October 6, 2013

"The National Park Service placed cones along highway viewing areas outside Mount Rushmore this week, barring visitors from pulling over and taking pictures..."

Cones! The dreaded cones!

After I read that, this song verse played in my head:
If you drive a car, I'll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet.
ADDED: Meade reads this post and asks: "Was it even a federal highway?" Yeah, was it the interstate? Why don't they close down the whole interstate highway system? Obviously, they're not doing everything they can, they're just choosing particular things, trying to be annoying in just the right way to sculpt public opinion. They're poking at us. With orange cones. And we are annoyed. But which way are we annoyed?

AND: If the giant head of the President has blocked your sight line to the giant heads of the Presidents, here's another sculpture for you:



ALSO: The government doesn't seem to know that a lot of those visitors to South Dakota ride motorcycles. A motorcycle can get right in there between the cones.

IN THE COMMENTS: TosaGuy said:
I lived in South Dakota for five years. Orange comes don't stop anyone from doing anything in the land where every sign on a rural road has a shotgun blast in it.

Mr Obama, tear down your Barrycades!
Hagar said:
This has to be State Highway 244 that goes by Mt. Rushmore. U.S. Route 16A is farther away, and, of course, neither has anything to do with the interstate system. However, South Dakota, like every other state, receives Federal money for their highway systems through the FHWA, and per Murphy's Golden Rule, whoever controls the gold gets to rule.
That's not true in Wisconsin! Scott Walker resisted the pressure to shut down state parks.
No Federal money comes without strings, but in this case I think the FHWA would have to side with the Park Service, and I think it is not like they have any actual jurisdiction; all they could do would be to threaten to be difficult and withhold future funding for this road (and other projects?), I think.
Yeah, that too happened in Wisconsin, after Scott Walker rejected the federal money for a "high speed" train. But let's remember that at some point, conditions on spending count as coercion and the federal government cannot force state government to do its work.

104 comments:

Larry J said...

The House should open investigations into how the National Park Service is behaving. Jerk the heads of the NPS before Congress and make them testify under oath. Americans love our national parks (some say too much) but not so much the NPS.

Larry J said...

The House should open investigations into how the National Park Service is behaving. Jerk the heads of the NPS before Congress and make them testify under oath. Americans love our national parks (some say too much) but not so much the NPS.

madAsHell said...

I've always wondered what a Park Ranger does.

Now, I know.

pm317 said...

I just mentioned the NPS gone wild to my hubby and said we should all visit the National Parks close to where we live -- kind of civil disobedience. He tried to play devils advocate siding with the Rangers, that they are needed to be there to keep order and need to be paid for their services. I pointed out that they are not there to police people and put them on a leash. This country operates on trust and trust that majority behave in a civilized way with responsibility toward society at large. When you start governing as though people are not going to behave in a civilized manner that they need to be policed and put on a leash, all bets are off.

Hagar said...

Another article somewhere said it was State highways and the governor of South Dakota has ordered the S. D. highway dept. to remove the cones.

Oso Negro said...

Whether you are annoyed is probably a function of which side you support. Inasmuch as I believe that Federal employees aside from the traditional armed services are progressive Democrats, I view their actions as entirely politically motivated. This annoys me.

Some Seppo said...

The Interstate Highway System is not owned by the Federal Government. If it were, you wouldn't see the type, style, and quality of pavement change when you cross county and state lines.

The Feds provided funding and coordination to create the system but do not own or run it. Another clue: Check those "shield" signs with the I-number on it. They each have the name of the state on it, which is the owner of the highway.

Michael K said...

If I were a park ranger, I would be very unhappy at being required to do this. Smokey Bear seems to be biting lately.

Carnifex said...

I got news for all you NPS dickheads out there. "Just following orders" didn't work at Nuremburg, and it won't work for you either. Show some backbone.

TosaGuy said...

I lived in South Dakota for five years. Orange comes don't stop anyone from doing anything in the land where every sign on a rural road has a shotgun blast in it.

Mr Obama, tear down your Barrycades!

Hagar said...

This has to be State Highway 244 that goes by Mt. Rushmore. U.S. Route 16A is farther away, and, of course, neither has anything to do with the interstate system. However, South Dakota, like every other state, receives Federal money for their highway systems through the FHWA, and per Murphy's Golden Rule, whoever controls the gold gets to rule.
No Federal money comes without strings, but in this case I think the FHWA would have to side with the Park Service, and I think it is not like they have any actual jurisdiction; all they could do would be to threaten to be difficult and withhold future funding for this road (and other projects?), I think.

Hagar said...

Local and state officials tend to get very nervous if you talk back to the Feds.
I know.

EDH said...

What Obama and his minions forget is that the citizenry comes equipped with their own cones -- rods and cones -- that allow them see what is going on.

cubanbob said...

Maybe it's a self-selection bias on my part but judging from the comments I read in numerous sites the democrats are doing a fantastic get out the vote drive for the republicans.
Indeed better than anything the GOP has ever done.

The Godfather said...

Putting up barricades (or Barrycades) and cones around national monuments and parks is not an "essential" government service. Apparently more NPS employees need to be furloughed.

pm317 said...

Apparently Gov sent this letter on Oct 1 but I guess Obama did not want to negotiate.

Governor Offers To Keep Mount Rushmore Open
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Gov. Dennis Daugaard has sent a letter to the director of the National Park Service offering state personnel and resources to keep Mount Rushmore open in the event of a federal government shutdown.

betamax3000 said...

Don't Cone Me, Bro.

Big Mike said...

When you stepped into the voting booth in 2008 did you think it would come to this, Professor?

You told us your reasons at the time, and you've repeated yourself ad nauseam. You wanted the Democrats to own Bush's foreign policy. Well they do, and do you like the results?

My question remains. Do you still like the results? And did you learn anything? Did you miss the fact that Obama was a community organizer, and that community organizers, to be successful, will always resort to demagoguery and street theater to get their way?

Bob Boyd said...

When it comes to tasking federal agents with harassing citizens on behalf of The Party, this is one of the more benign examples we have seen in recent years.
The IRS, the NSA, the EPA and the ATF have done a lot more than put out cones.

Hagar said...

For that matter, Meade, the U.S. Gov't does not "own" the Interstate Highways either; it is State cops that pull you over for speeding, not the FBI.
However, the Interstate construction is nearly 100% funded by the U.S. Gov't and have very strict rules, while construction of U.S. Routes and State and some local roads have Federal participation at various rates, or specific grants, and the States and local authorities have more input as to what gets built and how.

cubanbob said...

If the house republicans had any political skills they would be introducing a bill to lease out the parks to the highest bidder. A leased park wouldn't be subject to this thuggish strong-armed tactic and would raise even more revenue for the government.

Hagar said...

But the Federal Government does not "own" any of it, unless it is built on actual Federal land.

Deirdre Mundy said...

CubanBob-- wouldn't work.. the feds have already closed the leased, privately run campsites in the national forests, even though those EARN money for the feds@!

betamax3000 said...

Fun and Games at This Point. Heart-Warming Photos of Elderly Vets Past the Barricades, People Throwing Cones in the Air: Tailgating at the Shutdown.

Then.

Somewhere in this Great Land of Ours, Amidst the Backdrop of Federally-Owned Beautiful Scenery, A Push Will Come to Shove. A Park Ranger, Over His Head: He is, After All, Not the National Guard, But That Is, In Effect, What He is Being Told To Be.

This Is My Land / You Have to Leave / I'm Going Through / I Cannot Let You Do That / Try and Stop Me: Push, Shove.

Someone Will be Hurt.

Then.

The Media Will Have Their Shutdown Park Ranger Martyr, Complete With Evil Tea Party Park Visitor Assailant.

Let's Make the Park Ranger a Woman, or Black, to Really Get the Optics Right.

Note That the Park Ranger Doesn't Necessarily Have to Die: Televised Interviews With an Arm in a Sling Will Suffice. MSNBC, MoDo NYT Columns, etc etc etc.

It Will Be the Trayvon Martin Case Overlaid on the Government Shutdown: If Obama Had a Daughter Who Was a Park Ranger, More etc etc etc.

Then.

The 2053 Government Shutdown. Young Park Rangers Manning the Barricades to Prevent People from Visiting the Park Ranger Martyr Memorial. Cones Preventing People From Pulling Off the Road to View the Addition of Obama to Mount Rushmore.

Also: in 2053 there Will Still Not Be Any Personal Jet Cars.

-b3k

St. George said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
St. George said...

Instead go to Crazy Horse Memorial about 20 miles away.

The world's largest sculpture, it has no completion date set. An entire mountain is being terraformed into the shape of Crazy Horse astride a stallion.

The late sculptor Ziolkowski started work in 1948 alone and using a wheelbarrow.

From the start, he refused government funds.

FullMoon said...

Those orange cones are not Barrycades, they are souvenirs.

MB said...

Mr. Obama - Tear down these orange cones!

pm317 said...

The 2053 Government Shutdown. Young Park Rangers Manning the Barricades to Prevent People from Visiting the Park Ranger Martyr Memorial. Cones Preventing People From Pulling Off the Road to View the Addition of Obama to Mount Rushmore.

LOL.. love it. Maybe this will make an impression on Obama, you know the narcissist.

Inga said...

That sculpture should be renamed Coney Island.

David Noles said...

At St. George. I live in SD within 2 hours of Rushmore and about 40 minuets from the Badlands. But the point I wish to make is that Crazy Horse mountain is a much more compelling story and site than Rushmore. If you're out here don't miss it. Also don't miss Custer State park. Highway 16A which someone mentioned and is near Rushmore is a very scenic route to Custer Park. Also do Spearfish Canyon. Frank Loyd Wright called it the most beautiful in America. He built a hose there.

elkh1 said...

"per Murphy's Golden Rule, whoever controls the gold gets to rule."

We let them confiscate our gold.

Hagar said...

Well, Professor, maybe "the U.S. Gov't cannot force State or local officials to do its work," but "the Feds" sure can make them regret not volunteering to do it!

A good thing to remember is that for every Federal law, rule, or regulation there is for what to do in any particular case, there are at least two other laws, rules, or regulations requiring something quite different to be done.
The result is that Federal officials have wide discretion as to what they decide to do in any one case, and great powers to make you see things their way (or else!).
And, yes, I know; I have seen them in action, and sometimes it could be quite breathtaking!

Carl said...

If the giant head of the President has blocked your sight line to the giant heads of the President[s]...

Brilliant!

pm317 said...

uh oh.. civil disobedience in action

Obama sent his OWS people who are pretending to be tea party people to throw out the cones after reading betamax's comment here about no one being able to see him in 2053.

Paddy O said...

Is there any relevance here to commons laws that allow certain rights to people to use public land? I can't imagine that would be used often, but I'm curious if there's any such background of laws in the US.

It seems that was sort of the assumption with the Occupy folks, with the problems arising due to waste or other environmental damages.

Titus said...

Is South Dakota one of the most boring states?

Who lives there?

Titus said...

Are there any fab people living in South Dakota?

Does any store in South Dakota sell Prada?

Are there lofts?

Hipsters?

Gays?

I saw some National Geographic program about these Indian people living in some God foresaken hell hole in South Dakota. The place was disgusting.

Titus said...

The entire population of South Dakota is smaller than Boston.

Hyphenated American said...

I think acts of civil disobedience against obama's closing of he parks would make a lot of sense. Moreover, someone should put the cones around the White House. After all. Obama's travels to the golf course are non-essential.

Michael K said...

"Young Park Rangers Manning the Barricades to Prevent People from Visiting the Park Ranger Martyr Memorial. Cones Preventing People From Pulling Off the Road to View the Addition of Obama to Mount Rushmore."

Since the 1970s park rangers have been armed and the martyr will probably be an 80 year old vet.

St. George said...

Southwestern South Dakota--The Black Hills--is beautiful. I don't know anything about living there, but there's much to see and do on vacation there.

And Devil's Tower is just across the border in Wyoming.
Unforgettable.

Freeman Hunt said...

What absurdity! This only makes me think government, which appears to be petty and vindictive against the people, should be smaller. Start firing people. Start with whoever ordered the ridiculous placement of these cones.

furious_a said...

Vets reliving their youth -- the Normandy beaches and Mount Suribachi were both closed once, too.

Freeman Hunt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freeman Hunt said...

So what if you run over the cones to park and get out to look? What can they do? Are they going to shoot you for looking at scenery? Arrest you? Ha!

Freeman Hunt said...

I didn't want them to gut the government before; I'd been feeling rather moderate, rather Romney-esque. Now that the "We're *trying* to help, even if not successfully" mask is off, I hope they gut the federal government. They're not trying to help anyone. They're jerks. Withholding cancer trials, doing petty things like this, yet the politically valuable all get their work arounds. Who can trust them? Vipers.

Mark said...

Those who love Obama unconditionally won't be bothered by this display of spite. But I'm guessing a lot of independents aren't happy about it.

Freder Frederson said...

I got news for all you NPS dickheads out there. "Just following orders" didn't work at Nuremburg, and it won't work for you either. Show some backbone.

So blocking roadside scenic pulloffs is the moral equivalent to the mass murder of 12 million plus people?

You have gone complete Godwin.

Freder Frederson said...

Those who love Obama unconditionally won't be bothered by this display of spite.

Spite?! What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?

MayBee said...

Are there any Democrats here saying, "Yes. This is exactly how I wanted Obama to be." ?

Michael said...


"Spite?! What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process? "

Govt is not "shut down." The only discussion, only threat, to destroy the full faith and credit of the govt is coming from the white house in an effort to scare people like the writer. No Republican has made such a threat, to the contrary they have tried to pass legislation that would make default impossoble, legislation blocked by the Senate.

Think of this as a reconciliation maneuver, a way to use the rules of government to get what you want. Not "spite" just a use of the tools at hand.

Michael said...


"Spite?! What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process? "

Govt is not "shut down." The only discussion, only threat, to destroy the full faith and credit of the govt is coming from the white house in an effort to scare people like the writer. No Republican has made such a threat, to the contrary they have tried to pass legislation that would make default impossoble, legislation blocked by the Senate.

Think of this as a reconciliation maneuver, a way to use the rules of government to get what you want. Not "spite" just a use of the tools at hand.

Inga said...

Freder they shut down the government gleefully, giddily happy about it, says Michelle Bachmann, then they whine about the realities of what they bragged about wanting to do since 2010. The crowd at the Tea Party function cheered! Woo hoo they got the government shut down! They clamored for it, they own it. I love how desperately they are trying to spin this.

Why not have a vote and pass a clean CR? A true clean CR not a "clean CR" a la Rand Paul. They DO have the votes, the Speaker won't let them vote.

MadisonMan said...

What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?

I suspect they are following the wishes of their consituents. Just like the Fleeing Wisconsin Senators were following the wishes of their consituents.

Representative Democracy is messy. That's one reason to lobby for small Government. When things like this happen, then, the impact is smaller.

Hagar said...

You might want to read the article by Dan Balz of the WaPo posted on Hot Air.

I have for some time been thinking some folks who have been voting Republican may split off and go Democrat, but an even larger bloc of Democrats may go Republican on cultural grounds, however uneasy they might feel about that and reluctant to admit it.

Birkel said...

Inga:

Alright. I accept none of your premises.

First of all, there is no such thing as a "Clean CR". A continuing resolution is not a budget. There has been no budget passed. The reason no budget has passed is because the President and the Majority Leader want the "stimulus" to be part of the baseline budgeting that was enacted in the 1974 Budget Reconciliation Act.

Why are Democrats scared to vote for a budget? That's the thing that's Constitutionally required of Congress.

And why has the President not offered the number he will accept for the Debt Ceiling increase? Why hasn't he suggested the ONE TRILLION (or likely 1.2 TR) in increased debt needed to fund the level of spending he would like?

ANSWER: Because that level of spending is politically unpalatable.

Answer: Because the President and the Majority Leader know Americans are leery of continued debt financing of today's spending.

Answer: Because to pass a budget would force Democrats who are politically vulnerable to take difficult votes for ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in spending that Americans do not want.

Answer: Because a budget would force the true deficit into the headlines instead of the false "only 700 BILLION" number.

What do I win?

pst314 said...

"the normal constitutional process" has now been redefined to mean "you must go along with whatever the majority decrees" (as long as it's a liberal majority.) All liberal talk about how Constitutional processes protect minorities has been forgotten. Those who lawfully dissent and resist are now enemies. Not opponents, enemies.

Michael K said...

" Freder Frederson said...
Those who love Obama unconditionally won't be bothered by this display of spite.

Spite?! What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?
"

This has been answered already but Where do you get " they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?"

The normal Constitutional process is a budget and appropriations bills. The budget has been blocked by Reid and Obama since Obama was elected.

The House is passing appropriations bills, as is its constitutional duty for the past 200 years.

Take a Civics class. It would help.

pst314 said...

Big Mike said "When you stepped into the voting booth in 2008 did you think it would come to this, Professor?"

Perhaps it's unkind to keep reminding Professor Althouse of this, but it is true that those of us who actually paid serious attention to Obama's past--his associates, his allies, his behavior--knew that he would prove to be a totalitarian.

"One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool."
--George Orwell

Hyphenated American said...

"What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government and threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?"

I never get any liberal to explain why they ignore that in 2006 Obama advocated for and voted for USA to default on it's debt. I guess the reason is racism, they don't want to held a white African-americAn to the same standards as the tea party.

Deirdre Mundy said...

"normal constitutional process"

Actually, that's what's going on. The constitution does not say that the House must agree with everything the Senate and President day. It says ALL THREE have to reach a mutually agreeable compromise.

Do you seriously think the founders couldn't envision political arguments? Good grief! They lived through the constitutional convention! This *IS* how it's supposed to work. The House faces reelection every two years exactly so that they WILL have to bow to the will of the people!

jr565 said...

Though I don't really agree with Ted Steven's stunt, the fact of the matter is its not republicans closing the govt.
Under regular order the a house submits individual appropriation bills one at a time not all of nothing CR's. so, there's no reason why the Senate can't approve spending for the bills the House is passing.

And if they're not, then who is actually shutting down govt? Not the house republicans, but the Senate Democrats.

Hal Duston said...

I realize I'm a bit late, but here is the exact spot on Google Maps.

MadisonMan said...

It's pretty obvious to me that the govt must now block that Google Street View.

cubanbob said...

Good call Ann. The feds aren't going to push too hard lest the states push back and the court hands the feds their head. Thats one of the little poison pills Johnny Roberts put in the ruling along with the undefined yet conceptualized outer limit to Congress's powers under the commerce clause. Then there is still the taxation question that will come before the court eventually when someone pays the tax and challenges it. The democrats may have gotten too cute with the excise tax. Without the Cadillac Tax on policies over $27,000 the argument could me made its just an income tax. But with the excise tax on the overage it becomes an excise tax on an income tax. A tax on a tax. There are numerous tax issues as yet unresolved since they haven't been challenged but it appears to me that court laid a path for the tax lawyers to tie this thing up for years and possibly have most of it struck down when the court is forced to reconsider the abortion of a piece of legislation.

Freeman Hunt said...

Don't you dare try to look at the moon. The government put a flag up there. It is off limits to your eyes.

Levi Starks said...

Yes, let's do talk about the budget.
Obama Campaigned with a promise that he would sign no legislation, or approve a budget with pork barrel spending. and he's been successful in that first budget he signed was as he said created under Bushes watch, and hence he was not accountable for the pork contained therein. And guess what? In the following 2 years of a Democratically controlled house and senate, and the subsequent 2 years of a divided legislature there has been NO budget for him to sign. So I say congratulations President Obama. well played....

donald said...

I remember a class from 4th grade where the budget process was explained. I also remember Miss Vaughn explaining how we were a republic as opposed to a democracy because in a democracy citizens were exposed to violations of civil rights.

Just a simple elementary teacher in Georgia, maybe 25 or so imparting the basic function of our federal government to a young dumb future redneck.

How fucking bad did your teachers have to be Freder and Inga that you are so stupid and ignorant of the most basic civic functions? Or are y'all just depraved lying scumbags?

I'll answer that myself. It's both.

gk1 said...

You can tell the feds put some energy into being assholes about what they are closing and it will be rewarded 10 fold when the time comes. I used to have sympathy for them, but not anymore.

chrisnavin.com said...

So, he wants to rouse and unite people through a brand of civil rights activism and collectivism into government jobs and then ends up using these same jobs to more strongly unite his own political and ideological coalition?

Auntie Ann said...

Notice the things he's not shutting down: logging on federal lands, oil pipelines that cross public lands, etc.

He isn't hindering any major businesses, only individuals and small businesses.

Hagar said...

jr565,

Freudian slip there?

But Ted Cruz is not Thad Stevens reicarnated.

avwh said...

How many millions of voters see the BS this Administration is pulling, when 17% of the govt is "shut down"?

So much for Dear Leader being the adult in the room, the calm and reasonable, "no drama" guy. Of course, that was PR BS, too - since drama, protesting and revenge is all Chicago community organizers know.

damikesc said...

Republicans would be wise to propose legislation privatizing every single federal park in existence. The Dept of the Interior has proven it cannot be trusted to handle it.

What about the spite demonstrated by a minority of the house shutting down the government

The House has passed bills to finance parts of the government and temporary bills to fund all of it.

The MAJORITY IN THE SENATE and the WHITE HOUSE won't work with them.

threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. because they can't get their way through the normal constitutional process?

Given that tax receipts are far more than current required debt payments are, that is not a threat unless Obama decides to not pay on the debt, which is the only actually mandatory payments we have.

Why not have a vote and pass a clean CR?

1) They did. WH and Senate shot it down because it wasn't as long as they wanted.

2) There is budgetary process. Dems need to abide by it.

Inga said...

A budget was passed in the Senate on March 23, 2013. Since March Democrats have requested Conference committees 19 times and have been blocked by Republicans. Yesterday and today now, some of you do not know a budget was passed in March of 2013. Why do you people not know this? Talk about low information voters.

Cedarford said...

Big Mike said "When you stepped into the voting booth in 2008 did you think it would come to this, Professor?"

=================
Most people were deeply sick of war in 2008 and were very repelled, especially women and moderates, by a guy deep into bloodthirsty warmongering, demanding major wars or big open-ended interventions against Russia in Georgia, Iran, Syria, Burma, Somalia, Lebanon. Libya.

Few that voted against the deranged McCain and his neocon cabal regretted it.

However, I do think that in 10 years time there will be former Obamites that swear they had no part in destroying democracy for a cult of personality of a cheap incompetent little Leftist who promised them "Mo' Free Stuff". And some admissions that given national collapse...Romney should have been elected in 2012.

damikesc said...

A budget was passed in the Senate on March 23, 2013.

For the first time in 4 or so years.

Since March Democrats have requested Conference committees 19 times and have been blocked by Republicans

Republicans cannot do so. Filibuster is not allowed on budgets.

Yesterday and today now, some of you do not know a budget was passed in March of 2013. Why do you people not know this? Talk about low information voters.

THERE WERE FOUR YEARS WHEN THE DEMOCRATS REFUSED TO DO SO.

They did it to keep TARP, the Stimulus, etc in the baseline of the budget.

That's simple reality.

The Senate Republicans cannot stop the budget. It cannot be filibustered.

The House hasn't refused anything.

Inga said...

GOP blocks Reid from creating conference committee on budget

And from March until October this was done 19 times.

Birkel said...

Oh, Inga!
Now that you point to the one passed in 2013, please point to all the budgets passed between the 'stimulus' and then. Now point to how the one-off stimulus became part of the baseline that the 'sequester' reduces slightly. Now point to the extra trillion in this budget that came from the one-off stimulus.

Try moving off your talking points and talk about the trillion dollars in increased spending Reid wants to preserve. And then talk about why that trillion exra spending a year won't bankrupt the country without significant economic dislocation.

I'll wait here.

B said...

The definition of passing a budget is not amending the budget from the house and then start passing it back and forth between the branches. The definition is agreement between the 3 branches of government and having a budget passes into LAW.

The Senate added so much spending to the the March 2013 budget that only a complete jackass or a liberal shill didn't see it for exactly what it was. It was a ploy designed to give the Senate Democrats the cover of claiming they passed a budget while laying the responsibility of denying the asinine spending increases at the feet of the republicans.

By the way, Obama has done the same thing since he was elected. Propose a budget completely unpalatable to both house and senate knowing full well that it would never come back across his desk and stick to him.

Anyone claiming that the Senate passed a budget in 2013 like this meant anything is exactly the sort of unserious and low information parrot the ploy targeted.

damikesc said...

Did you read the article you cited, Inga?

Because it doesn't say what you think it says.

Also, opposing unanimous consent is not stopping anything. It can still be passed by majority vote.

They didn't agree to do what Reid wanted.

Inga said...

GOP senator objects to budget conference committee again

Inga said...

"Tonight, U.S. Senator Patty Murray made the following statement on the federal government shutdown."

“Families from across the political spectrum are sick of governing by crisis and the uncertainty it creates for businesses and communities. That’s why for six months I have fought every day for the budget that I passed in the Senate to be negotiated with the budget passed in the House. But at every turn I’ve been rebuffed by Tea Party Republicans who insist that the only way to negotiate is by holding our economy hostage in exchange for outrageous political demands."

http://www.murray.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/newsreleases?ID=fa922254-74d8-44c3-859f-22cf4f112f46

Inga said...

That's only a partial quote, from her statement, I wanted to hone in on the paragraph about her continued attempts to have budget conference committee.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

B,

I have been reading "the three branches of government" everywhere the past couple of days.

Any moderately-well-educated third-grader could name the three branches of the American government. Certainly any immigrant citizen could. But there seem to be rather a lot of blog commenters just since, oh, maybe Friday under the impression that they are the President, the Senate, and the House. Um, no.

The guy who talked about when Democrats had a supermajority of "all three branches of government" (on another site, not here) was the best. I suppose any President, occupying a post with one person in it, has a supermajority by definition. Except maybe Woodrow Wilson when Edith Bolling Galt Wilson was practically running the executive branch herself after her husband's collapse, but we'll hope that's an outlying case.

Inga said...

Murray blames Republicans blocking budget conference...

Republicans wanted a conference minutes before the government shut down, a bit late wasn't it? They had six months and they blocked every attempt to have a budget conference.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Damn, Inga, I got into a discussion just a few days ago about misheard phrases that got turned into new phrases with their own life -- "tow the line," "free reign," "to all intensive purposes" -- and completely forgot "hone in." It is -- or was -- "home in," as in zero in, focus on the target. IOW, guns, not knives :-) But your version is all over the place now. I credit this to (a) the image of "honing" being evocative, and vaguely suggesting cutting away excrescenses in pursuit of the kernel of truth; (b) "hone" sounding so much like "home" -- I am sure that "meld" wouldn't mean what it generally does now if it didn't sound so much like "weld" and "melt"; and (c) the fact that m and n are right next door on a QWERTY keyboard. I think (c) started it.

Inga said...

the Senate passed a budget, Tea Party blockedCompromise with the House

This is in chronological order, complete with videos of Patty Murray and McCain's take on the TeaPublican's intransigence.

Michael said...

Is Patty Murray putting out the orange cones? Is she that pissed?

Hilarious. But hey, they stopped the Amber Alerts so all the children kidnapped by their crazed low class parents can drive away. Because that is the way to show em that the party of no negotiation means no negotiation. Fuck your kidnapped cancer ridden kids.

B said...

Michelle,

You are quite obviously right and I stand corrected. I misspoke using 'the 3 branches of government' in that context. However, you indicated that you knew that I meant that the executive, senate, and house needed to agree on a budget before it became law and was not including the judicial.

To all, understand what is happening here. There are a lot of factors in play. October's upcoming debt ceiling played into that thinking but the elephant in the living room back in March was getting the ACA funded. The Senate majority leadership needed a fait accompli in 2013 before an election year when a lot of both Senate and House members do not want to be any where near having to vote for huge budget increases. Remember that once a budget becomes law it is the baseline for the next years budget. Next year the Senate would have crowed about a low/reasonable increase budget.

The Senate couldn't get March 2013's budget increases into committee because no committee members of either party want this sticking to them. The Democrats may blame the republicans for that as a sop to the low information liberal type but they didn't want it any more than the republican committee members did. And even if the Senate had gotten their budget through committee it would have gone back to the house and died in committee there because its had vastly more spending from what the house originally sent.

Everything from March on has been aimed at forcing the House republicans to fund the ACA outside the budget process.

Obama and the senate majority leadership expected the house leadership to blink and that might be a good bet. It's worked already in the last 2 1/2 or so years. They are counting on a lot of low information liberals, and unfortunately a lot of moderates, swallowing a lot of sound bite nonsense from 'leading' senate democrats.

Birkel said...

Has anybody ever seen Inga and Senator Murray in the same room?

damikesc said...

Inga, any reason Reid can't bring a conference to a vote? Unanimous consent isn't required for any legislation at all.

cubanbob said...

Inga citing Patty Murray is hysterical. So other than pissing off people with nasty stunts like closing the parks The Great Shutdown has had zero effect. The best thing the republicans should do is keep the status quo until 1/21/17.
The longer nothing happens the more the taxpayers will realize how much of a scam most government spending is.

B said...

"any reason Reid can't bring a conference to a vote? Unanimous consent isn't required for any legislation at all."

There's no reason he could not have forced the committees either. Its arguable that the various house and senate committees are where the actual power lies in the legislatures. Certainly they are responsible for the wording and spending inclusions in every piece of legislation (Well, almost every piece. Any legislator can draft legislation on his own and put it out there for consideration. Never gets anywhere without committee support though.)

The House committees are chaired by republicans and the important ones have a republican majority. The Senate committees are chaired by democrats and the important ones have a democrat majority. That's the real power that comes to the majority party.

Patty Murray is a liar. The Senate republicans haven't the power to keep anything out of any budget considering committee. Reid could have had his budget taken up by every relevant committee with a word.

The March 2013 Senate budget was a red herring from start to finish.

Kirk Parker said...

Inga,

Re: "Senator Patty Murray..."

Have you no respect??? Please, that's Patty "Osama The Daycare Provider" Murray. Have some decency, will ya?

Theranter said...

He wants the stupid people to think the fed govt only does these nice fun things! Think about your low info voter, "gosh those mean republicans got the govt shut down and now we can't go to the park" dumbasses do not realize 83% of the fed govt still operating.

All this hoopla about the NPS -- it a win-win-win for them, they confirm the benign benevolence of the Fed Gov for idiots; they keep the "squirrel" factor going in the MSM and on every dang blog while they pull other shenanigans, and they get to continue blaming the big mean republicans.

Clever. Verrrrry clever.

jr565 said...



Freudian slip there?

But Ted Cruz is not Thad Stevens reicarnated.


er, uh... Oops. meant Ted Cruz.
But can't stand that Ted Stevens guy. I don't agree with what he's doing either.

Peter said...

Well, if Mt Rushmore is closed then they should put a big shroud over it so no one can see it.

But, they'll need a really big shroud to cover the Tetons.

eric said...

Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska is dead.

RonF said...

I'm a Boy Scout leader. I have this fantasy in my mind:

Scout: "Mr. F, the Park Ranger says we can't stop here, we have to leave. We drove all the way from Chicago for this!"

Cool. Scout, you know how to take videos with that smartphone, right?

"Oh, yeah!"

Cool. Fire it up and follow me. Record everything I and the Park Ranger say or do. And make it obvious.

...

Mr. Park Ranger? My name is RonF, I'm Asst. Scoutmaster of Troop XX. We're not leaving until the boys have had a chance to look over the monument and take pictures.

"Mr. F., you'll have to move along."

Says who? You? Fine. Tell you what. You go call the cops or call a bunch of Park Rangers and force us out of here. Every kid on that bus has a smart phone. I'll tell every one of them to make videos of a bunch of NPS rangers or cops forcing a bunch of Boy Scouts away from this area and either into our bus or into whatever you have for a paddy wagon.

Please. Do it. Right now. Let's go. Does the term "YouTube" mean anything to you? How about "Viral"?

And then turn my back and walk away.

RonF said...

madAsHell, Park Rangers are honorable people who do jobs with long hours and relatively low pay because they're living in places and doing things they love. Don't blame them for what their corrupt bosses are forcing them to do under the threat of losing their jobs.

I almost said superiors, but that would have been a gross insult to the Park Rangers.

RonF said...

pm317, "I pointed out that they are not there to police people and put them on a leash."

Go to a National Park and set up on a campsite. Wait until a few drunks pull up in an RV, crank up a generator and a sound system and start playing Metallica and drinking. Then tell me they're not there to police people.

jr565 said...

eric wrote:
"Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska is dead."

I know. and I don't agree with what hes' doing either while he's dead and in the ground.