8 ms·

One of the things that needs to be understood is that this is intentional. The Grover Norquist "drown it in a bathtub" contingent of the Republican party is la

• perfmode 8y ago
  It's really disappointing to see how much the executive branch is getting away with.
  • crankylinuxuser 8y ago
    Ive asked before, but what do we do if a political party and the president they put in office is taking over the country? If I read the founding fathers, violence would be called for. But I don't mean me, or even a group of my buddies. This seems like, esp with the forceful quitting of Gen. Matt is, could indicate a potential coup situation in the military. And we already aren't paying a branch of the armed services: US Coast Guard. This terrifies the living hell out of me. I see no exit ramp; no amicable discussions; and the country further dissolving at the bureaucratic seams. And it seems intentional.
    • pathseeker 8y ago
      What are you talking about? These people are still in office by election. The Republicans gained seats in the Senate. There is a large portion of the country that thinks the Republicans are fine and that Democrats are the problem.
      • komali2 8y ago
        Last check, 56% blame Trump, 36% blame Democrats. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-14/trump-took-responsibility-for-shutdown-and-voters-give-it-to-him https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-14/trump-too...
        • notafish 8y ago
          Given the midterm senate votes (59.3% D, 39.1% R), that can be easily squares with most Democrats blame Trump and most Republicans blame Democrats. Which brings things back to the substantial advantage that the more rural states give the Republicans in the senate, which would have a good shot and ending the shutdown if they wanted to.
    • komali2 8y ago
      If, in 2 years, heinous shit is done by the Republican party to prevent the Democrats from turning this whole clock back 4 years, then yea, it may be time to turn to drastic measures. Until then, we can expect the system to work - significant damage will be done by the Republican party for 4-8 years, and, as is tradition, the Democrats will spend 8 years fixing it.
  • slg 8y ago
    A surprising amount of the American political system was built around our natural human desire to avoid being shamed. Once you have a political figure who is shameless all the rules chance.
    • golemotron 8y ago
      I'm a centrist but I saw as early as 2015 that shame was being overused. Shamelessness should be an expected escalation.
    • netsharc 8y ago
      A figure? Seems to me many in Washington were shameless before Trump, when they can lie to people about death panels so they can deny them healthcare, or "we need to tax the rich less!", etc. Or announcing support for a policy and denouncing it after taking lobbyist money...
      • solveit 8y ago
        There's everyday politicking, and then there's Trump.
  • asdff 8y ago
    This is what happens when all the checks and balances are 'on the same side.' The Republican party is an ideology that demands lockstep participation, every candidate from your county treasurer to the POTUS spouts the exact same half dozen talking points while actual policy positions are deliberately obfuscated. The only time Lindsay Graham and other big GOP names split from the madness of the party is when the optics leave them with no other choice, and they will say the bare minimum. See the half measures given to 'penalize' Rep. King.
    • pathseeker 8y ago
      > spouts the exact same half dozen talking points while actual policy positions are deliberately obfuscated. This is exactly what happens with both parties. It's a byproduct of the party system. Republicans: small government, better business environment, etc Democrats: strong social safety net, everyone pays their fair share, etc
      • thaumasiotes 8y ago
        I think it's interesting to think about this in the context of term limits. Athenian offices were strictly term-limited, except for the position of general. People apparently felt that having military experience in that role was more valuable than the benefit of term limits would make up for, and it's hard to blame them for that. But the general, able to serve for life, the only island of stability in the government, accumulated all the political power. This mostly defeated the purpose of having term limits on any office. American presidents are term-limited, but American political parties aren't, and policy -- in terms of the solutions, but also in terms of the questions that get asked -- is set by the parties. I think this is more than just a coincidence. On the other hand, Senators and Congressmen are not term-limited, but they don't seem to accumulate much in the way of political power.
        • Armisael16 8y ago
          A big part of the problem is that congresspeople can’t hire and retain good staffers long-term - the pay isn’t good enough and cost of living in DC has gone up drastically. This hamstrings Congress - they can’t really develop their own solutions and are forces to rely on outside sources for legislation. On a related note, did you know that more money is spent by businesses on lobbying than the federal government spends on all of Congress? (Also, senators are congresspeople.)
  • pathseeker 8y ago
    It's not though. Vetos can easily be overridden by the legislative branch so this is coordination between executive and the Republicans of the legislation. "Trump is doing this and is unstoppable" is a false narrative and is the reason that "Trump is compromised by Russia" is a senseless explanation.
    • jquery 8y ago
      I'm not sure why you're being downvoted for stating facts and reasonable opinions. I've been on Hacker News long enough I'm allowed to call out increasing the Reddit influence (which is why I visit less and less). It's getting worse. It appears Hacker News is no longer an adult forum to discuss controversial things in a sober manner. The guardrails Paul Graham put in place are beginning to break as Hacker News ages and the immigrants are able to use the downvote button.
      • fzeroracer 8y ago
        Fearmongering like this does not for a reasonable argument make. Especially when you're invoking language like calling people you don't like 'immigrants'.
        • sattoshi 8y ago
          Why do you seem to imply that "immigrants" is derogatory? I'm an immigrant. I'm not proud of being an immigrant but nor am I ashamed of it, it's just a characteristic. Redditors moving to hackernews can be called immigrants as they behave much in the same way. They have their own culture and background which they bring with them. Of course, they may assimilate but it doesn't seem to be working too good lately. I personally have wound up on hackernews maybe 5 years ago, but I have definitely seen a decline in discourse over the last three years or so specifically. I generally don't interact much as I often feel like there are people far more knowledgeable on a particular topic than myself and my comments would be little more than noise. You seem to have taken a similar path with most comments being on political topics, with echoes of champagne socialism. Fundamentally, I came here for the technology. I understand that discussions of politics are inevitable on this post in particular, yet I dread the day when the comments will be reduced to "orange man bad" as is the case on Reddit. Perhaps, I am just afraid of progress.
  • benatkin 8y ago
    I'm also disappointed by progressives who don't acknowledge the role of the legislative branch in all of this, starting with Paul Ryan endorsing Trump back in June 2016.
  • rattlesnakedave 8y ago
    Agreed, the fact that they have sprawled out to include all of these unchecked executive agencies with non-essential bureaucrats on payroll deciding the day-to-day of American life without any checks is appalling.
    • wwweston 8y ago
      Without any checks or oversight at all! Shameful! Well, OK... there's obviously one little check. Like, the staff of these organizations are literally not getting paid right now because of a funding impasse. So, obviously there's some regular oversight about who gets what kind of funding. And come to think of it, all these organizations and jobs were created by act of congress and/or executive prerogative, with scope prescribed by the relevant orders and law. But who are congress and the executive accountable to anyway? And who writes these so called "laws"? Who are the laws accountable to? Wait. They're written by members of congress? And carried out by the executive? Huh. OK, but other than that, totally unchecked! Again, who are "congress" and the so-called "president" accountable to? Who made them "officials"? Oh, yeah. Voters. So actually, there isn't any defensible sense in which one can say "unchecked" at all, actually. Now that we're here, it's almost as if the only way one could use the term "unchecked" is if they're not using language in an attempt to actually describe the world, but out of intent to characterize inaccurately without a supporting argument. Propagandize. Or, I suppose, if one had already had one's mind hijacked by such propaganda. But who would suspect that someone named "rattlesnakedave" might actually be engaging in that sort of commentary?
• ryandrake 8y ago
  On the other hand, I think we are finding out how “essential” some of these institutions really are. During this shutdown, besides these workers unfortunately not being able to work and get paid, normal life is still going on. Actual essential things are still happening. Armageddon is not happening. Sure, forms are not getting stamped in triplicate, and inspectors are no longer inspecting inspectors, but these are “paper and ink” problems. As a taxpayer, I see that life is still going on while these jobs are not getting done and I might eventually ask, do these jobs even need to exist? What about my life changes if that stack of papers no longer gets stamped and moved into another stack?
  • barrkel 8y ago
    Sure. And then you find out your kids get cancer 10 years later and you wonder why nothing was done about all that toxic waste?
  • slg 8y ago
    The comment that started this thread mentioned how the shutdown is creating an environmental ticking time bomb in back of their shop. Just because you personally don't immediately feel the repercussions of the shutdown doesn't mean those repercussions don't exist.
    • rudedogg 8y ago
      I think their point was that the ticking time bomb is only caused by regulations, which they can no longer comply with. The situation would be better for them if they could just get the oil recycled from their typical tank, but they need approval for that, so they are falling back to using drums in the parking lot. I doubt any of us trust companies to do the right thing most of the time, but I think we all agree some regulations are dumb, and a loss for everyone except the people whose jobs depend on them. For clarity, I have no idea if the tank inspection is a dumb regulation. And I realize without the regulations, they'd probably be dumping the oil behind the shop somewhere which we obviously don't want.
      • ryandrake 8y ago
• tgb29 8y ago
  I hope the shutdown ends soon so I can pay taxes.
  • thechao 8y ago
    Congress can end the shutdown tomorrow, if 2/3rds of the House & Senate are willing to vote on a spending bill. The executive branch is unnecessary.
    • NicoJuicy 8y ago
      They shouldn't agree with something that no one wants. They could have passed it when the Republicans were in Congress.
    • sangnoir 8y ago
      > if 2/3rds of the House & Senate are willing to vote on a spending bill. Only if the House and Senate leaders decide to put the vote to the floor. Even 100% (less one) support is powerless if they can't vote on it.
  • 6502nerdface 8y ago
    “Direct Pay is continuing to process payments as normal during the government shutdown. Continue to make your tax deposits and payments according to your normal schedule.” —directpay.irs.gov. Of course.
• zaroth 8y ago
  Strange, last I checked there isn’t a bill on the President’s desk. The shutdown has now cost more than Trump wanted to spend on border security to begin with. If it wasn’t clear that everyone here is just playing politics, it should have been after Nancy’s letter to Donald about the SOTU. But your last paragraph says it all. If you believe, without any evidence, that the President of the United States is a foreign agent, talk about it on /r/politics please.
  • kxrm 8y ago
    > Strange, last I checked there isn’t a bill on the President’s desk. There isn't a bill on his desk because McConnell won't let it happen because Trump won't sign it. Your reading of this situation is incredibly simplified. Trump by virtue of McConnell is absolutely a big reason why we are in a shutdown.
  • int_19h 8y ago
    There isn't a bill on president's desk, because the Speaker of the Senate refuses to allow a vote on any bill that the president claims he won't sign (which includes the bill that Senate has passed originally).
    • zaroth 8y ago
      Of course. And what’s stopping Congress from coming together with a compromise bill the President will sign? Last year we had a bipartisan bill with $25 billion in Wall funding and DACA amnesty. Now he’s asking for $5.7 billion and has said he wants to negotiate. There is a long, long prescedent of bipartisan negotiation in these matters. The new Speaker of the House has said she will absolutely not negotiate and claims border walls (which we have in spades already) are immoral and racist. Ok then! Several days ago Donald met with Chuck and Nancy and asked if he signed a CR opening the govt for 30 days, would they take up wall funding and Nancy said No. There’s nothing stopping either “side” from unilaterally taking a simple step to fully open the government. So logically everyone is to blame.
      • fzeroracer 8y ago
• techslave 8y ago
  yup, it's pure politics. Trump could have gotten his wall when republicans had both the house and the senate. He didn't push it because not enough republicans wanted it I guess, and he wouldn't shutdown the government based on his own party not funding the wall. Now that the dems have the house, he (and the republicans) can just blame the dems. But if congress really wanted to end this, they can just pass a budget with enough votes and override the president's veto. But instead, the republicans sit back and blame the dems, without having to admit to trump's base that they don't want a wall. It's reprehensible.
  • jquery 8y ago
    Easy solution, the Dems can help fund the wall and the shutdown is over. Why not? They've repeatedly says walls don't work anyway, and the cost of the wall is a rounding error in the federal budget.
    • techslave 8y ago
      it’s not the cost really. although it will easily balloon to 5x the cost (initial overrun plus maintenance) it’s still too small to care about. the shutdown has probably already cost more than the nominal wall cost. the problem is it’s a symbolic, umm symbol that is hard to walk back from. another problem with your argument is that it’s blame shifting.
• jessaustin 8y ago
  Wow Grover is lucky that the new House leadership agreed to work with him on this dastardly plan. What was the fig leaf they came up with? Something about a shovel-ready project in Texas and New Mexico? I love it, that somebody decided to have a contest of stubbornness with Donald Trump. When we wrestle with pigs...