah, they'll lose the pay because it's a cheap way to show how they feel your pain. No one in Congress is a paycheck away from foreclosure or bankruptcy. The potential cost of it being revealed that they never lost the money is greater than actually missing a paycheck.

For whatever it's worth, I feel your pain since my family will be directly impacted by a government shutdown as well.

Giggle. George Carlin said it best. Congress wants more live babies to make into dead soldiers.

I hope Anthony Weiner is planning to go on the floor of the house to read that to the speaker.

Except that this totally can get done, no problem. So they're not even trying.

Could always close it and just release these illegally detained prisoners back into the world. But of course then you would complain about that instead. Ironically it is funny that you are ragging on this "broken" promise, yet the GOP in general seems to be quite content with the fact these "fugitives" are going to be tried. You are funny, I like lunch time in =4, so glad my computer is fixed.

I saw a funny segment on The Daily Show from him. He was saying, "I'll make the ***** jokes around here. And Boehner? Seriously? Should my name be pronounced Way-nor?

Huh? The only people talking about that number were the Dems Joph. I'm not sure why you insist on reading more into this than "This is the number the Dems wanted so they told the media that's the number they were working towards".



No source? Except perhaps H.R. 1, in which the number was 61B, right? You're still failing to get that this was the "starting point" of negotiations. Boehner doesn't need to run to the media to tell them what his number is since hs and the House already provided that figure.



Of course there was. You just want to ignore it.



Lol! You are being incredibly naive and cherry picking numbers now. The GOP proposed dropping their number from 61B to 36B *if* that 36B included certain guarantees (like the cuts to the NEA, NPR, and Planned Parenthood which have kinda been part of the whole topic as well). That was the compromise Joph. "We'll drop the number to 36 if you agree to allow these specific cuts". The Dems clearly rejected that, but then insisted on using that 36B number as though it had been offered with no other conditions. And now they're trying to play like it's all super fair to split the difference between that number and their starting number of 30B and arrive at a "compromise" of 33B.


Surely even you can see how that's BS. If there are no conditions, then the compromise needs to be between 61B and 30B, not 36B and 30B as the Dems are trying to get away with. That's why the GOP came back with the insistence on those riders in the bill. They're willing to drop the total number into that range but only if those specific cuts are included. That was and is the only way any number in the 30B range has been considered by the GOP.



Lol! Sucker.

Huh? It's a budget legislation and the issue is "funding" for abortion clinics which would otherwise be included in said budget. I'm not sure how or why you think the two are unrelated. Now, if they attempt to drop an amendment blocking funding for abortion in an energy bill, you'll have a point.

I'm not interested in spoon-feeding your ignorance any longer so you go ahead just believing whatever your little radio friends tell you.