Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Cruz's "Filibuster"Follow

#102 Oct 01 2013 at 12:56 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,320 posts
The weekend after next is holiday weekend - Columbus Day. I think the government will be back up and running the friday before that (Oct. 11).
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#103 Oct 01 2013 at 1:50 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,541 posts
It's quite amusing to read the differing opinions between the Wall Street type fiscal conservatives who are freaking out (because they merely want government to stop preventing them from making more money than God) and the Tea Party type fiscal conservatives who are cheering the shutdown (as they are now finally fulfilling a campaign promise they made as far back as 2010.)

About the only happy people on Wall Street are the hedge fund guys that won some fiscal bets today. Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#104 Oct 01 2013 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Catwho wrote:
Tea Party type fiscal conservatives who are cheering the shutdown (as they are now finally fulfilling a campaign promise they made as far back as 2010.)

Except that they didn't stop (or even slow) the ACA going live.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#105 Oct 01 2013 at 1:56 PM Rating: Good
******
44,511 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Catwho wrote:
Tea Party type fiscal conservatives who are cheering the shutdown (as they are now finally fulfilling a campaign promise they made as far back as 2010.)
Except that they didn't stop (or even slow) the ACA going live.
Or a bunch of old fogies that wanted to look at a wall.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#106 Oct 01 2013 at 2:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Roger Waters show subject to government shutdown?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#107 Oct 01 2013 at 2:34 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,570 posts
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-fiscal-klan-20131001,0,2920370.story

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A Ku Klux Klan rally became a casualty of the U.S. government shutdown on Tuesday when National Parks officials told the white supremacist group the event would have to be canceled.

The KKK had been granted a permit for what it dubbed a First Amendment demonstration on Saturday at Gettysburg National Military Park, but park officials said it could not take place because all National Parks have been closed.


**** it, so close to an Illinois ***** joke. It was even in the Chicage Tribune...
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#108 Oct 01 2013 at 2:43 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
[quote=Jophiel]Roger Waters show subject to government ************************ awesome show, that.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#109 Oct 01 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Realistically, there are enough Republican detractors that a standard budget bill would pass as soon one was allowed to be voted on.

So it's really just a game of how long it takes to get Boehner to crack and send the general budget bill through a committee that won't kill it on sight.


Hard to say how this goes though. This is not the same as 1996. Back then, it was a standard budget fight, with both sides a bit off, and the GOP chose to shut down the government instead of passing some kind of continuing resolution while they ironed out the differences. While this looks similar at first glance, there are key differences. Back then, the view was that the GOPs objective was to shut the government down, refusing to even pass a temporary resolution, while Clinton and the Democrats appeared to be doing everything they could to get an agreement reached. This time around, we're in a situation where the Dems have failed to even attempt to pass a budget for 4 years, and the GOP has allowed a long series of continuing resolutions to keep the government functioning without a budget. You can hardly say they haven't been patient or given this enough time. It's been 4 years of no budget agreement, so it's hard to sell the argument that the GOP is refusing to give the Dems enough time.

Also, unlike Clinton, Obama is being incredibly (and probably foolishly) vocal about taking an absolute stance on this. So instead of looking like someone trying to come to a reasonable agreement, he's looking like he's the reason no agreement is being reached.

I'll also point out that this has to do with more than just Obamacare. That's the low hanging obvious fruit here, but the bigger issue is about a lack of budget process for so long that there has been no ability to do anything about spending. Obamacare just happens to represent a law that is already publicly unpopular and represents new spending that can't be offset or adjusted without going through a yearly budget process and thus will increase our yearly deficits even more if something isn't done. Normally, Congress goes though this each year and looks at the mandated program expenses, and what they'd like to do with discretionary funds, takes into account likely revenue, and then comes up with a spending plan to attempt to keep expenses somewhat in line with revenues. Without that negotiating process, there's no method to keep costs in line, which is at least part of the reason our deficits remain high. The Dems have passed laws increasing our costs, but have not allowed a budget process to account for those new expenses (likely because they know it'll mean lost funding for other things).


What's interesting is that the GOP has an opportunity here to change that. Since we've been operating with continuing resolutions for years now, what they can do is just address the spending issues that the people are most upset about and pass emergency resolutions to fund them one at a time. They did this with military spending, but they could do this with other things as well. Basically, they could require each and every thing that gets funded to be justified via public need. If they do it right, they could make themselves look quite good doing this. Obama gives a speech about how the shutdown is hurting some group everyone agrees shouldn't be hurt. GOP in the house passes a spending bill to fund just that thing. Dems in the Senate can't *not* pass this or they look like they're hurting those people. Similarly, Obama can't *not* sign that bill.

Do this selectively and one portion at a time, and you could fund just the "necessary" parts of the Federal government, and the GOP could accomplish something they could never do with the normal budgetary process: Trim the government by a significant degree. Cause let's face it. There are a lot of things we spend money on that aren't necessary, and would be hard to get public outrage over not being funded. Many of these things are the same things that the GOP has wanted to defund for decades now. So it's a potential big win for them if it works out this way.


Course, they might just fold if things look too bad. There's a lot of factors that will affect what they do. But I really do think that Liberals are being far too dependent on the assumption that the public at large will see this the same way they saw the 1996 shutdown. It's not going to be the same. Heck. If for no other reason than we're too far out from elections (and they're midterms). The last one happened right in the middle of the presidential primary season, so it became a part of the presidential race. That's not going to happen in this case.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#110 Oct 01 2013 at 4:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
the bigger issue is about a lack of budget process for so long that there has been no ability to do anything about spending.

Well, the GOP could have appointed members to the conference committee the eighteen times the Democratic Senate asked. You know, after they passed the budget the GOP had been screaming about for ages but now seems completely unwilling to actually work out.

You're right... the inability of the GOP to appoint members because they're terrified of the extremist wing of the party is a bigger issue. Ties into the whole shutdown thing pretty neatly though.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#111 Oct 01 2013 at 4:47 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
19,982 posts
The point here is that this isn't a budget fight.

You have a majority of the House perfectly willing to pass a budget with bipartisan support.

Then you have a minority of the House, which includes the Speaker, unwilling to let the budget go to a vote due to issues that have nothing to do with the budget. Nothing they are voting on, for or against, has anything to do with the funding to Obamacare. The GOP is trying to add extra, ******** provisions onto a bill that would otherwise pass with an easy majority simply because they're throwing a tantrum.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#112 Oct 01 2013 at 4:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
The point here is that this isn't a budget fight.

You have a majority of the House perfectly willing to pass a budget with bipartisan support.

That's true. The ONLY thing stopping a clean CR from passing is Boehner's adherence to the Hastert Rule. A majority of the House would pass a clean CR easily if Boehner took up the Senate bill (also passed by a clear majority). But he refuses since the party extremists would savage him for doing so.

Edited, Oct 1st 2013 5:50pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#113 Oct 01 2013 at 4:59 PM Rating: Excellent
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'd be more worried about going to war with the legion of blind gun-wielders..
Less ability to focus = more bullets fired. We'll hit something!Smiley: mad

Bachmann wrote:
"America is not shutting down," she said. "If we have anything to say about it, we're going to keep this open."
Smiley: lolSmiley: dubiousSmiley: looney
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#114 Oct 01 2013 at 5:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Michelle Bachmann (R-Batshit Insane)
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#115 Oct 01 2013 at 5:08 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
the bigger issue is about a lack of budget process for so long that there has been no ability to do anything about spending.

Well, the GOP could have appointed members to the conference committee the eighteen times the Democratic Senate asked. You know, after they passed the budget the GOP had been screaming about for ages but now seems completely unwilling to actually work out.


Wait. So the House passes budget after budget, which are ignored in the Senate. And then finally the senate passes a joke budget that they know can't possible pass, then they demand that a conference on that budget be started immediately, also knowing it can't possibly succeed, and then blame Republicans when they rightly suggest that maybe we at least agree on goals before setting up the conference?

It was a play for the cameras Joph. Nothing more.

Quote:
You're right... the inability of the GOP to appoint members because they're terrified of the extremist wing of the party is a bigger issue. Ties into the whole shutdown thing pretty neatly though.


Uh... you put far far too much weight in the power of the tea party Joph. The House didn't appoint members because Reid intentionally set it up in a way guaranteed to fail. It was an obvious attempt to make it look like they were doing something without any intention of actually doing anything. Only the most far left echo chamber folks actually thought this was a serious attempt at a budget deal.

Did you miss the part in the article you linked where it said that house rules require such a conference reach agreement within 20 days? Absent even agreement on goals for the conference, there was zero chance of reaching agreement in that time. Everyone, including Reid, knew that going in. By refusing to set that framework first, he sabotaged the whole thing. Intentionally.


The Dems don't want to pass a budget Joph. That should be obvious. They failed to pass budgets even when they controlled both houses of congress, so it's not about GOP opposition. They can get the same thing by passing continuing resolutions without the scrutiny that a budget process would entail. It's about not having to take responsibility for the rising costs of government and the resulting deficits. How many years must the GOP compromise on that before it's reasonable for them to say "no"?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#116 Oct 01 2013 at 5:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
And then finally the senate passes a joke budget that they know can't possible pass

It did pass. It passed the Senate. The next step is the conference committee between the House & Senate to reconcile the two bills. The GOP refuses to take this next step despite continued requests from the Democrats. Lack of a budget right now is 100% on them. Do they not teach basic government in California?

Quote:
Uh... you put far far too much weight in the power of the tea party Joph.

Really? Funny, I was certain we saw a Tea Party led government shutdown happen just today.

Quote:
a joke budget that they know can't possible pass

As opposed to the House budget which sailed right through the Senat--- oh, wait. Man, so ONE budget passed one chamber and ANOTHER budget passed the other chamber... what's the next step?

OH! That's right... you arbitrarily call one budget a joke and refuse to go to committee to reconcile them. Then try to pretend the government shutdown months later wasn't your fault but the fault of some nebulous "broken budget process" you refused to engage in.

Edited, Oct 1st 2013 6:16pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#117 Oct 01 2013 at 5:13 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Is the department that prints all of the money that services your $16,740,116,681,333.32 national debt still operating?
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#118 Oct 01 2013 at 5:31 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
The point here is that this isn't a budget fight.


It should be though. That's the problem. The Dems want to just pass a continuing resolution to keep funding everything at existing levels instead of actually going through the process of negotiating a budget. If we were actually working on a budget there would be a whole list of things on the table for trimming.

Quote:
You have a majority of the House perfectly willing to pass a budget with bipartisan support.


Of course. But not one that the Dems want. So the Dems ignore any attempt at a budget and insist we just pass continuing resolutions in order to keep the government running. At some point, someone has to be the responsible part here.

Quote:
Then you have a minority of the House, which includes the Speaker, unwilling to let the budget go to a vote due to issues that have nothing to do with the budget. Nothing they are voting on, for or against, has anything to do with the funding to Obamacare. The GOP is trying to add extra, bullsh*t provisions onto a bill that would otherwise pass with an easy majority simply because they're throwing a tantrum.


This isn't about passing a budget right now though. What the GOP is saying is that *if* the Democrats refuse to work with Republicans to pass a real budget and want to just keep passing continuing resolutions to keep the government running (which is supposed to be just a temporary measure, but has been going on for 4+ years), then they have to give something up. That's compromise. The Democrats want to keep their proposed increases in spending while not doing anything to address existing spending.

I think it's quite reasonable to say "Let's not start spending money on a new program if we can't even agree on how to spend money on the existing ones". In the absence of a budget, this is the only way to negotiate anything at all. The Dems have created the situation, so it's more than unfair to blame the GOP for using the only tool they have. If the Dems really want discussion and compromise they could actually make good faith efforts to sit down with Republicans and pass a budget. But they haven't. They haven't come close. Instead, they've chosen to just keep spending money and adding more money to that money, and are holding the whole economy hostage to this continuing resolution process. By making it all about that one thing, and always in a crisis mode, they hold the fear of shutdown over the public as a means of not having to actually balance the budget.


I'll ask again: How many years is the GOP supposed to just sit by and let that happen? How long can the US economy survive this? Obama talks about the faith and credit of the US economy, but this continuing resolution BS is causing more harm to that faith and credit than anything else. That is the problem. And the GOP is at least trying to address it, while the Dems seem to revel in keeping it going.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#119 Oct 01 2013 at 5:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Quote:
You have a majority of the House perfectly willing to pass a budget with bipartisan support.
Of course. But not one that the Dems want. So the Dems ignore any attempt at a budget and insist we just pass continuing resolutions in order to keep the government running.

He was referring to the clean resolution passed by the Senate and which would sail through the House if it were put up for vote.

Also, Smiley: laugh @ "Dems ignore any attempt at a budget"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#120 Oct 01 2013 at 5:46 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And then finally the senate passes a joke budget that they know can't possible pass

It did pass. It passed the Senate.


Really? I didn't realize that. Seriously?

Quote:
The next step is the conference committee between the House & Senate to reconcile the two bills.


Correct. Which requires that you do all the groundwork for that conference before you start it. Because the House rules require that once the conference members are seated, they have 20 days to reach agreement. Reid refused to set any ground rules or agenda, but instead insisted that the GOP assign members to the conference immediately. Thus guaranteeing that it could not possibly succeed.

Quote:
The GOP refuses to take this next step despite continued requests from the Democrats.


No. The GOP asked to have the ground rules and agenda set first so that the conference could actually accomplish something and Reid refused. You don't just show up to these things and start talking. There's a whole set of stuff that has to be set up before you assign folks to attend. Reid wanted to skip right to the last step, knowing this would ensure failure.

Quote:
Lack of a budget right now is 100% on them.


Lol. You keep telling yourself that Joph. You keep saying that in the face of the strict "no negotiations" message the Dems are putting out on every TV right now. Good lucky convincing people that it's really the GOP being unreasonable.

Quote:
Quote:
Uh... you put far far too much weight in the power of the tea party Joph.

Really? Funny, I was certain we saw a Tea Party led government shutdown happen just today.


Lol. I'm sure that's the exact language you heard on MSNBC. "tea party lead shutdown". Repeat it enough times and folks will assume that's what's going on, I guess. What does that mean?

Quote:
As opposed to the House budget which sailed right through the Senat--- oh, wait. Man, so ONE budget passed one chamber and ANOTHER budget passed the other chamber... what's the next step?


As opposed to the couple dozen budgets passed over the last few years by the Senate, not one of which was even considered, examined in a Senate committed, or given floor time to discuss. Waiting 4 years and then saying "we'll ignore what you did, and just write our own and intentionally sabotage any attempts to consolidate them" isn't a serious effort.

Quote:
OH! That's right... you arbitrarily call one budget a joke and refuse to go to committee to reconcile them.


The GOP was more than willing to go to committee. Reid intentionally failed to set up the necessary groundwork for such a committee to succeed. At what point does it become so obvious that he didn't want anything to come of this before we're allowed to just dismiss what he was doing as a complete waste of time? I think when he said "Nope. No planning. No agenda. No goals. Give me your names today or else!" is a good time.

Quote:
Then try to pretend the government shutdown months later wasn't your fault but the fault of some nebulous "broken budget process" you refused to engage in.


The GOP didn't refuse anything. Your own linked article clearly states that they were willing to attend, but wanted the normal set of planning to be done ahead of time so that they conference wasn't given an impossible time deadline. Reid refused. That's on him. There was no cost to him to allow time for planning and preparation. There was no rush at the time. But he decided to create one anyway.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#121 Oct 01 2013 at 5:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,905 posts
That depends on if you believe the "he's secretly a democrat" conspiracy theories or not I suppose.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#122 Oct 01 2013 at 5:47 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Quote:
You have a majority of the House perfectly willing to pass a budget with bipartisan support.
Of course. But not one that the Dems want. So the Dems ignore any attempt at a budget and insist we just pass continuing resolutions in order to keep the government running.

He was referring to the clean resolution passed by the Senate and which would sail through the House if it were put up for vote.


Yes. Which is not a "budget". That was my point.

Oh. And at some point, isn't just passing continuing resolutions to keep funding the government despite the lack of a budget, not "clean" anymore? That's the point of the opposition to this.

Edited, Oct 1st 2013 4:49pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#123 Oct 01 2013 at 5:52 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
19,982 posts
Why the **** would the democrats negotiate something that has nothing to do with the budget just to pass the budget?

Oh, right, because a Republican minority has decided that the democratic process of government is beneath them, and they'd rather be tyrants who will choose a "My way, or a government shut down" line of thinking.

The precedent this would set is atrocious.

They want Obamacare gone, I get it. Then they should repeal Obamacare. THEY are the ones who want this included in budget talks for no reason other than to try and blame the left for the federal shutdown.

That's not how this works. If YOU are the one insisting that extraneous additional provisions get added to an unrelated bill, and that bill fails because of those unrelated provisions, then it is YOUR fault that the bill failed. If you can agree on the core bill, pass the god damned bill.

It's one thing to tack on provisions when attempting to exchange legislation you want for legislation the opposition wants. That's compromise.

"DO THIS OR WE SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT" is not compromise.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#124 Oct 01 2013 at 6:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,071 posts
I'm pretty sure the GOP had a previous bite at the 'structure the ACA so that it was somewhat more palatable' apple, so the wouldn't have to slap a repeal or adjustments to it on every piece of paper floated through the house. Unfortunately, it appears they were throwing a hissy fit at the time, so those ideas weren't implemented. That was the time and place to fight the law, not here and now.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#125 Oct 01 2013 at 6:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Really? I didn't realize that. Seriously?

Yes, really. And it's great that you've been frantically Googling up information on this to try and cobble together a counterargument to something you literally first learned within the last hour but no, the issue was never "The GOP really wanted to but Reid wouldn't set rules!" Regular order is to set and have the conference committee. The GOP essentially refused and used the lame excuse of demanding a committee before the committee... when they were never really serious anyway. You just keep saying "Wait, no.. we need more rules" and kicking the ball down the road.

And they do not have "twenty days" to reach an agreement. They have an initial twenty days and then individual members of the House may ask for a motion to instruct the conferencees (edit: I guess the word is conferees... who knew?) to move the process along (as in, lend their opinion on what the committee members should say, not just say "move it along"). That's hardly any dire event aside from perhaps cluttering up the House's urgent business of doing jackshit and passing their 750th motion to repeal Obamacare. See, this is what happens when you learn of something and then rush to assemble an argument against it without knowing what you're talking about.

Look, you already proved during the last big budget/debt fight that you know nothing about this stuff. I appreciate your ***** but leave it for people with a clue, okay? I bet the guys in the office kitchen are impressed when you start babbling half imagined factoids so maybe stick with that.

From Senate.gov, a primer on conference committees for curious young minds who just learned that such a thing exists:
Quote:
What are the steps for sending a bill to a conference committee?

There are four steps for sending a bill to a conference committee, three of the steps are required, the fourth is not. Both houses must complete the first three steps.

(1) Stage of disagreement. This is where the Senate and House agree that they disagree. As stated in the CRS report, "Going to Conference in the Senate", this agreement may be accomplished by one of the following:
The Senate insisting on its own amendment(s) to a House-passed bill or amendment.
The Senate disagreeing to the House’s amendment(s) to a Senate-passed bill or amendment.
(2) Once the House and Senate agree to disagree, they must agree that they want to create a conference committee to resolve the legislative disagreement they acknowledged in step one. This step is accomplished by either requesting a conference with the House and the House agreeing to the offer, or by accepting the House’s request for conference.
[Note: You'll notice there is no "Demand special rules or else you can't have the committee" step. Steps 2 & 3 are where the process broke down in that the GOP vaguely agreed to have a committee but refused to appoint any members using "But we didn't have a committee to decide special rules!" as an excuse]
(3) Step three is where each house appoints its conference members. The Speaker appoints the House’s conferees. The Senate elects its conferees, or the Senate can authorize, by formal floor action, for the presiding officer to appoint the conferees.
(4) The final step in the processes is an optional step. During this step each house may provide a motion to instruct. These are instructions on the positions that the conferees should take during the conference, but the instructions are not binding.
[Note: This is the terrible end after twenty days without resolution. Who can dare to work on a joint budget resolution when you have the specter of nonbinding suggestions looming over you after three weeks?]


Edited, Oct 1st 2013 7:34pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#126 Oct 01 2013 at 6:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
paulsol wrote:
Is the department that prints all of the money that services your $16,740,116,681,333.32 national debt still operating?
Yup, all 771 of them were deemed essential, unlike the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (people that investigate things like why that fertilizer plant in Texas blew up) which was deemed non-essential and will operate on a skeleton staff of 3 people.


Edited, Oct 1st 2013 5:23pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#127 Oct 01 2013 at 6:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Thankfully, Flea got out of the "interpreting for federal immigration court" game last year. Or else we'd be running on one paycheck right now.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#128 Oct 01 2013 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
Ironically the Office of Government Ethics will be closed down as well; save 1 person, who I imagine will only be doing ethical things to their records. Smiley: lol

Smiley: um

Smiley: tinfoilhat
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#129 Oct 01 2013 at 6:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The E-Verify system has been shut down but the GOP is willing to pass a bill re-opening national parks.

Priorities! Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#130 Oct 01 2013 at 7:45 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,947 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Why the **** would the democrats negotiate something that has nothing to do with the budget just to pass the budget?


Spending has nothing to do with passing a budget? That's news.

You get that making adjustments to spending on a whole set of government programs is part of the normal yearly budget process, right? One can presume that the entire reason why the Dems have avoided doing this for 4+ years is precisely because they don't want to go through a budget process where they might have to actually compromise on some of their spending. By passing continuing resolutions instead, they get to avoid having to justify the costs for all the things government is doing.

This is a normal process. It's supposed to be done every single year. Meaning every year, congress will debate (for example) how much money to allocate to something like Obamacare, or Medicare, or the Post Office, or whatever. Since a budget bill is a law, just like any other, that process allows congress to make adjustments to any existing law with regard to spending. This is normally done in conjunction with the White House so that they have some voice in terms of making sure the implementation of government programs isn't impacted (too much) by the budget process.

So basically, the white house kinda chooses which things are most important for them, and works with congress to make sure that those things get funded. And along the way there are lots of compromises made on all sides. The Democrats have avoided this for many years now, making it impossible to make any adjustments to spending at all (or at least significantly more difficult).

The GOP isn't doing anything unusual by trying to require some sort of spending compromise in return for funding the government. The Democrats have been doing something unusual for the last 4 years by effectively creating a "spend money on everything or nothing" condition. In other words, the Democrats have created this crisis, not the GOP. They've given the GOP only two options: Fund everything the Dems want, or fund nothing.

Quote:
Oh, right, because a Republican minority has decided that the democratic process of government is beneath them, and they'd rather be tyrants who will choose a "My way, or a government shut down" line of thinking.


Lol! You're kidding right? It's the Democrats who have created that all or nothing condition. Not the GOP. It's the Democrats utter unwillingness to compromise on any spending at all for the last 4 years that has lead us to this condition. If they were willing to compromise, we'd have passed a budgets all along. Let me remind you that they did this even when they controlled both houses of congress. This is not about the GOP blocking the budget process. It is about the Democrats not wanting to make a budget because just passing "temporary" continuing resolutions allows them to get what they want without any scrutiny about what they're actually doing.

Quote:
The precedent this would set is atrocious.


The precedent that we require both sides to sit down and hammer out a deal on spending with the cost of failure being a government shutdown? Um... That's *normal*. What's abnormal is not doing that and just passing continuing resolutions for 4 years instead.

Compromising and reaching a budget agreement is what congress is supposed to do every single year.

Quote:
They want Obamacare gone, I get it.


They want it gone. 55-60% of Americans want it gone. It's a broken piece of legislation that doesn't work even if you don't take into account the innate opposition to it due to its socialist nature. Um... But that's really beside the point. If the Dems really really really wanted Obamacare, they could work through a budget process to fit it in with all the other spending. Of course, they'd have to give up other things to make room for it. Which is why they've avoided the process.

It's not about funding or not funding Obamacare really. It's about the Democrats not wanting to have to lose anything to get it. They haven't even tried sitting down with Republicans and asking "What will it cost us to pay for this?". That's the problem.

Quote:
Then they should repeal Obamacare.


We're working on it. Problem is that everyone knows that once you actually start implementing a law of that size, it becomes incredibly hard to repeal it because sufficient changes and costs and jobs are now associated with it.

Quote:
THEY are the ones who want this included in budget talks for no reason other than to try and blame the left for the federal shutdown.


They want it included in budget talks because normally every single federally funded program is included in budget talks every single year. What's been happening is the Dems have used some extreme measures to protect Obamacare from any sort of budget scrutiny or adjustment. So apparently they care more about forcing this piece of garbage down the throats of Americans than they care about the "faith and credit" of the US. That is their choice, not the GOPs.

Quote:
That's not how this works. If YOU are the one insisting that extraneous additional provisions get added to an unrelated bill, and that bill fails because of those unrelated provisions, then it is YOUR fault that the bill failed.


It's not unrelated though. It's a continuing resolution that's being passed in lieu of having an actual budget. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to include discussions and negotiations that would normally be involved in a budget discussion within that discussion. Why would you think otherwise?

You know what would be unrelated? If someone argued that we should do something like end a war in Iraq or not pass a budget, with the threat of shutdown as a result. Want to know who voted to do just that in 2006? That would be President Obama. There's some serious hypocrisy.

Quote:
If you can agree on the core bill, pass the god damned bill.


What is the "core bill" though? Do you understand what is even on the table here? I really think you don't.

Quote:
"DO THIS OR WE SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT" is not compromise.


Except that it's not "do this or we choose to shut down the government as a separate action". Failing to pass a resolution automatically results in a government shutdown. It's not a choice being made. It's not like the GOP has some magical power to force the government to shut down anytime they want and then holds that over the heads of the Democrats. It is an automatic consequence of failing to have a budget. The continuing resolutions are a temporary measure to keep funding the government in the absence of a passed budget. What the Democrats are doing is saying "continue to fund everything or fund nothing". And if we fund nothing, the government shuts down.

They're the ones who have created this all or nothing condition. Not the GOP.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#131 Oct 01 2013 at 8:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,570 posts
What the Democrats are doing is saying "continue to fund everything or fund nothing". And if we fund nothing, the government shuts down.

Nah, no sale. No one not already ideologically blindly committed to slack jawed rubber stamping of anything their "team" does politically would ever find that even vaguely plausible. Sorry.

The continuing resolution, the debt ceiling, all that stuff, are pro forma exercises of the House's ability to fund government. Refusing to pass one without ludicrous conditions is like a company treasurer refusing to fund payroll unless he gets a pony.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#132 Oct 01 2013 at 8:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
650 posts
Why is that Democrats are blamed for not being willing to compromise, but Republicans get a pass for doing the same thing?
#133 Oct 01 2013 at 8:57 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,570 posts
Why is that Democrats are blamed for not being willing to compromise, but Republicans get a pass for doing the same thing?

Democrats are pragmatists who rely on reason to find the best workable solution. Republicans are idealists willing to hold their breath until they die to get a cookie. Hence, the adults are expected to sacrifice to prevent harm, the children are expected to continue making threats and claiming "I'll die if I don't get to go to the Justin Bieber concert" Democrats value data and evidence based outcomes, Republicans value certainty regardless of outcomes or data. Fairly well understood social underpinnings to party affiliation. Democrats are hopeful, Republicans are terrified of almost everything, etc.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#134 Oct 01 2013 at 9:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
It's a little disconcerting how Cruz, Lee & Co can spend months talking about how they're going to shut down the government over Obamacare, then they shut down the government over Obamacare exactly as they said they would... and then Gbaji says how the shut down is all Democrats.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#135 Oct 01 2013 at 10:17 PM Rating: Excellent
From TDS (In regards to the whole "He'll talk to Iran but not Republicans!" sound byte going on the last couple days)

Jon Stewart wrote:


Apparently, they are allowed to do that — [members of Congress] are allowed to make laws, and the President is allowed to sign laws. And what do we do if those laws are unconstitutional? Well apparently nine precogs in magic robes got together, looked at the Affordable Care Act, and decided that it was not unconstitutional.

So everything appears to have been done literally by the book. This bill is now a law, vetted by the very system these Republicans claim to love — but to hear Republicans tell it, the whole thing could just be avoided if President Obama would just meet him halfway!

The bill is a ******* law! Are you familiar with how the word works? Did you see the Giants game on Sunday? Okay: they lost 31 to 7. And you know what the Giants didn’t say after that game? 'If you don’t give us 25 more points by midnight on Monday, we are gonna shut down the NFL!'

You’re not helping yourself. If it turns out that President Barack Obama can make a deal with the most intransigent, hardline, unreasonable, totalitarian mullahs in the world, but not with Republicans, maybe he’s not the problem.


Linky w/Video
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#136 Oct 01 2013 at 11:32 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
12,071 posts
New political maths require 70-75% support for a min. Bill. 50>D>40% +>.5R.

I dub this the super sekret majority.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#137 Oct 01 2013 at 11:32 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,599 posts
Jophiel wrote:
It's a little disconcerting how Cruz, Lee & Co can spend months talking about how they're going to shut down the government over Obamacare, then they shut down the government over Obamacare exactly as they said they would... and then Gbaji says how the shut down is all Democrats.

It's also funny how gbaji not only defends the Republicans' actions as being correct policy (naturally, I wouldn't expect non-partisan analysis from even an average sane person, let along gbaji), but that he also defends the Republicans' actions as being viewed favorably by the general populace.

I mean, it's okay to think that your policy is morally right, but is viewed as such by a minority of people. Or inversely, to believe that the majority of people are ignorant, and they are supporting a bad policy.

But no, Republicans are both always right, and always scoring more political points with voters than the hapless Democrats. YOU ARE FUCKING BONKERS.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#138 Oct 02 2013 at 2:57 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
trickybeck wrote:
But no, Republicans are both always right, and always scoring more political points with voters than the hapless Democrats. YOU ARE FUCKING BONKERS.
It's obvious, that's why Romney won the election.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#139 Oct 02 2013 at 6:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,541 posts
The point being ignored in all this budget whining is that the CBO and GAO and all those acronyms determined that the ACA will reduce the deficit over the long term. Repealing it will thus, ipso facto, add to the deficit.

Which is why the Republicans adding its repeal onto a budget makes them the opposite of fiscally responsible.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#140 Oct 02 2013 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
******
44,511 posts
Jophiel wrote:
It's a little disconcerting how Cruz, Lee & Co can spend months talking about how they're going to shut down the government over Obamacare, then they shut down the government over Obamacare exactly as they said they would... and then Gbaji says how the shut down is all Democrats.
Disconcerting, or predictable?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#141 Oct 02 2013 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,320 posts
One of our Senators went on record last weekend with this:
Susan Collins wrote:
I voted against Obamacare and have repeatedly voted to repeal, reform, and replace it, but I disagree with the strategy of linking Obamacare with the continuing functioning of government — a strategy that cannot possibly work,” she said in a statement.


But then proceeded to vote right along with the majority of republican Senator's. Obviously her vote was just symbolic as the budget bill wasn't going to pass with our without her support.

What do you think....Is she wise, cowardly or simply a split-tongued serpent?

(Her seat is up for re-election next year)
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#142 Oct 02 2013 at 7:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
Disconcerting, or predictable?

Can't it be both?
Elinda wrote:
But then proceeded to vote right along with the majority of republican Senator's. Obviously her vote was just symbolic as the budget bill wasn't going to pass with our without her support.

What do you think....Is she wise, cowardly or simply a split-tongued serpent?

Isn't her seat pretty safe? I recall it being a seat the Democrats keep wishing they could pick off in a largely blue state but she remains popular and they never come close. She could be trying to avoid a primary challenge from the right or just trying to maintain some party line unity. Which could be cowardice or could be understanding that the fractured party is going to lose this fight. Or, you know, both.

A day or two after I told someone that, as far as GOP senators go, Kirk seemed to be doing an okay job and I could imagine a world where I favored him over a weak Democratic candidate, Kirk decided to vote against any sort of clean resolution, stand with defunding the ACA and is spending today leading WWII vets through the memorial. I'm as well disposed to WWII vets as anyone but somehow I think that tens of thousands of families not getting their paychecks should trump a photo-op with twenty old guys looking at some monuments.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#143 Oct 02 2013 at 8:09 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,320 posts
Disconcertingly predictable or predictably disconcerting?

____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#144 Oct 02 2013 at 8:13 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,320 posts
Jophiel wrote:

Isn't her seat pretty safe?
I think it is not as safe as it has been thanks to our unpopular tea-party gov. Though I've not heard much rumblings of a strong candidate to run against her.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#145 Oct 02 2013 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,982 posts
gbaji wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Why the **** would the democrats negotiate something that has nothing to do with the budget just to pass the budget?


Spending has nothing to do with passing a budget? That's news.


The point here is that none of this has anything to do with Obamacare, which was created to use new funding avenues that are not a part of this current spending. Obamacare's marketplace launched yesterday because it has all the funding it needs independently of whether or not we have a working budget.

That's the point. There's essentially nothing the right could do to this bill to make it affect the funding to Obamacare, for or against, because it doesn't discuss it. It's not a point of discussion. A small group of conservatives on the right want to act like that doesn't matter, but the majority of the house (Right AND Left), know that's *********

Again, it would be a different scenario if this was actually a line of contention in the budget, but it isn't. It's them screaming about an unrelated issue and pretending they're connected because "spending."

Quote:
Lol! You're kidding right? It's the Democrats who have created that all or nothing condition. Not the GOP. It's the Democrats utter unwillingness to compromise on any spending at all for the last 4 years that has lead us to this condition. If they were willing to compromise, we'd have passed a budgets all along. Let me remind you that they did this even when they controlled both houses of congress. This is not about the GOP blocking the budget process. It is about the Democrats not wanting to make a budget because just passing "temporary" continuing resolutions allows them to get what they want without any scrutiny about what they're actually doing.


A bipartisan budget bill exists and passed the Senate. The only reason it didn't pass the House is because the Speaker chooses which Committees review bills before they reach the vote.

Quote:
The precedent that we require both sides to sit down and hammer out a deal on spending with the cost of failure being a government shutdown? Um... That's *normal*. What's abnormal is not doing that and just passing continuing resolutions for 4 years instead.

Compromising and reaching a budget agreement is what congress is supposed to do every single year.


And, again, the compromise happened. That bill exists. It has overwhelming support. It hasn't been voted on because Boehner won't bring it to a vote.

Quote:
Quote:
They want Obamacare gone, I get it.


They want it gone. 55-60% of Americans want it gone. It's a broken piece of legislation that doesn't work even if you don't take into account the innate opposition to it due to its socialist nature. Um... But that's really beside the point. If the Dems really really really wanted Obamacare, they could work through a budget process to fit it in with all the other spending. Of course, they'd have to give up other things to make room for it. Which is why they've avoided the process.

It's not about funding or not funding Obamacare really. It's about the Democrats not wanting to have to lose anything to get it. They haven't even tried sitting down with Republicans and asking "What will it cost us to pay for this?". That's the problem.


Obamacare doesn't need to be fit in with the other spending on this bill because it isn't on this budget proposal at all.

Quote:
Quote:
Then they should repeal Obamacare.


We're working on it.


You're doing an awesome job. Failed to repeal it, failed in your quest to rule it unconstitutional, shut down the government and it still launched...

My FAVORITE part of this is how you have decided to ignore that the majority of your party is almost as ****** off at the Democrats at this point.
This group of Tea Party Republicans have been a serious thorn in their and Boehner's side for three years now. They vote against Republican-led initiatives, they refuse to compromise even when it's to great GOP advantage, and they've actively created a situation in which Republican wins are far less encompassing or valuable because they vote ideologically instead of pragmatically.

They're willing to sit here and scream "NO BUDGET UNLESS OBAMACARE IS GONE FOREVER" while the rest of the party was looking to win by getting the tax removed from medical devices. That would have been a very solid victory for the Right.

Now they're not even going to get that, because the shutdown has effectively put all the balls in the Democrat's basket. GOP members are flocking to throw the Tea Party Reps under the bus, so they can avoid the fire from their own districts. The Left has managed to get through this relatively unscathed, since the GOP didn't even remotely stand firm on the party line of "Blame the Dems." At the very best, most Republicans are saying "Well, they're not compromising either..."

And now that Boehner has managed to **** off his entire party to support a group of conservatives who will never follow the party leadership or offer him tangible support, he's severely weakened their ability to go forward even on issues unrelated to the budget.

So, realistically, this has been a win on many layers for the Left. And the best part is that the Left didn't have to do anything except watch the GOP self-destruct.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#146 Oct 02 2013 at 8:36 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,982 posts
Jophiel wrote:
It's a little disconcerting how Cruz, Lee & Co can spend months talking about how they're going to shut down the government over Obamacare, then they shut down the government over Obamacare exactly as they said they would... and then Gbaji says how the shut down is all Democrats.

Well duh, literally everything wrong with the universe is the Democrat's fault.

Including all the in-fighting in the party. Totally the Dem's fault.

What I'm interested in seeing is what happens when the Tea Party are finally punted out of the GOP. Where will gbaji's loyalties lie?

I'm betting he's going to pretend he was ALWAYS on the side of the moderates, and that the Tea Partyers were subversive liberals who just wanted to mess things up.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#147 Oct 02 2013 at 8:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
A bipartisan budget bill exists and passed the Senate.

I'm fairly certain that the Senate budget passed along party lines. But then, so did the House budget (but only the Senate budget is a "joke" that would never pass the other chamber according to Gbaji's astute political analysis) and the next step is to set up a reconciliation committee.
Quote:
this has been a win on many layers for the Left

National Journal published a poll today stating that Americans view the Number One priority for the GOP congress is "making trouble for Obama" (32%). The No. One issue for Democrats is perceived to be "lowering health care costs" (24%).
Quote:
And now that Boehner has managed to **** off his entire party to support a group of conservatives who will never follow the party leadership or offer him tangible support, he's severely weakened their ability to go forward even on issues unrelated to the budget.

Ezra Klein has an interesting interview with National Review's Robert Costa about Boehner and how he got into this mess. Short version: Boehner has lost control over his caucus to the Tea Party "hardliners"and his previous failures have removed any sway he could have had.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2013 9:51am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#148 Oct 02 2013 at 8:52 AM Rating: Good
******
44,511 posts
Jophiel wrote:
National Journal published a poll today
- that was clearly and absolutely oversampled.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#149 Oct 02 2013 at 9:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,541 posts
Yeah, general media consensus I'm getting that regardless of which party or which house is to be blamed for the shutdown, Boehner has no balls.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#150 Oct 02 2013 at 9:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
gbaji wrote:
By passing continuing resolutions instead, they get to avoid having to justify the costs for all the things government is doing.
Just for the record this way really isn't any better.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#151 Oct 02 2013 at 9:33 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,982 posts
Quote:
I'm fairly certain that the Senate budget passed along party lines. But then, so did the House budget (but only the Senate budget is a "joke" that would never pass the other chamber according to Gbaji's astute political analysis) and the next step is to set up a reconciliation committee.


That's fair, though I'm fairly certain the sheer number of Republicans that have voiced support for the Senate bill by now is large enough to pass it.

And I think the general budget that's been sitting in committee is so similar to it that they could bring that they could easily reconcile the two with minimal political grand standing.

I sort of feel bad for the more moderate Republicans. They're willing to play nice, but their leadership is weak and the extremists of their party are insane...
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 53 All times are in CST
cynyck, ElneClare, Tasera, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (49)