Funding for government lapses as short-term spending bill stalls in the Senate

[Skroe]

Wow your reading comprehension is terrible.

I never stated any of those things. All I said was both sides need to work together to come up with a solution, or pass a Pay Our Military Act like they did in 2013, otherwise thousands of hard working men and women, and their families, who have scarified alot for the safety of the USA, could face financial ruin.

But please, show me where I stated that "the democrats need to cave!". I actually said BOTH sides need to make compromises.

Perhaps if the gap between civilians and military members wasn't so large in society today, you would understand why a majority of military members vote republican, or least have a better understanding of what military members go through.

Your lack of understanding is extremely clear in your responses though.

The gap is this large because civilian leaders of both parties - Not the military, which did everything that was asked of them - completely and utterly lost the War on Terror years ago, through epic mismanagement, stunning incompetence, corruption and compromise. But because Civilian leadership in the United States is so weak, we have not yet a President or a Congress to take ownership of the fact that America has now lost at least two wars in the last fifty years. So they keep sending 10,000 troops to Afghanistan, 17 years later.... for what reason exactly? To somehow redefine "not visibly losing" as "winning"?

The US should have ground Al Qaeda to the dust and been out of Afghanistan by 2004. In that world, the Civilian Military gap is much narrower. But in this one, because Republicans cut taxes while going to war, instead of expanding the US Army to be 800,000 strong like was needed, it kept it at 560,000 and asked two, three, four deployments out of troops. And that was followed by Barack Obama and the Democrats, which treats military service like an affliction, and tried to downscale the military even further, while expanding its missions.

You want that civilian-military gap fixed? This is how you fix it. You expand the US military by hundreds of thousands of troops and hundreds of ships, fighters and vehicles. A $150-$250 billion expansion. You raise taxes, significantly, to pay for it. And then you decide to commit big to Afghanistan and do it right, or cut your loses and get out. Getting big means 30 years with 300,000 troops there at a time.


The US military-civilian divide's origin is rather plain: the only people to take the War on Terror seriously was the US Military. American civilians didn't. Politicians didn't. Without the whole team playing, of course the game was blown.

And you know what the absolute best part is? This country is so epically stupid about this shit, that it KNEW all this stuff right after 9/11. I'm old enough to remember that political talk, about "doing it right", "lessons from Vietnam", watching out for an open ended commitment and civilian-military divide. None of this was a surprise. We knew how this could go down if we made the wrong choice.

And nationally, we made the wrong choices anyway. What does that say about us as a people?

[Vanyali]

I have not once forgot about the civilians who work for the government who are affected. And I completely get and understand everything that you posted.

The people I am talking too are people who seem to take their rights for granted, and then are perfectly fine giving the finger to those who fight for those rights.

Sorry if it irritates me.

As someone that tried (and got largely railroaded out of getting into [based on feeling my throat the army claims i have hypothyroidism despite blood tests and ultrasounds showing their doctor is a shitty conman]) for military service and has a long family history of service you're full of shit.

You're not protecting anyone's rights. Haven't for the last decade. For the last decade (few decades, actually) all the military has served as is a giant dick-wagging money-making machine that doesn't serve to deter or stop anything from hitting america because it's not actually doing anything about threats americans are facing. It's doing something about what americans are told are big scary threats and causing a self-fulfilling prophecy more than anything else. Our men and women are being killed so someone can make a profit rather than do anything remotely benefiting most americans.

[Sunseeker]

Wow your reading comprehension is terrible.

I never stated any of those things. All I said was both sides need to work together to come up with a solution, or pass a Pay Our Military Act like they did in 2013, otherwise thousands of hard working men and women, and their families, who have scarified alot for the safety of the USA, could face financial ruin.

But please, show me where I stated that "the democrats need to cave!". I actually said BOTH sides need to make compromises.

Perhaps if the gap between civilians and military members wasn't so large in society today, you would understand why a majority of military members vote republican, or least have a better understanding of what military members go through.

Your lack of understanding is extremely clear in your responses though.

Yeah no shit they need to work out a deal. Did you just figure that one out when you realized the shit going on in the government was coming back to bite you?

There was a deal and then our Dumbass-in-Chief sank it.

So don't bark up my tree for suggesting the Democrats should stick to their guns when our Dear Leader is a fucking idiot. We know we need to make a deal. We'd just rather not get fucked while doing it.

Go whine about not getting paid somewhere else, I understand you perfectly, I'm just not buying your crocodile tears.

[Skroe]

I have not once forgot about the civilians who work for the government who are affected. And I completely get and understand everything that you posted.

The people I am talking too are people who seem to take their rights for granted, and then are perfectly fine giving the finger to those who fight for those rights.

Sorry if it irritates me.

You fight for some rights against some sources that would violate those rights. You do not defend against all of them. Other people fight to defend other rights, against other threats.

Your weapon is the gun or the drone or the tank. My brother's weapon (as a DA) is subpoena.

You fight terrorists or ward off Russia and China. You defend our freedom in that regard. But what defense do you offer against the corrosive effect on democratic government by corruption? None. That is not your roles. Others do that. I would not say the above people take their rights for granted at all. But the US military does not have a monopoly on "defending freedom". It is functionary, as is everybody else.

We are at this point, nationally, as a people, because we have completely forgotten the lines of responsibility, and who does what. I mean, the founders themselves, suspicious of standing armies in general, would be aghast at this "Military First" rhetoric these phony conservatives on TV are spewing. That is plainly un-American; not because the military is unimportant (on the contrary, it is vital), but because that civilian-military gap you speak of created a weird and un-American military worship cult where suddenly yes, you do exist above the Smithsonian employee, and your financial hardship is somehow more significant than theirs.

Look, you should get paid. Everybody should get paid. Millions of people are going to go through hardship because of the failure of less than a thousand people. But this only stops for good, and we don't get a sequel, if standards, practices, behaviors and traditions are renormed and enforced.

When was the last time Congress actually passed a budget before the Fiscal year began? A decade? Maybe more? We talk about Trump as "not normal"? He's not. And neither is that abhorrent practice. And yes, that is how this situation began, because lest we forget, we are here because a Continuing Resolution that extended the last budget that was passed expired.

[Lenonis]

I actually said BOTH sides need to make compromises.

The problem is that they did. There was a bipartisan compromise and then Trump, the leader of the GOP, blew it up and now the GOP has defaulted to "give us everything we want" as their "compromise" position.

This isn't a "both sides do it" situation.

Similar to the 2013 shutdown one side isn't play fair and thus deserves the blame.

[Skroe]

As someone that tried (and got largely railroaded out of getting into [based on feeling my throat the army claims i have hypothyroidism despite blood tests and ultrasounds showing their doctor is a shitty conman]) for military service and has a long family history of service you're full of shit.

You're not protecting anyone's rights. Haven't for the last decade. For the last decade (few decades, actually) all the military has served as is a giant dick-wagging money-making machine that doesn't serve to deter or stop anything from hitting america because it's not actually doing anything about threats americans are facing. It's doing something about what americans are told are big scary threats and causing a self-fulfilling prophecy more than anything else. Our men and women are being killed so someone can make a profit rather than do anything remotely benefiting most americans.

It is not this gentlemen's responsibility to choose those fights.

That's on us. We keeep electing politicians who won't alter policies. Oh and we have had substantial political turnover. And yet, the political decisions have barely changed.


It is not his place to make a political decision. That's the civilians job. That's the American people's job. We aren't nationally up to the task. The first step would be to admit how Al Qaeda won the War on Terror because we decided to do everything wrong we possibly could after January 2002.

[Vanyali]

It is not this gentlemen's responsibility to choose those fights.

That's on us. We keeep electing politicians who won't alter policies. Oh and we have had substantial political turnover. And yet, the political decisions have barely changed.


It is not his place to make a political decision. That's the civilians job. That's the American people's job. We aren't nationally up to the task. The first step would be to admit how Al Qaeda won the War on Terror because we decided to do everything wrong we possibly could after January 2002.

I'm not saying it's rank and file's fault of those decisions. Because you're right: they're rank and file and go where they're told. But this whole shit about lording it about like they're the sole thing protecting us from all the ills of the world is bullshit, and insulting to all the members of my family who've been in the service and don't lord that shit.

Most people don't go into the military because they're ultra-concerned with "protecting our rights". That shit gets drilled in later. Most go in because they're poor or can't see another option, or are using it for free schooling. It's ultimately selfish for the vast majority of our troops, which is fine, but they try to hide that selfishness by lording about that they're the Wall the World Breaks Against, which is not fine.

[Cthulhu 2020]

nah real translation is 45 of your 49 democrats voted to shut down

and 45 of my 50 republicans voted to keep it going

So thats means that this is about 90% democrats fault that we are in a shutdown because DACA DREAMERS... grats you just cost the US 100x more than the dreamer program.. guess you won we should have just let them stay because your trying to ruin the country till we let your ticket to winning the minority vote stay.

This "logic" (using that term extremely lightly) was strangely absent from the right in the 2013 shut down.

[Justank]

I can only explain for myself. I can't read everybody else's mind, and simply being in the military certainly does not give somebody hive mind thinking.

I would like to ask this though, why focus on the one part I posted instead of addressing the entire thing? Or is it because you have nothing to say about it?

- - - Updated - - -



I have not once forgot about the civilians who work for the government who are affected. And I completely get and understand everything that you posted.

The people I am talking too are people who seem to take their rights for granted, and then are perfectly fine giving the finger to those who fight for those rights.

Sorry if it irritates me.

Pro-tip bud. Set up a Navy Fed or USAA account and get your pay sent there if a shutdown is imminent or just in general, they'll pay you during the shutdowns based on what you're usually making. And stop complaining about how little we get paid. We get allowances or simply have things covered for all the extra expenses for PCSing, deployments, etc. Yes the amount of money we get is not huge, but if you're having money issues with military pay you're simply not living within your means and you need to take another look at your budget. It's plenty to live and raise a family on.

[Gestopft]

Since 1998, Americans behavior, top to bottom, have given Democracy a bad name.

Just out of curiosity, why 1998 in particular?

[Skroe]

Just out of curiosity, why 1998 in particular?

The Monica Lewinsky scandal came into the public view.

Take a step back, let's look at the big picture.

1992. Americans win the Cold War. The Soviet Union disntegrates. Liberal Democracy explodes around the world. The Free World is ascendant. Bill Clinton is elected President in November, the first Boomer President.

1994. Shape of the post-Cold War order still taking shape. Democracy continues to spread around the world. International enusiasm for a post-Cold War, non-block based order, here as well. In the fall, Republicans get elected to Congress via the Contract With America.

1994-1997, Republicans and Clinton engage in various back and forths. Conservative Republicans ascendant in Congress. Democracy's rep is still pretty good. America's 1996 election is the most domestic-issue focused one in 60 years.

1998. Lewinsky affair comes into public light. Clinton commits perjury defending his inappropriate relationship. Entire year is consumed with the Lewinsky affair with a few short interruptions. Russian Inflation, Asian Financial crisis and Clinton Impeachement saga deliver an early, but stern blow to the functional (rather than philosophical) nature of Democracy.


2000. The 6 week Saga following the 2000 Presidential Election delivers an extraordinarily severe blow to the reputation of Democracy, namely the sorry state of America's voting procedures, and how it was handled, and eventually decided, by the Supreme Court. Although the law was followed, Gore won a larger share of the popular vote, and the result looks deeply undemocratic. Questions about legitimacy dog Bush until 9/11.

2003. The United States launches the deeply unpopular Iraq War. Becomes a global pariah until ~2005. China begins its advance, striking early deals. Russia pivots away from friendly relations with the US in small, but significant ways that are realized for their significance a decade later. America is not "leading" anyone right here. Bush's "with us or against us" line of operation neglects the interest-driven nature of global affairs... namely the fact that most countries just want to keep out of the way of larger issues unless it directly concerns them. He was forcing stands most countries didnt want or didn't need to take.

2004. Abu Ghriab abuses plus growing antagonism towards GITMO deliver a hammer blow to America's reputation around the world. People (including myself) at the time used euphaisms for various reasons, but the world saw the self-professed beacon of democracy torturing people and jailing them indefinitely without trial, exactly like an autocratic regime would do.

2005. Having won re-election, Bush is re-embraced by the liberal democratic international community, largely due to France and the US burying the hatchet over Iraq and replacement of Gerhard Schroder in Germany with Conservative Angela Merkel. America's reputation still in the toilet, but slowly recovering.

2007/2008. Global Financial Crisis and Great Recession begins, starting in the United States. Reputation of America as being on top of even economic issues demolished. The reputation of liberal democratic countries to deliver stable and enriched lives over authoritarian regimes called into question, as CHina's advance continues and Emerging Markets initially, don't suffer. Damage constrained largely to the US and Europe at first.

2008-2009. Obama's election begins the recovery of America's global reputation for real, largely due to the fact that he was not Bush. It would have been the same under President McCain, but the fact he was African American certainly showed that despite the shit its done, America can still confront it's historic demons. Make no mistake, Obama's 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was really a Peace Prize to the American people for doing something historic in electing a black man in a country that defines Slavery as its original sin. America's soft power spends the next few years recovering. But surging oil prices over the next few years and lingering unemployment dampen democracy's reputation.


2010-> 2015. A lot happened here, but the biggest one that mattered to every day people is that high unemployed and stagnant wages around the developed world (particularly in Europe) created an opening for the Hard Right or Hard Left. During this period, in the US, Canada, Asia and in Europe, citizens of liberal democracies went back and forth between center-right and center-left parties for their assemblies and/or national leader, and saw little change. Hard Right and Hard left opening created because the populations felt betrayed by the "establishment" of the political center. These Hard Right and Hard Left groups are universally far less democratic and often have ties to Marxist groups or Nationalist/Neo Nazi groups. The Euro Crisis must also be mentioned in this context.

2016-> present. The rise of Trump, the latest hammer blow to America and democracy's reputation. Early on, one writer characterized Trump as "America's experiment with authoritarianism". I think that may be a bit far, but that's broadly the reputation we've gained.



Basically across the past 20 years, early on, soon after the Cold War, democracy embarrassed itself by not holding its highest leader to the highest ethical standard, and the political-driven drama that consumed the US that year became a historic global spectacle. And from there, with the 2000 election, Iraq War, Abu Ghirab, Financial Crisis and so forth, it mostly got worse.

Trump won't do it, because he is not a leader and not a (small d) democrat in any sense of the word. He does not care for democracy. He is all about power. But it will be the job of the next President, even if that is Pence, to remind the human race why "democracy" is the only legitimate political philosophy consistent with universal human rights. And the best way to do that is for America to cut the drama politics out, engage in the highest ethical standards, and practice what it preaches.

America doesn't need some ridiculous Kennedy-esque speech. It needs a good 8 years of low-to-no drama politics with a good economy and, to paraphrase SecDef Mattis, Americans respect each other again. We do that, we'll see the sleeping giant of democracy push back against Chinese and Russian authoritarianism forcefully.

[Regalia]

America doesn't need some ridiculous Kennedy-esque speech. It needs a good 8 years of low-to-no drama politics with a good economy and, to paraphrase SecDef Mattis, Americans respect each other again. We do that, we'll see the sleeping giant of democracy push back against Chinese and Russian authoritarianism forcefully.

Sooo Angela Merkel.

[Skroe]

Sooo Angela Merkel.

Pretty much.

It needs civility in government, the rules being followed to the letter, budgets passed ahead of time rather than 6-8 months into the Fiscal Year.
It needs a largely scandal free, cooled down political environment, filled with boring people doing boring things. No absurd Democratic liberal agenda to remake society, or a backwards Republican plan to reset the clock to 1885.

Paying the bills.
Keeping the lights on.
Following the rules to the letter.
Boring. With a good economy.

America's leading problem is that at almost every level, it doesn't follow its own rules anymore. In a consequence-free society, of course anarchy and drama rule the day.

Which is entirely the point, because the leading argument that authoritarians have against democracy is the messy processes that sometimes comes from it is less disireable than the stability of the strong hand of their authoritarian regime.

Case in point, the 2000 election. Put aside if you think the end result was correct. The US did follow a messy process. Court arguments, first at the state, then the Federal level. There was no question of whose job was what and where the legal challenge should go. As a nation of laws, objectively, this is exactly how things SHOULD have been: disputes between parties worked out through a legal system. That is the mature process of a mature society.

Now to people in countries with different, or less developed legal systems, and who are unfamiliar with the US's complex local-state-federal system (most countries are unitary countries, not Federal), and suddenly it looks like a free for all. Then consider voting on decades old obsolete mechanical machines, that lead to "hanging chads", when even the developing world was using scantrons then... it doesn't look good. It makes it looked rigged.

America is not Ireland. We're not some small, globally insignificant haven. We're the center of the world. People who want us to be something that we aren't are never going to get it. We're too rich and too powerful and too big for it to be that way. This translate to that Americans must understand that our actions or inactions have global ramifications, especially today. There is no "an internal family matter", when your the US. Our successes and failures as a democracy resonate loudly.

America just elected a man who called countries in the the developing world - which is to say, where most of the human race lives - "a shithole", specifically in Africa, continent where our country has a complicated historic relation with. Imagine how that looks? We will pay for that line as a country. We always do.

After all, the President of China, Xi Jinping, isn't calling would-be partners a shithole, now is he?

Yes yes, Trump's slavish followers have spent 10 days obfuscating what Trump said. They'll be singing a different tune when China open's its first Atlantic Ocean Naval base in Walvis Bay, Namibia or something.

[Masark]

Then consider voting on decades old obsolete mechanical machines, that lead to "hanging chads", when even the developing world was using scantrons then... it doesn't look good. It makes it looked rigged.

Scantron schmantron. The only proper ballots are ones marked by hand, then put in a box, then counted using Mk1 eyeballs in a massively parallel manner.

The only electronic device used in federal and provincial voting up here is the telephone used to call the results into the returning office.

[draynay]

The only electronic device used in federal and provincial voting up here is the telephone used to call the results into the returning office.

witchcraft

[Zan15]

nah real translation is 45 of your 49 democrats voted to shut down

and 45 of my 50 republicans voted to keep it going

So thats means that this is about 90% democrats fault that we are in a shutdown because DACA DREAMERS... grats you just cost the US 100x more than the dreamer program.. guess you won we should have just let them stay because your trying to ruin the country till we let your ticket to winning the minority vote stay.

shutting down to help people is still better then shutting down in 2013 to take healthcare away from people.

so if they are responsible at least its to help people.

[Garnier Fructis]

nah real translation is 45 of your 49 democrats voted to shut down

and 45 of my 50 republicans voted to keep it going

So thats means that this is about 90% democrats fault that we are in a shutdown because DACA DREAMERS... grats you just cost the US 100x more than the dreamer program.. guess you won we should have just let them stay because your trying to ruin the country till we let your ticket to winning the minority vote stay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxim...mate_causation

[Omega10]

The gap is this large because civilian leaders of both parties - Not the military, which did everything that was asked of them - completely and utterly lost the War on Terror years ago, through epic mismanagement, stunning incompetence, corruption and compromise. But because Civilian leadership in the United States is so weak, we have not yet a President or a Congress to take ownership of the fact that America has now lost at least two wars in the last fifty years. So they keep sending 10,000 troops to Afghanistan, 17 years later.... for what reason exactly? To somehow redefine "not visibly losing" as "winning"?

The US should have ground Al Qaeda to the dust and been out of Afghanistan by 2004. In that world, the Civilian Military gap is much narrower. But in this one, because Republicans cut taxes while going to war, instead of expanding the US Army to be 800,000 strong like was needed, it kept it at 560,000 and asked two, three, four deployments out of troops. And that was followed by Barack Obama and the Democrats, which treats military service like an affliction, and tried to downscale the military even further, while expanding its missions.

You want that civilian-military gap fixed? This is how you fix it. You expand the US military by hundreds of thousands of troops and hundreds of ships, fighters and vehicles. A $150-$250 billion expansion. You raise taxes, significantly, to pay for it. And then you decide to commit big to Afghanistan and do it right, or cut your loses and get out. Getting big means 30 years with 300,000 troops there at a time.


The US military-civilian divide's origin is rather plain: the only people to take the War on Terror seriously was the US Military. American civilians didn't. Politicians didn't. Without the whole team playing, of course the game was blown.

And you know what the absolute best part is? This country is so epically stupid about this shit, that it KNEW all this stuff right after 9/11. I'm old enough to remember that political talk, about "doing it right", "lessons from Vietnam", watching out for an open ended commitment and civilian-military divide. None of this was a surprise. We knew how this could go down if we made the wrong choice.

And nationally, we made the wrong choices anyway. What does that say about us as a people?

First of all, as anti-war as I am, I do NOT view military service as an affliction. I believe that the US SHOULD increase our taxes for the purpose of military spending, except that it mostly should go to the people who served active in the military over the last 17 years (wow it's been a long time since 9/11). I am thinking a LOT of money, especially for those that served multiple deployments. Like enough to pay for a house in cash (for those with 4+ deployments).

That is topic number 1. Number 2 is: As antiwar as I am, if we MUST fight - and I have always thought that the whole Middle East war idea was bad from the start - then FIGHT TO WIN. It seems that America fights just hard enough to assure that we will have to fight another year.

At this point, my vote is that we leave the Middle East. If China and Russia gain control there - well considering how much damage we've done there (and I include Libya and Yemen in this as well) - well that would be better than us destroying our military and our reputation there. However, it seems that Trump supporters would prefer to sacrifice more American soldiers in order to stick it to the Librulz, because they are certainly NOT fighting to win. And right now they have the power.

[Lynarii]

I blame a lot of the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan on the fact that the US military has been built up in the minds of the citizens as some divinely powerful invincible force that cannot help but crush anything it opposes. This overestimation of the military's capability has lead to the idea that it doesn't /need/ any support. When people legitimately believe that the US military can take on the entire rest of the world at once without breaking a sweat, then why should they spend more of their taxes to make it even bigger?

I'm not anti-military particularly (though I do detest some of the ways politicians /use/ the military). I simply think that supporting the military should mean more than sticking a camo-colored ribbon on the back of your truck and talking about how invincible the US is.

[Deletedaccount1]

I blame a lot of the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan on the fact that the US military has been built up in the minds of the citizens as some divinely powerful invincible force that cannot help but crush anything it opposes. This overestimation of the military's capability has lead to the idea that it doesn't /need/ any support. When people legitimately believe that the US military can take on the entire rest of the world at once without breaking a sweat, then why should they spend more of their taxes to make it even bigger?

I'm not anti-military particularly (though I do detest some of the ways politicians /use/ the military). I simply think that supporting the military should mean more than sticking a camo-colored ribbon on the back of your truck and talking about how invincible the US is.

I am a non-interventionist but the military is not the (main) cause of the government's budget problems. That honor goes to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.