Several government officials tell TMZ ... most of the Camp David employees are still on the job and will stay on the job during the government shutdown. That includes chefs, gardeners, electricians -- everyone who keeps the place up and running. In all, we're told more than 250 Camp David staffers are still going to work and getting paid.

Mind you, Camp David -- located in Catoctin Mountain Park in Frederick County, Maryland -- is a 180-acre compound built and run specifically for Presidential R&R. It has a pool, tennis courts, a skeet range, bathhouse, bowling alley, horseshoe pit, cabins, and lots of other stuff.

Since when is the President's personal recreation squad considered essential personnel?
[LEFT]
[/LEFT]

IggyPride00;1512154 wrote:Erick Erickson from red state reported today that only 15 of the White House's usual 90 personal servant staff have been allowed to continue working.

In non-shutdown times that equates to 22.5 public servants per Obama family member.

I assume that was similar for prior administrations ... what it tells me is that (SURPRISE! SURPRISE!) we probably have a spending problem.

"Hello. My name is Uncle Sam. And I am a spendaholic."

Belly35;1512149 wrote:Has the Michelle Obama 1.9M staff been cut yet.... you can only do so much, with so little

Well, she had to cut back on her tweets.

http://twitter.com/FLOTUS/status/38508548027593932

Due to Congress’s failure to pass legislation to fund the government, updates to this account will be limited. #Shutdown

TedSheckler;1512177 wrote:Well, she had to cut back on her tweets.

http://twitter.com/FLOTUS/status/38508548027593932

LMAO...that's because she no doubt has a paid staffer to tweet for her (just like most celebs).

"In a government shutdown, Social Security checks still go out on time," Obama said. "In an economic shutdown, if we don't raise the debt ceiling, they don't go out on time."

All holy hell would break loose in this country if the government stopped sending out SS checks.

Obama knows that, which is why he is already planting the seed that they will be withheld if the debt ceiling isn't lifted.

The next step will be him telling the general public to call Republican congressmen and ask them where the check is.

He has a game plan all ready to go if they don't raise the debt ceiling on the 17th.

IggyPride00;1512187 wrote: He has a game plan all ready to go if they don't raise the debt ceiling on the 17th.

They'll raise the debt ceiling, but if Obama wants to put this behind him he will need to sit down and honestly negotiate meaningful reforms. Otherwise, they will just punt until shortly before 2014 elections, or just after those people would come into office.

Obama has replayed this act so often now that he's being tuned out just as much as anyone else in Congress. I think Americans are waking up to the fact that both parties are very much responsible for the gridlock.

if Obama wants to put this behind him he will need to sit down and honestly negotiate meaningful reforms.

Read a Washington Post article today that said he feels stronger about anything he has in his presidency that he won't negotiate on the debt ceiling.

He basically looks at it like if Republicans know they have to raise it to avoid default then don't give them anything for doing their job. If they don't, then they own the ensuing fiscal calamity.

He thinks yearly brinksmanship over it is bad for the presidency (himself and future successors) and doesn't want to further weaken the office by giving congress something every time they come up against the debt ceiling when it is their fault for appropriating more spending than the debt limit allows.

IggyPride00;1512193 wrote: He thinks yearly brinksmanship over it is bad for the presidency (himself and future successors) and doesn't want to further weaken the office by giving congress something every time they come up against the debt ceiling when it is their fault for appropriating more spending than the debt limit allows.

I think (haven't verified it) that raising the debt ceiling has frequently been accompanied by concessions/cost cuts. A majority of Americans feel it should work that way. And it's only logical - you're having to raise the debt ceiling because you continue to spend more than you take in.

What Obama is doing is abdicating leadership, yet again. He is the head honcho of the Democratic party and has the ability to build a compromise. Your quote above is a complete cop-out to avoid any substantive spending cuts.

If Repubs manage to take the Senate in 2014 Obama will deeply regret this childish brinksmanship. If the status quo remains in 2014, Obama will be remembered as the POTUS who presided over, and contributed to, the most divided and ineffective government in decades. But I'm not sure he cares. His goal would seem to be to remain above, outside and unaccountable for the fray in the hopes of building a Clintonian influence after his time in office.

I think (haven't verified it) that raising the debt ceiling has frequently been accompanied by concessions/cost cuts.

Rarely, and at the very least nothing near the scale of what we got in 2011 as far as cuts.

To show you how much things have changed, back in the early 1980's Tip O'Neill (then House majority leader for the Democrats) only asked Reagan for hands written notes to all 243 of his members asking them to please raise the debt ceiling. The notes were delivered the next day, and the debt ceiling was raised.

Reid and Obama are simply two-faced liars. Just go back to 2006 for their comments on this issue at much lower deficit levels. The debt ceiling has been wielded in such manner many times, not to this degree because the situation was never so severe nor the Dems so unreasonable. They are liberals who demand spending increases without offering real cuts - the sequester was a fluke, they never thought the Repubs would stomach that.

Let's break this down:
Obama says Congress has to make good on its promises.

But Obamakare was passed without a single Republican vote

Now with massive deficits and massive debt, you want to add another expensive entitlement. Seems perfectly logical to cut an entitlement that hasn't been implemented, and that is actually consistent with what Obama is saying about Congress addressing its spending problem. That is exactly Congress exercising some restraint on its spending commitments with really no harm.

Republicans should dig in and demand Dems come to the table with at least $2T in cuts or the House won't fund Obamacare. The debt ceiling exists PRECISELY for when one party refuses to honestly and seriously address spending. I'd bump the debt ceiling to carry us about 9 months. And the I'd say we aren't funding Obamacare until we can all agree on a plan that balances the budget in 10 years.

Thomas Friedman was on NPR tonight likening the Tea Party to the American version of Hezbollah.

gut;1512287 wrote:Reid and Obama are simply two-faced liars. Just go back to 2006 for their comments on this issue at much lower deficit levels. The debt ceiling has been wielded in such manner many times, not to this degree because the situation was never so severe nor the Dems so unreasonable. They are liberals who demand spending increases without offering real cuts - the sequester was a fluke, they never thought the Repubs would stomach that.

Let's break this down:
Obama says Congress has to make good on its promises.

But Obamakare was passed without a single Republican vote

Now with massive deficits and massive debt, you want to add another expensive entitlement. Seems perfectly logical to cut an entitlement that hasn't been implemented, and that is actually consistent with what Obama is saying about Congress addressing its spending problem. That is exactly Congress exercising some restraint on its spending commitments with really no harm.

Republicans should dig in and demand Dems come to the table with at least $2T in cuts or the House won't fund Obamacare. The debt ceiling exists PRECISELY for when one party refuses to honestly and seriously address spending. I'd bump the debt ceiling to carry us about 9 months. And the I'd say we aren't funding Obamacare until we can all agree on a plan that balances the budget in 10 years.

That is ridiculous and not at all realistic.
Honestly, what would make the D's come to that position? Really?
What would make the President flip on his biggest accomplishment?

It is like the D's stopping the Bush tax cuts back in the day.
But, whatever, keep living in this fantasy world.

Tell ya what. If what you say occurs, then you have accept, and get the R's to really push for full Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reform.
You have to say to old people, your benefits are getting cut. Good luck with that.

Oh, and also real, deep cuts to defense. Otherwise, you are talking about cutting at the margins.
Until the R's really accept drastic cuts to the mandatory spending, all this talk is bullshit.

I'm sick of it. And, really, the R's are just shooting themselves because the spending is still increasing for this insanely stupid shutdown.

IggyPride00;1512340 wrote:Thomas Friedman was on NPR tonight likening the Tea Party to the American version of Hezbollah.

I wouldn't go that far, but they are honestly the most idiotic party in a while. Reason eludes them.

gut;1512195 wrote: If Repubs manage to take the Senate in 2014 Obama will deeply regret this childish brinksmanship. If the status quo remains in 2014, Obama will be remembered as the POTUS who presided over, and contributed to, the most divided and ineffective government in decades. But I'm not sure he cares. His goal would seem to be to remain above, outside and unaccountable for the fray in the hopes of building a Clintonian influence after his time in office.

What bullshit land do you live in to think the R's have any chance in 2014?
Moderates, needed to win Senate seats, are killing the R's.

ptown_trojans_1;1512341 wrote:What would make the President flip on his biggest accomplishment?

Just a spitball, and I mean that, but might the president playing a central role in ending this shutdown be a big accomplishment in its own right? Theoretically, he could come out looking cleaner and still salvage a "game-changer" legacy.

Again, it's just a top-of-the-head idea.

ptown_trojans_1;1512341 wrote:Tell ya what. If what you say occurs, then you have accept, and get the R's to really push for full Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reform.
You have to say to old people, your benefits are getting cut. Good luck with that.

Same as telling those on any governmental assistance, "It's going away." Sauce for one is sauce for the other. It's interesting how there are those who are so intense in their support for pruning back or eradicating "entitlements" until you touch on one that affects them.

ptown_trojans_1;1512341 wrote:Oh, and also real, deep cuts to defense. Otherwise, you are talking about cutting at the margins.
Until the R's really accept drastic cuts to the mandatory spending, all this talk is bullshit.

This is factual, and something more "fiscal conservatives" do need to come to terms with. It really seems as though there is a cognitive dissonance among professed fiscal conservatives when it comes to DOD and DOHS spending.

ptown_trojans_1;1512341 wrote:I'm sick of it. And, really, the R's are just shooting themselves because the spending is still increasing for this insanely stupid shutdown.

I'd be curious to see a comparison of what we're "spending" now versus what we'd be "spending" otherwise. Have you seen such a comparison floating around?

ptown_trojans_1;1512342 wrote:I wouldn't go that far, but they are honestly the most idiotic party in a while. Reason eludes them.

You would not go that far? Are you serious? Its not even close. Not even in the same ballpark. The idea that this thought is not condemned forthright and then in this post is supplemented with criticism of the tea party is quite telling of the animosity that has been fomented against them.

When the tea party starts lobbing rockets indiscriminately into DC or sends suicide bombers the comparison is valid. This kind of inflammatory rhetoric is quite frankly disgusting and drives a wedge between the disputing parties. Lets hope a mentally unhinged person is not motivated to act on this kind of bullshit. History has shown that horrible wars and unspeakable atrocities have been sparked by this kind of shit. People that unjustly spout this shit need be without qualification taken to the woodshed.

or sends suicide bombers

Liberals have been calling them economic suicide bombers for years now.

IggyPride00;1512402 wrote:Liberals have been calling them economic suicide bombers for years now.

Pots have done that to kettles for ages.

IggyPride00;1512402 wrote:Liberals have been calling them economic suicide bombers for years now.

Yes and I find the "real American" or "unpatriotic" rhetoric disgusting as well. Lets just hope the central planners in DC figure out they can't manage 300+ million people and "compel" them to order their lives as they see fit via the tax code before its too late.

ptown_trojans_1;1512344 wrote:What bullshit land do you live in to think the R's have any chance in 2014?

In case you did not remember the R's did quite well in 2010 in the wake of Obamacare. Taking state legislatures in a census year. A decade of ramifications. A lot will change by 2014 but congressional districts will not.

gut;1511790 wrote:You are, again, wrong. You are forgetting about all the component manufacturers (the "auto industry manufacturing" does not comprise solely the OEM's).

The entire govt isn't even shutdown, and it's not like it's one giant entity but more a conglomerate of many entities/functions. It's simply not an apples to oranges comparison. Just be man enough to admit you put your foot in your mouth and move on.

and you are forgetting about all of the contractors that rely on government funding to operate. so increase the millions of govt employees by a few more if you want to play that game. and yes, the government is shutdown. people wont work for free forever. I cant travel for my job, I cant receive training, administrative staff isn't at work, we cant even buy paper for the copy machines, if my govt car breaks down, we cant fix it (which isn't good since I spend a considerable amount of time in it). just because your mail shows up still, doesn't mean the other 299,999,999 people in this country aren't feeling some effect.

ptown_trojans_1;1512341 wrote: I'm sick of it. And, really, the R's are just shooting themselves because the spending is still increasing for this insanely stupid shutdown.

So you propose the Repubs do nothing? It's long past due someone stands up and demands some fiscal accountability in Washington.

They control the purse. That is what the Constitution says. They can say we are not funding Obamakare because this country cannot afford another unfunded entitlement. If Obama and the Dems want to shutdown or battle over the debt ceiling, then THEY are the ones choosing Obamakare over Social Security, Medicare, etc.

It had to come to this sooner rather than later. Cutting spending and entitlement reform is not popular, and it won't be pretty. But it must be done. And ultimately it will have to be a combination of benefit cuts and FICA increases. But those reforms can be smaller/more palatable if they address about a 20% across the board cut/freeze on discretionary spending. It can be done responsibly over 10 years, which would amount to mostly annual increases of @ 0.8%.

Glory Days;1512466 wrote:and you are forgetting about all of the contractors that rely on government funding to operate.

LMAO, just give it up. You thought you were being slick with the "who else sends 40% of their workforce on vacation?". I gave you an answer. Just stop digging yourself such a hole. It's really not defensible. Yeah, we can play this game - I also didn't mention the dubious "10 jobs" (but well greater than 1) every auto manufacturing job creates.

Just stop. You made a foolish comment, accept it and move on.

majorspark;1512395 wrote:This kind of inflammatory rhetoric is quite frankly disgusting and drives a wedge between the disputing parties.

Amen to that.

It is VERY TELLING that the Tea Party has to be labeled extremists and viewed as radicals because they are demanding some fiscal responsibility in Washington. I mean, I don't recall anyone calling Harry Reid a terrorist. Had he waited 4 years he could have perhaps compared it to the Obama Congress more than doubling those deficits and debt. The hypocrisy among the Dems runs deep:
"Any objective analysis of our country's fiscal history would have to conclude this administration and this rubberstamping Republican Congress are the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of our country," Mr. Reid said. "In fact, no other president or Congress even comes close."

Also from 2006. Hmmm, John Boehner talking about the need to increase awareness and understanding for the cuts. Maybe all this "financial terrorism" really isn't just for show but a necessary evil to bring the crisis front and center for American people.
"To go in and start making cuts without first helping people understand the problem, the extent of the problem, and the fact that these programs are not sustainable for the long term is, I think, political suicide," he said.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/politics/16cnd-spend.html?_r=0

gut;1512468 wrote:LMAO, just give it up. You thought you were being slick with the "who else sends 40% of their workforce on vacation?". I gave you an answer. Just stop digging yourself such a hole. It's really not defensible. Yeah, we can play this game - I also didn't mention the dubious "10 jobs" (but well greater than 1) every auto manufacturing job creates.

Just stop. You made a foolish comment, accept it and move on.

haha alright, keep pushing that square peg through the round hole with your apples and oranges comparison. figured you might be able to see the intent of the question, guess not.