Legion to D.C.: Stop the shutdown now

Legion to D.C.: Stop the shutdown now

On the eve of a House hearing about how the Department of Veterans Affairs is being affected by the government shutdown, American Legion National Commander Daniel M. Dellinger is calling upon Congress and President Obama to settle their differences immediately, for the sake of America and more than 20 million veterans.

"The time for bickering and political brinksmanship is over," Dellinger said. "It is now time for our government in Washington to stand with – and not against – our men and women who have served this country with honor and sacrifice. Do Congress and the White House truly understand what it means to eliminate a veteran’s sole source of income? Benefit payments to our veterans will soon end if the government shutdown goes on. Who is going to take responsibility for the despair that will surely follow?"

Dellinger, who voiced his concerns Oct. 4 at a press conference in Washington, said The American Legion’s anger over what the federal government shutdown is doing to America’s veterans is strictly nonpartisan. "Democrat, Republican, Independent alike, all are failing America’s veterans by refusing to cooperate," he said. "We have a genuine crisis in leadership in our nation’s capital. With the government closed and a debt ceiling about to be breached, our veterans aren’t the only ones who will pay the price of political arrogance – the entire country will."

VA Secretary Eric Shinseki will be the sole witness at an Oct. 9 hearing before the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. In a statement issued by the committee, the hearing’s purpose "is to clarify precisely how veterans, VA programs and employees will be affected by the shutdown in both the near and longer term."

On Sept. 25, VA announced that 95 percent of its employees would either be fully funded, or required to perform excepted functions, during a government shutdown. Two days later, the department indicated that benefits claims processing and payments would not be affected by shutdown. However, VA reversed its stance in a Sept. 28 memo, saying that funding for claims processors and beneficiaries would run out by the end of October.

The serious impact of the shutdown on veterans reached a more critical stage Oct. 7, when VA announced it had to furlough nearly 10,000 workers because of funding shortfalls. Loss of this work force means the department can no longer process GI Bill benefits claims, conduct personal interviews and hearings, offer educational or vocational counseling, or provide outreach activities and programs.

The reduced work force also means that American Legion service officers are unable to use office space allocated to them at the regional offices. The Legion has more than 2,600 accredited representatives across the country who help veterans file claims for pension, disability and other VA benefits.

"Let’s get away from all the politics and talk about the real desperation that so many of our veterans are facing," Dellinger said. "Imagine how will it feel to be a veteran living month to month on a VA benefits check that may not be paid in November? Imagine how veterans are going to feel – who are sick or disabled because they served this country – if they are no longer able to provide the basic needs of their families?

"We’re talking about food, shelter and electricity. We’re talking about survival for people without any safety nets. How does Congress and the White House feel about putting thousands of veterans at risk of eviction, homelessness or worse? And why are they creating such despair for our veterans?"

According to the Legion, the Veterans Benefits Administration issued more than $758 million in benefits payments in September alone.

Dellinger said The American Legion, through its Legislative Division in Washington, is pressing Congress each day to find a solution to the shutdown. "And find it quickly," he said. "It’s called compromise. Get off the talk show circuit and pick up the phone."

More in Veterans Benefits Center

 

Greg Bryant Post369

October 10, 2013 - 10:58am

How can congress get payed and vet's not?????????

Carse

October 14, 2013 - 11:31am

Though the Obama administration barricaded open-air memorials and even previously threatened to arrest World War II veterans on “Honor Flights” to see their memorial, they allowed pro-amnesty demonstrators, including many illegal immigrants, to use the National Mall, which was supposed to be closed due to the shutdown, for a rally in support of comprehensive immigration reform. Democrats in Congress—like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi—were allowed to ride to the event in golf carts, as Breitbart News reported. That's how.

Bob C.

October 10, 2013 - 10:17am

It is more than "obama care." Raising the debt limit is the other issue, which I do not support. The White House needs to look up the word, negotiate.

bobcook

October 9, 2013 - 6:02pm

Our Congress is composed of paid politicians. When each side has drawn such hard lines on this subject, it reveals something more than just party politics, in fact many current members may have served for the last time when the elections come around again. NEVER THE LESS we must know that there is something fundamentally wrong with Obamacare for such dramatic and climatic battles. Look at the voting, these Congressmen have voted consistently and almost unanimously to fund the Federal government minus Obamacare even Though they may suffer the political ramifications for their convictions. Maybe it's time for all Republications to stand behind our Congressional Representatives and applaud them for the courage under fire that they have exhibited. All Veterans swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, perhaps now is the time as civilians to continue upholding our sacred Oaths.

Robert Kelly

October 11, 2013 - 10:18am

Right, On if they would read it and do it Great but they are too big they think they doing the right thing but they are not licensing to the people that put them in office. So next time they will not put them back they all will be replace with someone new.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:03pm

Something wrong with the bill? Fine, get the votes and change, repeal, amend, or whatever you want to do. What is going on now is not courageous, it is an affront to our Democratic Republic form of government. It is an acknowledgement that they cannot defeat the law on the law's merits, which is the proper form to pursue, not parliamentary blackmail.

Ben Strong

October 9, 2013 - 12:37pm

American hero...Ted Cruz and Our other pro-Americans did not create Obama's 'Marxistcare' that has caused the shutdown. If you are going to Washington DC to represent Us...Get your damn story straight and go after the real culprits that are destroying Our nation and US Constitution.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 12:55pm

Do you think that upholding funding for the entire government because you don't like a piece of legislation that has been duly passed, signed, and upheld is something other than destroying the Constitution. Think real hard before answering.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:31pm

They are only holding up funding for obamacare. Whew that took a lot of thought. NOT

Mike Long

October 9, 2013 - 2:44pm

Right on Sandbox Vet! It is a crime when 20 extremists who are trying to circumvent the law of the land can hold the entire country as hostages. "Congress" and Obama are NOT the ones with the guns to our heads, they are representatives of the majority.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 3:35pm

You are correct. It is not every single member of Congress who is at fault. In fact, there are House Republicans who don't really want to do this either, they just fear ouster by a Tea Party-backed candidate in future elections, so they fall in line. What I fear more than anything else is the legitimizing of this type of tactic as a valid, future option for lawmakers of either party to use. It's terrible and totally un-Democratic. How do I know this? Easy. How loud would the Republicans be screaming if the shoe was on the other foot? And they would be correct in condemning the Democrats for engaging in this type of childish nonsense.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 6:42pm

Childish non sense? You mean like closing open air memorials? Closing roads like sligo creek park here in MD. Every day the goverment is shut down is a good day. And the house at last count has passed and set to the sen 26 spending bills to keep the government going and to keep vets payments going. The sen has held at last count ZERO votes to pass anything. WHO is shuting down government Obama and Harry Reid. THATS who.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 6:59pm

These aren't spending bills when they specifically exclude funding for certain laws. They are second bites at the apple. Let me ask you this, if Democrats were the ones holding up funding over a law they didn't like, what would your response be then? And, what have you say about Boehner on Sunday morning talk show acknowledging that back in August he pledged to send a "clean" CR to the President for signature, but then backed out and reneged on his promise? Still think it's the "Obama Shutdown?" Give me a break.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:40pm

Laws do one thing. They take away freedoms. The only law writen and passed in the last forty years thatsb worthy the paper it's writen on is right turn on red.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:25pm

The House which controls spending has said they will pay for every thing but obamacare. Tell me again who shut what down. And are you saying that a politician told a lie. Oh MY. Obama never told a lie did he.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:30pm

The House Republicans shut it down via their end around the Constitution that they claim to cherish so much. The law was passed, signed, and upheld under challenge. You think Obama should just back down and allow this to happen? Would you respect a Republican President who backed down if the shoe was on the other foot. Get real.

A.G. Mendive

October 9, 2013 - 11:57pm

I really do not understand why you keep on ignoring the reality of the situation. I previously posted that "the Supreme Court decision did not give a “clean” upholding of Obamacare. The court effectively rewrote the law by allowing states to opt out of Medicaid expansion, and other pieces of Obamacare are still being litigated in federal courts, such as the mandate that employer-required insurance must include objectionable abortifacient drugs" furthermore, the way in which the court rewrote the law to make it a "tax" means that the law is now in question because it had to have started in the house of representative to be constitutional, not the senate so this also will have to be litigated. So let’s agree that they should pass those parts of funding the governmenr with which all of them agree and this way avoid some of the stupidity and meanness that is so much on display. With regards to those things to which either part objects, this should be discussed and compromises reached.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:34pm

There is nothing unconstitutional about not funding a bill. If it where thats what the libs would be screaming instead they have taken the road of making life as misserable as they can for all americans especialy vets. And i'm sure you like that.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:38pm

Again, I'll say it again. I'm not a liberal. You don't think a minority of lawmakers that don't fund a law, thus making it untenable is an end around the "pass, sign, interpret" principles of the Constitution? Answer this: What would you be saying if Democrats pulled this same stunt on a Republican president and shut down the government? The right would be going nuts.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:57pm

You are a liberal. Also it's not a minority of law makers. Minorites don't get things done. The majority in the House is doing just what the PEOPLE of AMERICA sent them their to do and that was stop this obamacare law. This obamacare has nothing to do with health care. It is a take over of 1/3 of the us economy. Wake up dude. If the problem was that there were 40 mil people that had no health care [ your lib numbers ] The easy fix would be to raise taxes on everybody and buy health ins. for 40 mil. end of problem. What do the libs do with not one single repub vote and massive fraud and give aways they pass a 2800 page law that no read and said tuff toenails. Did you know that when you sell your house 2% of the sale goes to the goverment to help pay for obamacare. Do you know what that means? Youe house just lost 2& of it;s valvue. Well we are fighting back. We elected a majority in the house thats doing it.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 8:06pm

Just because I want sanity restored and am calling a spade a spade does not make me a liberal. I have done nothing to defend the substance of the law and have only commented on the process that is ongoing, so your problems with the law itself I will not address. And I said a "minority of lawmakers" on purpose. There are 535 lawmakers (House+Senate) and its 232 House Republicans holding up the funding bill. That is a minority. Clearly your statement is correct, that minorities don't get things done. Exhibit #1: The entire situation we are conversing about. Nothing is getting done. Again, I will ask, what if the Democrats shut down the government over a law they didn't like, would the Republicans roll over and just say, "Oh well, guess we lose here." Yeah, right. The Fox News talking heads would be screaming themselves horse about treason etc. I just don't want this type of malfeasance to be a valid tool in the future for either party for any duly passed, signed, and upheld law.

HwitBera

October 9, 2013 - 3:01am

I find it "IRONIC" that you blame "Congress" when one of the two entities that make up the Congress of the United States, The House of Representatives, has made concession after concession on the CR Bill. It is the Democrat-controlled Senate which has joined the President in drawing a "line in the sand" (is this somewhat reminiscent of Syria), regarding the total funding of ObamaCare, and which refuses to even consider a bill which affects that "train-wreck" of increased costs, decreased benefits, lost employer insurance, and fines (taxes by any definition) if someone chooses to opt out of the program. Please set the record straight on this point. The "rubber-stamp", puppet media will continue to cloud the issue if they are left unchecked.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 11:26am

It's called providing funding for a duly passed, signed, and upheld law of the land. The Republicans are failing to do this and are clearly at fault. You can dispense with the Fox News talking points now.

DLee

October 9, 2013 - 11:51am

Sandbox - Your comments indicate you condone PrezBros inability to conduct the office that you probably elected him to. He is the main reason for the USA being broke and the Citizens lacking confidence in the Federal Government. Dirty Harry is just as guilty and puppy dog following the PrezBro.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 11:59am

No, my comments actually come from a person who is middle of the road and is disturbed by those Tea Party Congressmen that are undermining the democratic process I swore to uphold when I served. I did vote for Obama twice, but I also voted for Bush twice and Clinton once (and that is my only votes due to my age). I'm not interested in a flame war, but I will say your reference to the president is clearly racist and I (a white male) for one don't appreciate. Afford the man the respect of the office at least.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:37pm

Respect is earned not given.

Joe Kirkup

October 9, 2013 - 1:26pm

It embarrasses me to have served in the same military as a guy like you who doesn't even understand the Constitution or the separation of powers. The job of the House is to control government funding. That is their job under the Constitution. You didn't know that?? Think first, write later. Joe Kirkup 22 Calvin Ave Lehigh Acres, FL

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 2:41pm

I don't understand the Constitution? Let's go back to Saturday Morning Cartoons to make this real simple. Bill originates and is passed in Congress. Executive signs bill, making bill a law. Supreme Court upholds law as Constitutional. What the House is doing is wanting a second bite at the apple and, further, what they are doing is decidedly un-Constitutional. Can you please point me to where this same scenario has ever played out? It hasn't because respectful politics has been reduced to hyper-partisanship. Let me put it another way. What if the Dems were pulling this same stunt? Would you be so agreeable then? (spoiler alert: Fox News would have a collective aneurysm)

OEF/OIF Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:06pm

Sandbox, the house of representatives is trying to get their first bite at the apple. The ACA was written by democrats, voted on by democrats and signed into law by democrats. Yes the bill originates in the house, it is vetted and funded and then sent to the senate. Did you happen to take a look at the process of the ACA back in 2010? It was concockted in the whithouse, sent to the senate for "proofing" and then to the house to fund where yes that woman of the hour pelosi said " I guess we'll have to pass it to see what's in it." It was a piece of garbage then and it is a piece of garbage now, even half of the democrats in the house doesn't like it in it's current form. It was rammed down our throats and signed in to law by a man who considers himself above the law and has shown nothing but contempt for the very document that we swore to defend and he swore to uphold, it sickens me that you, one of my fellow bretheren would defend such a man. Maybe you should look in the mirror and decide just exactly what kind of country you want this to be; a dictatorship or a democracy. I don't stand with the TEA party but I do stand against ALL enemies, including that one in the whitehouse and the one in the seante.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:33pm

So does that mean that every law passed with a majority Republican Congress with a Republican President can be invalidated by these same abhorrent tactics? I didn't think so either. Here is the deal, if it is indeed a piece of garbage, and I have not comment on the substance of the law itself, then get the votes and change, repeal, or amend it. It's that simple. And that is the way it works.

OEF/OIF Vet

October 10, 2013 - 12:25am

If it were me, I would have fought it right up to the witching hour and then let it loose, full on on the country and then when everyone complained about the train wreck that it is and everyone was looking for a head on a platter, the only heads would be reid, pelosi and obozo. And the only reason you nor any of the supporters will commint on the content of the bill is because you know it is a train wreck

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 6:32pm

Sandbox; Slavery was once the law of this land, are you saying we should go back to that? How about prohibition, we had it now we don’t. Libs say that they one the election and Obamas president so we the people of this country should sit down and shut up. Well the great TEA party WON the house of reps and the house controls the money in this country. So all you libs sit down and shut up. The house will spend the money as they see fit. Not the pres. And not the sen. The HOUSE! UncleJohn

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:35pm

I don't think anyone has ever said that any politician is above critique and scrutiny. And I'm not sure what slavery has to do with anything here. That was abolished via Constitutional Amendment. Here, the law was actually UPHELD, not abolished by anything, so your apples to oranges argument fails miserably. By the way, I'm not a liberal, I am in the middle of the road. I understand anyone who is not a Tea Party nut is considered "liberal", but I'm not a liberal regardless.

MBeware

October 9, 2013 - 1:50am

As a follow-on to my previous comment, I believe we might even get the benefit of some LEADERSHIP, which is sorely lacking in Washington, DC these days!

Roger McDonald

October 9, 2013 - 1:15am

Obamacare was "passed" by both houses of congress and signed by POTUS and conditionally deemed "constitutional" by the Supreme Court but, I read somewhere that the "fine" to fund, that Chief Justice Roberts said had to be called a tax originated in the Senate, which I've heard can't levy taxes, so the logic goes that until the house legislates a "tax" Obamacare isn't constitutional. If most of this is true the house is doing exactly what it should be doing.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 1:43am

Wrong, wrong, wrong. There is no such thing as "conditionally Constitutional." If there were a problem with the law, the SCOTUS would have invalidated it and actually they are good at telling the Congress what they need to change in order make it Constitutional. So, now can you agree that the House Republicans are being schoolyard cry-babies?

OEF/OIF Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:11pm

They did invalidate it as a law under the interstae commerse act. It was validated as a tax and since the House controls the purse strings they are doing what needs to be done. get your facts straight before oyu type.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 6:34pm

No sandy your WRONG WRONG WRONG. Its not a health care law its a TAX and that is excatly what the sc said.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:42pm

I think I didn't make it clear in my post. I said that Commerce Clause was argued much more than Tax and Spend, but that the SCOTUS decided it on that ground (Tax and Spend). I am aware it was not decided on Commerce Clause, I think I just wasn't clear since I put both ideas in the same sentence.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 7:40pm

How is what I said wrong then?

Ben Strong

October 9, 2013 - 12:52pm

You need to pull your head out of the 'sand-box' and wake up to the truth. The Republicans didn't create Obama's 'MarxistCare'.They are trying to save Us from this Marxist monster ( liveliketherestofus-DOT COM/obamacare/?utm/source=taboola ) and this is causing the 'shutdown.' Wake up and smell the anti-American 'Socialist Sewer' that people like you have created.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 3:20pm

The truth is this. First, I'm, politically at least, in the middle of the road. It's sad that a middle of the roader such as myself is considered a radical liberal or radical conservative in the current hyper-partisan environment. Second, I'm just speaking truth, more about the process than the merits of the law. Fact: It's been passed, signed, and upheld. If this law is the great destroyer of America, then gather the votes and repeal, amend, or otherwise change the law in a proper session of Congress. That is how the process works, not the abhorrent tactics currently being undertaken. (As an aside, I would be equally passionate about calling out Democrats if the tables were turned and they were trying to undermine a law that they didn't like)

A.G. Mendive

October 9, 2013 - 7:07am

the Supreme Court decision did not give a “clean” upholding of Obamacare. The court effectively rewrote the law by allowing states to opt out of Medicaid expansion, and other pieces of Obamacare are still being litigated in federal courts, such as the mandate that employer-required insurance must include objectionable abortifacient drugs. The concept of tax and spend legislation having to start in the House and not the Senate is also in the works as a matter to be determined with regards to Obamacare that as you may remember was always stated by the Senate Democrats WAS NOT A TAX.

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 11:21am

You are right and you are wrong. The teeth of the law was the personal mandate. That was upheld as an exercise of Congress's power to tax and spend. If that fell, then the law was worth about the same as the paper it was written on. But what you must understand, the Court can validate or invalidate laws as it sees fit and is not bound by what is said during committee or debate (called legislative intent)or on cable news networks. Here, what members of Congress called the provision is irrelevant. Tax and Spend was not argued nearly to the extent of the "Commerce Clause" argument, but that is what the SCOTUS decided it on. What you are right about are that there are other challenges to the law and they will play out, but it will not gut the law like the challenge to the personal mandate would have, if successful.

American Veteran

October 9, 2013 - 12:23am

The Great Imposter/Pretender does not want to piss of 20 million veterans. On Sunday, Oct 13th some veteran groups will be in DC along with some 5 million truckers. If the Great Pretender continues with this :poop: he may have 20 million veterans on Sunday.

Skipper FingerLakes

October 9, 2013 - 8:49am

There will be Patriot Riders escorting the Hero Flights to the Memorials . Anyone going to support our Troops and Hero's driving to DC needs to put T2SDA on your window, then the protesting Truckers will let you through. Please get this info out to those who are planning on joining.

Lucy Marie

October 8, 2013 - 11:56pm

I retired with 22 years in the Military. I receive a service-connected compensation for injuries received while on active duty. I invite all of you to look to the past history as to how a U.S. President and the U.S. Senate and Congress treated Veterans of the "Great War." (World War 1) A PBS program sponsored by the Disabled American Veterans... Should prove an eye-opener. It is entitled "The March of the Bonus Army" The founder of IAVA has said the Congress and the Senate treat Military and its Veterans as if it were a favorite chew toy. They want our votes. They talk-a-good-talk, but never walked-the-walk. How many vets in Congress and the Senate?

Donald Smith

October 8, 2013 - 11:39pm

Those who voted for OBama surely owe the rest of us an apology. A real nut case and is tearing this country apart here and abroad.

Sandbox Vet

October 8, 2013 - 11:59pm

I'm a proud Legion member and middle of the road voter and have voted for both parties at particular times. But, when my choices are McCain with living joke Palin and Romney with right wing extremist Ryan, I will never apologize for voting Obama/Biden.

Ben Strong

October 9, 2013 - 12:57pm

Your a 'talk the talk'... 'leftwing' Obamatard and here's your leader.. theobamafile-dot-com commieblaster-dot-com

Sandbox Vet

October 9, 2013 - 2:58pm

I'm not affiliated with either party. I am simply stating facts and drawing the rather obvious conclusion that what these extremists are doing is decidedly un-Democratic and un-Constitutional. You can throw names around all you want since that's the only argument you have, but to be sure, I would be just as angry if the Democrats engaged in these absurd tactics.

OEF/OIF Vet

October 10, 2013 - 12:32am

Sandbox, I think you need to go to a rehab clinic, you are clearly addicted to the kool-aid, because the democrats in the seante are engaging in the same tactics that you say the "extremeists" in the house are engaging in, so where's your outrage at them. I guess you missed the fact that the democrats in the senate refused to fund the VA so that they could pay the death benefits to fallen comrades, a bill that passed 407-0 in the house; or is that not what you consider extreme?

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 11:55pm

You sure President Bush didn't have anything to do with tarnishing our image abroad? Might want to at least rethink that part of your post.

A.G. Mendive

October 8, 2013 - 8:50pm

David Mo Post 21 “All Presidents have had the ability to grant exemptions and waivers across the spectrum of different legislation. “ He does not have the authority to change the law unilaterally, he could not decide to postpone the implementation of part of the law (in the case of Big Business) but apply the thing to the “peasants”, so please stop. “And the government employees are "exempted" by the fact that they already have health insurance and this law does nothing to change that. “ Again, you are wrong; Senator Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) During the 2010 debate over the Affordable Care Act, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, proposed an amendment requiring members of Congress and their staffs to purchase health insurance though state exchanges. Democrats co-opted the idea as their own and inserted it into the bill. The provision was silent about who would pay for that insurance, or how those payments would be treated. The exchanges were intended for uninsured people who couldn't get health insurance through their employer or qualify for Medicaid. Those who had access to health benefits meeting minimum coverage levels could still purchase insurance on the exchanges — but without a subsidy and using after-tax income.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 9:07pm

Yeah, I was talking about the other hundreds of thousands of federal employees, not the 535 lawmakers and their staffs. Granting exemptions and waivers is not unilaterally changing a law. Was it a change in the No Child Left Behind Act when the Bush Administration granted waivers to certain states? No, it was just a waiver based on well-supported reasons. As far as the "Big Business" waiver, already 85% of those workers are covered by their employer provided insurance, so the waiver affected relatively few people. The reason a personal waiver was not granted is to get health insurance coverage in the hands of those who need it most, as you point out, the currently uninsured who will be receiving a subsidy for the purchase.

Independent

October 9, 2013 - 5:59am

the reason waivers were given to Big business was they were afraid that they would drop their insurance coverage before the election if they had to comply with Obamacare

clanbailie

October 8, 2013 - 8:07pm

Is this an organization devoted to the defense of the Constitution, or is it an advocacy group for taking property from others for ourselves? I'm having a hard time determining which. Let's stay focus. We need to be asking what is needed for the long-term survival of our Nation? Blaming two sides of a budget debate is not helpful, as is suggested by American Legion National Commander Daniel M. Dellinger.

Thought

October 8, 2013 - 7:21pm

Impeach Obama and Biden. Vote Congress and the Senate out of office, replace them with new people.. all of them if necessary, or recall them at once.

Bill Robbins

October 8, 2013 - 10:59pm

SIR, You have my vote, washington dc is just a CESSPOOL filled with those BOTTOMDWELLERS we the people KEEP Electing. ALL Parties need to be tarred and feathered and run out on a rail to the state cesspool California!

paul kucsma

October 8, 2013 - 10:09pm

I agree! Get them all out of Washington. They ALL have demonstrated their inability to run the government and their unpatriotic selfish motives.

Sea-Bee

October 8, 2013 - 8:02pm

Yes IMPEACH Obama.... But bear in mind, We voted him in. Silly Americans we are?? We DID NOT learn from his last term's foul-ups, and fumbles. *sigh!* And still, we elected him. I served just like you folks, and voted right. Life is okay, for now. WELL SAID!! Pass it on

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 7:29pm

The last election only proved that you can bus in enough voters to about 30 districks in 5 states and win.

Sandbox Vet

October 8, 2013 - 9:41pm

On what grounds would you propose we impeach Obama? What actual crime? Or is this just a superlative way to say you don't like him; much like the misguided lefties that wanted to impeach Bush?

MightyMike77020

October 8, 2013 - 7:51pm

Yes.

timstdy

October 8, 2013 - 6:04pm

Wonderful! Not only will my Appeal that has been in since Oct 2010 STILL not make any progress but I will not receive my disability pay. Thank you President Obama!

Thought

October 8, 2013 - 7:23pm

Obama and Congress and the Senate should not receive their pay.. let them see how it feels.

Sandbox Vet

October 8, 2013 - 6:09pm

Really? You sure there isn't another group that may bear some responsibility for this? Or does that inconvenient fact not fit your narrative?

Vargas

October 8, 2013 - 6:30pm

I agree, what about those that are funding the destruction of the middle class via their politicians. I say we the people must take action. Lets create a class action suit against the money source, the rich, their PACs. for the damage they have done

biker bob

October 8, 2013 - 5:56pm

Vietnam Era Vet an Obama should have been impeached a long time ago.

richard allen

October 8, 2013 - 9:28pm

YES AND RUN OUT OF THE COUNTRY

Slide

October 8, 2013 - 6:56pm

You are just like every other dumb ass Vietnam Vet. Remember Bush? Well you should asshole he's the one who got us into this mess.

OEF/OIF Vet

October 10, 2013 - 12:40am

Dude, ease up, we're all on the same team here, don't disrespect people who have served, or are you one of the trolls who has never served, I bet that is the issue with your disgusting, vile, disengenuous comment.

tommyB

October 9, 2013 - 5:21pm

Actually bush didn't get us into this mess. It was Clinton and his mandate that people who couldn't afford home should get one. But Bush did not do anything to stop it

Skip764

October 9, 2013 - 5:08am

Excuse me Slide, but why do you refer to those of us who served in RVN as "dumb ass Vietnam Vets"? We went and served, when it wasn't the "popular" thing to do. When Bush left office, we had a budget. Bush, Clinton, and other presidents had to compromise. So what makes Obama so special? Merely because he says it is so doesn't make it so. They ALL need to grow up.

Skip764

October 9, 2013 - 5:08am

Excuse me Slide, but why do you refer to those of us who served in RVN as "dumb ass Vietnam Vets"? We went and served, when it wasn't the "popular" thing to do. When Bush left office, we had a budget. Bush, Clinton, and other presidents had to compromise. So what makes Obama so special? Merely because he says it is so doesn't make it so. They ALL need to grow up.

Doggy Daddy

October 8, 2013 - 7:36pm

That is BS. You ought to smell what your shoveling. Who is doing the spending like there is no tomorrow?im1a

Bob Wyman

October 8, 2013 - 6:33pm

Wow! You sure got THAT right! So the First Amendment rights of military personnel are almost worthless. We are prevented from visiting OUR military memorials in Washington DC . . . while illegal aliens gather on OUR federal mall today. We are prevented from attending Catholic Mass on our military installations because contract priests are prohibited from the same bases. Commissaries in Hawaii are closed forcing OUR families on the hyper-expensive economy. Routine medical treatments and operations are postponed at military medical installations - while civilians at civilian medical facilities have no such postponements. The Commander-in-Chief has failed the troops. The Commander-in-Chief has failed all veterans and their families.

SkipperFingerLakes

October 9, 2013 - 9:26am

Look up Million-Vet-March-on-the-Memorials on FB , also Special Operations Speaks out on FB 2 Millions Bikers to DC on FB started this revolution on 9/11 to show Respect to our Nations Veterans and the Military. It has now turned into a National Protest. 10/13 will make HISTORY -Million Vet March on the Memorials has links to local Memorial Protests. BTW, if driving DC or State Capitals around the country, put T2SDA on your window, and the Truckers for the Constitution will let you through. Others will be on the Over Passes with American Flags to Support our Veterans right to their Memorials, and our Constitution. Bless our Veteran's and Heros. Please spread the word.

Sandbox Vet

October 8, 2013 - 6:35pm

So, shouldn't we impeach the members of Congress that shutdown the government, too? Pretty sure Obama would have signed the appropriations bill had the House Republicans not pulled the "take my ball and going home" level of maturity from the schoolyard playbook.

skip764

October 9, 2013 - 5:12am

It seems to me Obama is the one who's taking "his" ball and going home, until Congress recognizes his "supreme authority" as President and CIC.

Alex Umrichin

October 8, 2013 - 5:32pm

The fact is, is that 87% of the Federal Government is open for business. The 13% closed is closed to make it as uncomfortable for people as possible. Closing open air monuments which require no "operating" is just a plain stupid bureaucratic decision emblematic of an idiot President who could pour water out of boot with the instructions on the heel.

US ARMY74

October 8, 2013 - 4:55pm

Hi,I'm a veteran from the Vietnam era,I gone be short speaker of the house,OPRN the Goverment and give us what we Earn,I'm 100% Disabled so I need the money as well you are collecting your's.

James Franklin

October 8, 2013 - 11:42pm

USARMY74, you are not the reason for this shutdown. Veterans always suffer when Leaders who make key decisions stumble in the middle of corruption! The center of our nation is with you! The leaders who constantly prosecute each other with vicious tongues over programs that have yet to work. We have to many focused on prosecution and, not enough on helping our vets. Keep me informed of how it is affecting you. I listen to all our non-profit veterans groups their commanders and how they stand on this issue. I am a retired military Viet Nam vet. I have been helping in this battle since 1963. I pray that we get leaders who will focus their energy in and on the real issue's Like our National Commander's. The service officer's who helped many of you get your disability rating are very concerned. The freedom's we have are possible because of your sacrifice. I am fighting for you. Hang in there!

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 5:04pm

US ARMY 74 - put your sights where they belong, Obama and Reid. The House has sent several resolutions to provide for us but all have been rejected outright by the Senate Majority Leader and the POTUS. I personally recommend that one way we could fund the VA is to cut all retirement benefits from Congressional Representatives and Senators who have not completed at LEAST as many years of service as is required to obtain a military retirement. As it is, they only have to complete 1 term in office before receiving a 100% retirement benefit. How's that for a fair compromise?

Jim Fitzgerald

October 8, 2013 - 6:27pm

The government shutdown, debt, and other socio-economic problems could not possibly be the fault of the radical Marxists occupying the White House, could it American Legion? Take a stand against the enemy, or we will.

timstdy

October 8, 2013 - 6:08pm

Also make sure that "serving" members of Congress receive no pay during the shutdown!

W. A. Martin

October 8, 2013 - 4:37pm

I am a U.S.Army Veteran who served my country from 1968 to 1972. During that period of time I served wherever doing whatever was asked of me by my commanders. In the Army and at home I endured the racist, bigoted attitudes of those who thought themselves above the rest of us,regardless of race color or creed, simply because we were wearing a uniform of the U.S. military. Interestingly enough, eventhough we were disrespected, I still DO NOT remember a single case where it was an excepted practice to disrespect the person in the position, holding the title of the PRESIDENT of the United States of America. Isn't this one of the reasons that we felt that our mission as U.S. servicemen/women was so important?? Why then are we so willing to embrace the position of members of a party in "our" House of Representatives, who go about their business of whatever it is that they claim to be doing for the good of our nation, while showing such outright disrespect for our duly elected President. I say "get off of your high horses, remove your undercover white hoods, and treat this country as the intelligent people that we are and pass the budget and debt ceiling legislation that we(a.k.a., those that you serve?) deserve to have. If you feel that there valid changes or corrections that are needed in the A.C.A. then set up a comittee from both houses and both parties to discuss ways to fix the problem areas." That is my opinion, like it or not.

OEF/OIF Vet

October 10, 2013 - 12:48am

So are you asserting that those who disagree with this whitehouse are akin to the KKK? I was just wondering since you made reference to "white hoods" and if that is the case, isn't your accusation as vile, if not more vile than the critisism of a sitting president that has no respect for the people who fought the wars so that he, a minotiry, could have the opportunity to be the first president that is not white? Isn't your comment a slap in the face of those who would exercise their rights under the constitution that we swore to uphold and defend? Just trying to understand your scolding when you yourself engage in backhanded insults, that's all.

CVS-38

October 9, 2013 - 8:43am

First, thank you, Mr. Martin, for your service to our country. And secondly, thank you for bringing much needed RESPECT and intelligence to this conversation. Gratefully, A fellow American

R.W.Sgarella USMC Ret

October 8, 2013 - 7:31pm

Your words are on target but SNFU Loveya bro.

John M Dowley. Sr

October 8, 2013 - 5:50pm

W. A. Martin , you have got it exactly right. It was of some relief to read your letter and see that there are people like yourself who understand the challenges the President has faced since being elected. I am glad he is standing up against the thugs in congress who care nothing about veterans lives or their benefits, much less the good of the country. Thank you for stating the obvious so eloquently.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:46pm

Mr. Martin, Thank-you for your service during the Vietnam era. I know it was a difficult time to serve and the crap you had to deal with was unwarranted. As to your comments, I don't appreciate the veiled racist implication. Just because I and those I elect to office disagree with you or the POTUS does NOT make us racists. Also, the oath you took upon entering service in the armed forces was FIRST to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign OR DOMESTIC, and only SECOND to obey the orders of the President of the United States, etc.

wamartin

October 8, 2013 - 6:03pm

Reread the comment that I made and you will see that I was not making a veiled racist implication about whether or not you agree me or others. My racist reference was and is about the level of disrespect that is blatantly shown toward "our" president. Now if you find this objectionable, that maybe you should do some soul-searching to see if my comments were aimed at you or not. Having already done my own soul-searching, I felt the need to say what I said.

timstdy

October 8, 2013 - 6:21pm

Mr. Martin, Any implied, misunderstood, or whatever racist comments in your original post should take nothing away from your point of the blatant disrespect shown to the Office of the President. The PERSON of the President is open to all constructive and correct facts good or bad of his actions while serving, just as is any other elected official. The exception to that is our Brothers and Sisters currently on active-duty who are much restricted in any comments concerning the serving Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces as dictated by the UCMJ. Thank you for stating your opinion and standing by it. This is a right we all served to protect.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 5:11pm

I happen to be white, and it is hard for me to understand the level of hatred and totally unreasonable opposition that I see to this President and EVERYTHING that he does. Political opposition is one thing -- the Repubs hated Bill Clinton, but this is at a whole new level. I believe that part of it HAS to be race. And you know what, that is a real shame, because this man is more eloquent and more reasonable and intelligent than 99% of the white people that I know. By they way, it is the job of the President to carry out our laws, and the job of the Supreme Court to decide whether those laws are constitutional. If Congress believes that a president is violating the law, then it is their responsibility to impeach him. If you decide that you will disrespect a president because you think that he is not following the constitution, believe me when I say that this is way above your pay grade.

timstdy

October 8, 2013 - 6:27pm

Mr. Navarro, Many of your comments may be very well correct but stating that you think the serving President is violating the constitution is at the pay grade of EVERY citizen of this country. EVERYONE! Your statement of "If you decide that you will disrespect a president because you think that he is not following the constitution, believe me when I say that this is way above your pay grade" is completely wrong.

Alex Umrichin

October 8, 2013 - 5:37pm

BJ Clinton was 1) a draft dodger and 2) a serial abuser. Obummer is a Socialist who wants to make you dependent on government. Neither is a friend of the American people. As for hatred? No, just an abiding difference of opinion and a complete rejection of the liberal mindset.

AndersonHatfield

October 8, 2013 - 4:10pm

Ever since I returned from Iraq (100% total and permanent Disabled ) I have endeavored to put my life back together. I have done the best that is possible in spite of chronic pain and depression issues. This shut down crisis has stressed me out worse than the War itself. How dare the politicians threaten, withhold or attack the very benefit that allows me to exist what is left of my so called life. I assure you this. If I do not recieve my "Compensation" (not a free be, a compensation for loss that I suffered ) I lose everything. When that happens, I have no choice but to end this miserable existence after finalizing my Last Will & Testament. The House and Car will be sent back to the bank, but at least my survivors can have a yard sale of my pocessions. The weapon and coin collection should get 5-8K but I had wished to leave them more than that. It is a truth that those crooks in DC have my very life in their hands. God Help Me

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 4:50pm

Anderson, I encourage you to listen to Jared T. You were put on this earth for a reason. I encourage you to continue to seek that reason. You may feel right now that your situation is without hope, but I promise you that this will change. Please be patient, and please continue to hold out hope for the joy which you deserve.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:28pm

Anderson, I invite you to consider otherwise what you have posted here. There might be some serious issues for a while, but what you are proposing (suicide) is a VERY permanent solution to a VERY temporary problem. There are people out there that are willing to help and will happily do so if you will give them the chance. I encourage you to go get hooked up with a good church and reach out. The problems you face are significant and real, but there are far better solutions than removing yourself from dealing with them. Please seek help.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:09pm

Al, I invite you to read Mark Levin's book "Liberty & Tyranny". Yes he is a conservative talk host, but it seems to me that you (and others) are only listening to one side of the argument here. I have stopped to consider how Obama is transforming America, and it is towards tyranny, whatever its name. This comes from a lifetime of study of government structures and the histories of nations, not from Rush Limbaugh (I frankly find him too wrapped up in himself and arrogant). I am willing to listen to rational arguments from any viewpoint, but I am sick of the political left in this country slapping labels like "racist", "sexist", "homophobe", etc. on anyone who disagrees with their ideology. I have yet to read a post that has credibly dismantled the arguments I have posited using the facts. I know this is the established law of the land, but I look back to the Republican takeover of Congress in the '90's. They passed laws that made the Federal Government abide by the employment laws they were making the private sector adhere to. So I go back to my basic argument here: If its good for the goose, shouldn't it be good for the gander? If this is such a great law for us common folk, shouldn't the ruling elite have to abide by it also? Please, before you make any further remarks, answer me why Congress should get a pass on the implementation of this law when it is ramming it down my throat, all the while telling me its good for me.

AndersonHatfield

October 8, 2013 - 4:09pm

Ever since I returned from Iraq (100% total and permanent Disabled ) I have endeavored to put my life back together. I have done the best that is possible in spite of chronic pain and depression issues. This shut down crisis has stressed me out worse than the War itself. How dare the politicians threaten, withhold or attack the very benefit that allows me to exist what is left of my so called life. I assure you this. If I do not recieve my "Compensation" (not a free be, a compensation for loss that I suffered ) I lose everything. When that happens, I have no choice but to end this miserable existence after finalizing my Last Will & Testament. The House and Car will be sent back to the bank, but at least my survivors can have a yard sale of my pocessions. The weapon and coin collection should get 5-8K but I had wished to leave them more than that. It is a truth that those crooks in DC have my very life in their hands. God Help Me

cousin818

October 8, 2013 - 4:07pm

This President could have been the GREATEST President in American History. He could have UNITED this country beyond belief. Made it the proudest, wealthiest, and strongest country in the world. Instead he has decided to TRANSFORM AMERICA. From a republic to a Hugo Chavez Venezuela. He has divided this country into the have and the have not's, Black and white, rich and poor, male and female. From a people who control their Government, to a Government who controls the People. All the men and women who died for this Country must be turning over in their graves. Did they die in vain?

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 3:58pm

David Mo Post 21 Seriously? I don't think the founding fathers would have approved of the backroom wheeling and dealing, much less the underhanded legislative tactics used to pass the Obamacare monstrosity to begin with, so yes I think they would have approved very much of the methods being used by the Republican party to halt our march towards totalitarianism.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:08pm

Yeah, I don't think they had the lobbyists and a lot of the things in mind when they drafted the founding documents. But, I think they would be even more outraged at what these Tea Partiers are doing. "Underhanded Tactics" "Monstrosity" none of these phrases or words have anything to do with the fact that the law was passed by Congress, signed by the Executive, and upheld by the SCOTUS. It's done. It's not the march toward totalitarianism, it's exactly how the system of government was set up. Not a second bite at the apple via parliamentary blackmail.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:58pm

Except that my voice was completely ignored in the first place. The POTUS and the Democratically controlled Congress shut out Republicans from the process. Oh sure, Obama made a symbolic gesture or two, but made it clear that "compromise" meant that Republicans had to agree with his demands or be left out of the game, which is exactly what happened. This is not no more blackmail or underhanded that what the Dems pulled off getting the ACA passed, and I would argue it is a great deal less so. They are finally making Harry Reid and Obama listen to my voice. That is NOT how the system was set up. I would also ask you David, who is calling the shots on where to apply the pressure of the government shutdown? That is coming straight from the White House. I read an article earlier today where a Parks employee was cited saying that the orders of the Parks Service were coming straight from the top and they were being instructed to make things as painful and uncomfortable as possible. Ask yourself this; why does the government have the money to actively shut down the open air memorials on the Capitol Mall, but doesn't have the money to take care of its vets? Also, why would they go out of their way to shut down the WWII memorial and the parking lot at Mt. Vernon (which they only PARTLY own)? Obama is trying to apply pressure where it will hurt the most in order to get his way. Its that simple.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 5:10pm

Also, I have to ask. Let's for a second grant everything you said about what is going on within the shutdown itself (although I do not comment on the veracity of the claim). Would Obama be engaging in these dastardly tactics within the shutdown had the House Republicans not engaged in parliamentary blackmail and shutdown the government to begin with? Let me ask you then, do you think what the House Republicans are engaged in is consistent with how are form of government is set up? I'll even ask it another way. If Republicans gained a majority in 2016 and gained the presidency and completely repealed the ACA, but Democrats held enough of the House to do what the Republicans are doing and said "We aren't going to fund the government until you reinstate the ACA", would that be acceptable to you?

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 5:02pm

Everybody has some sort of disagreement with the government, so the fact that your particular voice was not heard is, while harsh, irrelevant. Just like when Bush had a majority in Congress and dissenting views regarding his tax cuts were, while harsh, irrelevant. While I don't doubt your passion, I fail to see in your post a persuasive argument supporting the proposition that the President is obliged to negotiate with those engaging in clear, decidedly undemocratic tactics.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 3:54pm

Vietnam Era Vet Let me start by saying thank you for your service during one of the most difficult times in American history to be in the armed services. I honor and respect you for that sacrifice. That said, the healthcare law that is now the law of the land is still a monstrosity and not at all in accordance with what the founding fathers envisioned for this country. The Supreme Court ruled it to be constitutional ONLY because it was being presented to them as a "tax." The Federal Government in all of its legal arguments up to the Supreme Court denied that it was a tax and switched its tactics only when it became apparent that they would probably lose based on their previous arguments. Also, just because an activist Supreme Court says its constitutional, doesn't make it so. Additionally, our nation not only survived, but became the dominant world power by rejecting totalitarian government. Obamacare puts a full 1/6 of the economy directly under the Federal Government's control. They can barely run the military well, and not much of anything else. What makes us think they will be responsible stewards of this responsibility? Our healthcare up till now was largely non-political. Moving forward, it will be completely politicized if this law is allowed to stand. As a final argument, if this monstrosity is so good for the country, why are so many groups getting exemptions from it, namely Congress, Unions and some States that provided key votes to ram the legislation through? This law is NOT caring for its Citizens. Let us remember 2 points - "That government governs best which governs least" and "A government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take everything away."

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:15pm

"Moving forward, it will be completely politicized if this law is allowed to stand." I think what I'm trying to say is fine, if you don't like the law, get the votes and (change, repeal, amend, etc) it. What the House Republicans are engaged in is completely inconsistent with our form of government.

A. G. Mendive

October 8, 2013 - 3:50pm

President Obama possibly “illegally” changed the affordable care act by granting over a thousand exemptions, delaying its effect on big business, and exempting the “government elite” including itself and his appointees from the provisions of the Law they passed without a single Republican vote. I don’t see why anyone in this organization specifically those that are in charge would not demand that everyone in the country be treated the same. We did not sacrifice years or more of our lives to create a privilege class in our country!

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:24pm

All Presidents have had the ability to grant exemptions and waivers across the spectrum of different legislation. Education and Immigration are two areas that readily come to mind. And that's all presidents. Obama was not the first to engage in this common practice. And the government employees are "exempted" by the fact that they already have health insurance and this law does nothing to change that.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 6:49pm

I have health care and its gone up over twice what I was paying. My out of pocket is way up and I have to just pay it. The exempted ones you talk about is the reason my payments are up, I'm paying for there excemptedness. And you are just a liberal hack sent here to spue obama care crap.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 3:50pm

You have got to be kidding. I am an Independent, so I am not beholden to either party, but it is clear that those calling for the President to negotiate on the ACA issue are dead wrong. The law was passed by Congress, signed by the Executive, and upheld under challenge by the highest Court in the land. It's over. There is no negotiation. House Republicans are resorting to immature, 3rd Grade playground tactics because they didn't get their way. And to the Tea Party and their Supporters: Do you think the founders that you lionize would approve of this parliamentary blackmail that the Republicans are engaged in? Think long and hard before you answer.

Bob Reddy

October 8, 2013 - 9:32pm

David Mo: ALL are talking points given out by the National Democrat Committee. Come on, show some original thoughts.

Vietnam Era Vet

October 8, 2013 - 3:40pm

This new Health Care is the Law of the Land, passed by Congress signed my the President, and affirmed by The Supreme Court.It is wrong for a few in Congress to hold the Country from servicing its Citizens. After all as vet's didn't we take a oath at one time to support and defend The United States. A country not protecting, and Caring for all it's Citizens is not any better then what we fight and have fought against over 200 years. May this country be always the home one the free and the land of the brave.

Vet Nam Vet

October 8, 2013 - 3:40pm

How can you think that any Oboma care will help people like young adults trying to go to school, still live at hope, and if they don't get Obama care they get fined for not having it. If people like those students who can't afford it lives at home. Are people that are unemployed. What are they suppose to do. Not everyone gets Oboma care unless they pay for it. So who whens. Mr. President. So yes he needs to negotiate and relize his plan has a lot of flaus.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 3:52pm

Fine. Then get the votes and change the law in proper session. The current tactic is inconsistent with our form of government.

Jared T.

October 8, 2013 - 3:40pm

Thank you Jake for putting the blame where it truly belongs. While both parties play the political game, the Republicans are the ones actively looking for and suggesting solutions, as they have been all along. The POTUS has yet to offer any realistic budget that would receive the support of his own party, much less mainstream America. And let's not forget that when the monstrosity that is Obamacare was passed, it was done so AGAINST the will of the American people, using political legislative tricks to ram it down our throats. I am dependent right now on my VA benefit and am looking to use my GI benefit for the schooling I am currently receiving, so I am among those slated to be hurt by this gridlock. But I refuse to be used as a piece in the game, having others stand and say what I want and demand. Also Sid, just because airbornveteran first used the term "socialism" doesn't mean he's inviting destruction of the nation. Just because the POTUS and Dems aren't using the term doesn't mean that's not what they're pushing us towards. You remember Obama's first presidential run where he was talking all "Hope & Change" and "fundamentally transforming" America? He's up to his eyeballs in that transformation right now, governing by executive order to bypass Congress. He is our first Imperial President and he IS pushing us closer and closer to socialism. I don't know very many people personally that wanted Obamacare (but I do know a few). The vast majority of people I know hate it and know it will destroy our country. All the predictions of its opponents are not only turning out to be true, but its actually worse than predicted. I elected my Senators and Congressman to fight this monstrosity, and if that means I and my family have to endure some personal pain, so be it!

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 3:56pm

Are you really suggesting that the Republicans are being the reasonable ones here? Really? The law was duly passed by Congress, signed by the Executive, and upheld by the highest Court in the land. Politicians who engage in parliamentary blackmail are inconsistent with our form of government...which, by the way, is still the finest in the world. Your last sentence, however, is correct. The proper way to change the law is to get the votes and alter, repeal, amend, etc in a proper session of Congress, not via this selfish, immature 3rd grade playground tactics the Tea Party is engaged in.

John Simmons

October 9, 2013 - 6:53pm

Selfish immature like obama spending money to close memorials that are open air and open 24 hours a day seven days a week because he is a small very small person? That sefish and immature. You hack.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 3:51pm

Jared, Have you ever tried to figure out just HOW Obama is fundamentally transforming America? Do you believe that because Rush told you to believe it? In reality, he is not transforming anything. This country is indeed being severely damaged, but it is being damaged by those who push these paranoid fantasies, and the people who believe and repeat them as if they had any basis at all in reality.

Lew Howell

October 8, 2013 - 3:30pm

Negotiation is the key to American politics. The present administration refuses to negotiate, apparently bemused by the notion of an "imperial presidency." It's just a journalistic phrase, Mr. President. Follow the lead of your predecessors and NEGOTIATE!

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:26pm

This may be the rare instance in government where negotiation is not the correct course of action. Should what you call the "imperial presidency" kowtow to a new "imperial House"...or more aptly, "imperial Tea Party?"

Larry Holman

October 8, 2013 - 3:28pm

I thank Commander Dellinger for encouraging action to reopen the government. It is sad that so few care so little about so many that they would permit the shutdown. There are no good reasons to oppose the Affordable Care Act; millions will benefit from it. The growth in health costs will continue to decline. Real leadership is needed from all sectors of our society to let that small handful of extremists know that they about to join others of infamy in history.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:17pm

Larry, the Affordable Care Act will not make healtcare more affordable for long, and in fact, it is causing premiums for thousands, if not millions rise. I just listened to the story of a man who had raised his deductible to $5,000 annually in order to save on his monthly premiums. Before Obamacare that premium was around $247 a month for him and his wife. After Obamacare his insurance company informed him that everything about his current plan would remain the same, including coverage, but that the monthly premium would now be over $650 a month. That's not a decline in healthcare costs, no matter how you slice it. The only way premiums go down for the average American household is through massive government subsidy, which is unsustainable.

Perry McClendon

October 8, 2013 - 4:07pm

Not sure where you've gotten the idea that obamacare will reduce costs. Health care costs are already going up. When insurance companies are told to cover everything their rates have to reflect the added risks. The administration has exempted a lot of folks from the A.C.A so it must not be well received by everyone. The employer mandate was pushed back a year. The website crashed and still doesn't work. Obamacare isn't ready for prime time.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 3:44pm

Larry, you are correct. For all the vets who are commenting on this site who oppose the Affordable Care Act, I'd like you to ask yourselves a question -- WHY do you oppose it? I'm pretty sure that for many of you it is because some Republican (who is NOT looking out for you by the way -- he is looking out for those in this country who already have plenty)told you that you should oppose it. The Affordable Care Act is going to HELP a lot of veterans, and we should be cheering for it, not opposing it.

Mike Snow

October 8, 2013 - 4:17pm

I think the opposing points of view in the exchange herein explains why we cannot get any agreement. Regardless of which side you support, here, in my humble view are some facts: The Affordable Care Act was never negotiated. I was passed, reluctantly is some cases, by a Democratic House AND Senate and signed off on by a Democratic President. -We need health care reform very badly. -The verion which seems to carry Our President's name, about to be fully put in to effect, is seriously flawed and needs fixing, or,maybe even completely tossed out to fix the flaws that will destroy our country. -The HOUSE has done everything possible to continue / reopen government short of caving in on the Healthcare issue. -I do not know who anyone wants to blame, but, in my opinion, the ACA needs to be revamped. I recognize that as a fact. Others may not. - I do not understand why our President wants to inflict as much pain as possible instead of looking after the best interests of our veterans and our citizens. I think he should open government and procede to to what should have been done to begin with: rework this healthcare bill with input from the House and the citizenry in general. 65 million may have voted FOR President Obama but another 60 million voted against him. That, to me, is a significant minority. Yes, I will lose veterans benefits if they do not resovle this and it will create a hardship on my family. We are able to work through it. Many will have a more catastrophic situation than my family. All the more reason to get this settled. One more comment... had the President done his job this year, along with the other four years he has been in office, he would have submitted a budget proposal to the HOUSE so we all know what his priorities are. Disagreements might have gotten worked out in advance. Maybe not. But, there is plenty of blame to go around for all. This country needs a healer leading us, not one who divides. His victory on this will devastate our country and for what... so he can have a healthcare bill with his name associated with it?

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 5:35pm

Mike, Were you living here in the good ole USA (and paying some attention) when that law was working its way through Congress? Obama tried STRENUOUSLY to get Republican input and cooperation on this law. Many of the ideas in the law were taken straight from the Republicans -- from laws passed by them in some of the states and from suggestions made by them. In the end, the Republicans didn't want this law (and still don't want it) because it is opposed by the wealthy and by big business. You see, just like Social Security and Medicare, it is designed to help the little guy, and Republicans have never much favored that idea. And don't kid yourself -- the Republicans have no intention of "improving" this law. Their whole objective is to dismantle it. They would love to repeal it, but they can't; they would love to defund it, but they can't; the best they can hope for right now is to delay it. But make no mistake, their objective has not changed, and they think that by delaying the law they may eventually be able to kill it. Then the poor people could go back to begging for their health care in emergency rooms, just like in the good old days.

67vietvet

October 8, 2013 - 11:59pm

Al, Your kidding right? What does it feel like to breath sand on every breath? You out to know since your head is so deep in it! This guy never ever tried to negotiate! Listen to his words. Your the reason that this country is so "screwed"! Don

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:32pm

May I show the facts in a different light. The law was passed by a majority in both houses of Congress (not "Democrat Congress" or "Republican Congress", just "Congress"), it was signed by the Executive, and upheld by the SCOTUS. It's the law. If it fails on its own merits, then the requisite votes should be gathered and it should be amended, repealed, etc. The last thing that should be acceptable to the American people is the outrageous tactics the House Republicans are engaging in. "I don't think they have poll tested 'No Negotiation'". Yeah, I doubt the Republicans poll tested "Shutdown government like little kids on playground who threaten to take their ball and go home."

Vet. Nam Vet

October 8, 2013 - 3:25pm

I somewhat agree on that. But look who but Obama in office twice. The United States did. Hopefully this time around they will kick him out of office on a rail. Maybe he needs to come down to real life and get on OBama care for him and his family.

veteranof60s

October 8, 2013 - 3:23pm

Commander Dellinger is NOT taking a view that is held by me either. I'm tired of being forced to buy something that is not only not what I need, but is almost worthless. This is no longer socialism; this is communism. When we are forced to buy something we do not want that is against the Constitution of the U.S. no matter what the justices of the Supreme Court say. They are wrong!!! All those who have fought for this country were hopefully fighting for what this country stood for. "Free" stuff is NOT what we've stood for for over 200 years. Hard work and the opportunity to make a better life is part of it. Sen. Harry Reid and Mr. President, let the House of Representatives send through bills that pay for everything BUT Obamacare and everyone else could get back to work. Their have been bill after bill sent through by the House that Sen. Harry Reid had blocked in one way or another. THIS IS WHY THERE IS A SHUTDOWN!

Hubert T.

October 8, 2013 - 3:42pm

You are right. There may be some parts of the unaffordable care act that benefit a few but in large, the program will defeat us all. the Supreme Court could not find the act constitutional as written so they called it a tax. Half of the US citizens were not represented but will be required to buy into this "law". If the leadership of Mr. Obama is whet we have to look forward to, we are headed into turbulent waters.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:02pm

Does it bother you that even less of the represented public support the childish and immature actions taken by the House Republicans?

JAKE W.

October 8, 2013 - 3:19pm

HEY, LET'S PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS. CONGRESS DID THEIR JOB THIS TIME. THEY APPROVED MONEY FOR GOVT OPERATIONS COMPLETELY EXCEPT FOR OBAMA CARE. THE PEOPLE WANT IT ABOLISHED AND THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO. OBAMA IS GOING TO CRAM THIS DOWN THE NATION'S THROAT WHETHER THE NATION WANTS IT OR NOT. OBAMA IS THE PROBLEM, NOT CONGRESS.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 3:36pm

You may type your comments in capital letters, but you are still wrong. Polls show that a majority of the American people DO NOT want Obamacare dismantled. Nobody is cramming anything down our throats -- the law was passed by a majority in Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court. That is how laws are made in our country. And how are they reversed? By majority vote of the U.S. Congress, not by blackmail and shutting down the government. Is this how you want to see all the big issues settled in the future -- by shutting down the government? Get a grip on reality, man.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:24pm

Al, I don't know what polls you've been looking at, but the vast majority of Americans want this law gone.

TL

October 9, 2013 - 2:53pm

Stop swallowing the Fox line, hook line and sinker and get your information from less biased sources. The figures of how many people signed up or tried to sign up on the FIRST DAY should tell you all you need to know. The American people want at least some semblance of the medical care that every other civilized country in the world has. (And Congress also has!!)

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 6:58pm

In PracticeTracking the Affordable Care Act « All posts • Closer Look at Polls Finds Views of Health Law a Bit Less Negative Oct 1 7:50 pm Allison Kopicki On opening day of the new federal and state health insurance exchanges, a deeper look at how Americans view the Affordable Care Act shows that public opinion is not as negative as has been reported. Although much polling has shown that more Americans disapprove of the 2010 health care law than approve, recent polling has shown that a slice of those who disapprove are critical of the law because it does not go far enough in changing the nation’s health care system. The Kaiser Health Tracking Poll conducted in mid-September posed a two-part question, first asking respondents whether they perceived the law as favorable or unfavorable. Those who answered unfavorable were then asked if their unfavorable view was because the law went too far or not far enough. Overall, 33 percent of Americans found the law favorable, 43 percent found it unfavorable, and 17 percent were unsure or did not give an opinion. But the faction that disapproved of the law broke down this way: 33 percent who said the law went too far, 7 percent who said the law did not go far enough, and 3 percent who could not say either way. So when we account for those who disapproved because they wanted more expansive reform, the poll shows that support for the law and opposition to it are much more even: 36 percent oppose the law, and 40 percent are in support of some form of federal health care transformation (if one includes the 7 percent who want a more expanded version). Kaiser was not alone in this finding that a small sliver of Americans who want a more expansive approach to health care can tip the balance of how support for the health care law can be viewed. A CNN/ORC poll conducted in late September found 38 percent of Americans in favor of the law that makes major changes to the country’s health care system, 39 percent who said they opposed the legislation because its approach toward health care was too liberal, and 11 percent who said it was not liberal enough. If one combines the segment that wants a more liberal approach to health care reform with those who approve of the law, a plurality of Americans view health care change favorably. In a CBS News poll conducted in July, 20 percent of Americans said they wanted Congress to expand the law, 16 percent said to keep the law as is, 18 percent said to repeal just the mandate, and 39 percent said to repeal the entire law. Polling over the past few years has also shown that majorities of Americans approve of specific measures in the health care law, including coverage of those with pre-existing conditions and the extension of coverage of dependents on their parents’ health plans until they reach the age of 26. The most recent New York Times/CBS News Poll, released last week, found that even though more Americans disapproved of the health care law over all, a majority said they would like to see Congress uphold the law and make it work as well as possible (56 percent), rather than stop the law by defunding it (38 percent). And while nearly two-thirds of those who disapprove of the health care law support defunding the law, 3 in 10 said they prefer that the law be upheld. Perhaps most tellingly, and a predictor of the heavy traffic that has been reported on the state and federal health care exchange Web sites, the recent Times/CBS Poll found that although those without insurance were divided over their approval of the health care law over all, nearly 7 in 10 of uninsured people said they wanted the health care law upheld and made to work.

richard millet

October 8, 2013 - 3:18pm

I support whatever needs to be done to stop this impass and get the goverment moving forward . All parties need to put the higher good in front of personal dogma

Vet. Nam Vet.

October 8, 2013 - 3:18pm

I am like other veterans. They fight to keep this country free day after day. It seems the only people doing more harm to us it the government trying to see you is right and wrong. Not the long haul picture. If I knew the government would be like it is today back in 70 I would not have joined the army. We can't even protect our own, what do they think is going to happen after the shut down and no one gives?

Sid Curl

October 8, 2013 - 3:16pm

Your socialism comments are uncalled for. That means your are inviting a destruction of the American way of life and on that subject. Only you, who mention socialism take responsibility for that being introduced into the conversation. No where has socialism been mentioned. The leader of this organization has the right to express his views. That does not call socialism into the discussion.

Phil Farmer

October 8, 2013 - 3:16pm

Why not require every member of congress to complete a form of basic training commesurate with their age? Then make them subject to a period of active duty away from their home.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 3:16pm

The President is asking the House of Representatives to re-open the government without conditions, and the Republican House says it will do so only if some parts of the Affordable Care Act are dismantled or deferred. It is obvious to all that what the Republicans have in mind is to defund or dismantle the health care law, a law which will help many, many veterans. Yet, the American Legion apparently believes that the President needs to "compromise" and thereby dismantle or defer parts of the health care law. This is not "compromise" (I give something and you give something), it is caving to the interests which fund the modern day Republican Party. American Legion, get on board, and take a position which benefits those who you are supposed to be looking out for.

Larry Holman

October 8, 2013 - 3:43pm

You, Mr. Navarro, have a clear understanding of the situation. I wonder how these rightist positions encouraged by the American Legion affect membership in such a fine organization.

Jeff Holt

October 8, 2013 - 3:18pm

Well said Al.

Frank Maggio

October 8, 2013 - 3:15pm

I feel the two parties should get together and find neutral ground and the first step is for Obama to take some responsibility for what his five years in office has done to the country and stop blaming everything on the Republican party !

Bobby Mac

October 8, 2013 - 3:13pm

Let's get this settled! Stop all campaign contributions until these people get it right!

Sid Curl

October 8, 2013 - 3:11pm

Get rid of the Tea Party and all of this stupidity stops. Will the American Legion stand up to them?

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:33pm

Let me get this straight Sid, you want to silence some people you disagree with in order to get another government handout, does that about sum it up? You would sacrifice the first amendment rights of citizens in order to get more cradle to grave benefits from Uncle Sam? What exactly did you fight for?

tpcc

October 9, 2013 - 9:12am

What did you fight for, Jared? Exactly, please. What we didn't FIGHT for was for our representatives in Congress. We voted for them. What we voted for is for people to run the business of the country. And a couple of these people including one I voted for are holding up approval for the appropriations (or CR or whatever) of the budget of the Government of the Country which protects the people whom I did fight for and by their vote APPROVED THE MONEY! So what is the fighting actually about? I thought it was about doing your job.

airborneveteran

October 8, 2013 - 3:09pm

Commander Dellinger's views are HIS OWN. They are NOT my views. It is a sad day when the only people actively resisting this country's descent into socialism (Obamacare) are basically being told by our Legion commander that they are wrong. I guess the Americanism plank of the Legion only matters after everyone gets their check. I'm not insensitive to veterans who will be hurt. I just prefer not to harm the entire country with socialism in order to help my fellow veterans.

!01 Jumper

October 8, 2013 - 3:56pm

Too bad your silk never failed dimwiy.

Albert Palmer Short

October 8, 2013 - 3:46pm

Do you call Social Security socialism , Do call Medicare socialism?Do you call the Police, Fireman socialist? I get so tired of people screaming we're going socialist , just like we were all Communists when Joe McCarthy reigned. Do a little studying and see how many so called socialist countries there are. Start with Great Britain , Canada, France , Germany.

airborne all da way

October 8, 2013 - 11:49pm

Right u r APS, read a little more and explain to me how well they are doing or not doing under government control medical. Also look up how many of our Canada neighbors come to the US for treatment and it surgeries because if they waited they may be dead or worst off.

drtdk

October 8, 2013 - 3:27pm

Airborne veteran has nailed it. The buck stops with the President, and he is not leading the charge to solve the situation. Perhaps a bit of training in the military might have made a difference. Obviously no conflict would be settled by one person who is inflexible, even the President of this country. Even Gorbachev tore down HIS wall.

airborne all da way

October 9, 2013 - 12:14am

Some say that ObamaCare is the law of the land. So it is, but, who is Obama to make changes to the law?.Who is Obama to decide that certain businesses may take another year before implementing his law (oops, did I say his law?) and others have to do it now or else!! And why I ask, Why isn't Obama and Family in line to sign up for this wonderful Medical Plan that will save some??... And --»»

airborne all da way

October 9, 2013 - 12:20am

possibly be responsible for the death of some, due to the age and cost of surgery, I am sorry to even say it, but the nan and his henchman had already said that they would have to see the cost effectiveness, what that person still has to offer. My God, is this what thus country has become??

airborne all da way

October 9, 2013 - 12:28am

If this ObamaCare is the greatest thing next to a smart bomb, then my question is this.... WHY, I ask?? Why isn't Obama, his pretty wife and beautiful children not standing in line to sign up for His Law, ObamaCare!! A couple reasons come to mind. 1) It would be dangerous for him and his family, after all he is the President and the might get rained on and get wet, or #2) The ObamaCare medical plan suck.

airborne all da way

October 9, 2013 - 12:34am

And that the ObamaCare plan isn't going to work and that he wants his family get nothing but the best, who cares what the rest get, he us probably saying, I got mine, good luck to suckers. Another question, how come the Senate and Congress are not standing in line to sign up for the god sent medical plan. WHY???.Or am I the only thinking this.

airborne all da way

October 9, 2013 - 12:07am

I agree with airborne vet and drtdk, all Obama has to is sign the VA bill and some of the others. But he won't, He Is The Little Spoiled Brat He Can't Get What He.Wants So No One Will Get Anything. He is the one taking his little toys home and not let others play.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 3:59pm

Funny, it seems to me that there is no "charge." The law was duly passed by Congress, signed by the Executive, and upheld by the highest Court in the land. Could you possibly suspend your anti-Obama views for a second and at least acknowledge that the process has been followed and that the outrageous acts of the House Republicans are undermining what we veterans served to protect?

NAC1013

October 8, 2013 - 8:04pm

David Mo - The law you say was duly passed and upheld by the court is not the law now since POTUS has unilaterally given 1200 waivers, extended the employer mandate and granted Congress & staff an exemption. No president should have the power to change the law. If the law allows this kind of executive action, then the law is wrong and must be changed.

Mike Snow

October 8, 2013 - 4:25pm

David, you missed the part, apparently, when this healthcare law was being passed, when Speaker Peolosi had to bribe members of the Democratic Party to get enough votes to pass this thing. This bill NEVER was vetted to the entire House or Senate. Even the Democrats did not know what was in this bill. Well, now we do. And it is seriously flawed and needs to be fixed or tossed. The President needs to allow the democratic process to function.

David Mo Post 21

October 8, 2013 - 4:40pm

Vote exchanging, backroom deals, Politicians that didn't fully read the legislation. What does that have to do with the ACA alone? That sounds like every other law that is passed. And whatever point I might miss, here is the point I get: It has been passed, signed, and upheld. It's over. What the Tea Party is doing is inconsistent with our form of government. Here is another point. You nailed it when you opined that it is flawed, needs to be fixed, etc. BUT, that's for another day...you know, in a proper session of Congress with the requisite amount of votes.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:35pm

Mike, I couldn't have said it better myself - Thank-you.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 3:26pm

airborneveteran, I don't know whether you are old enough to be covered by social security and medicare, but when that day comes I would certainly expect you to refuse these benefits. They represent socialism at its best, and I would not expect people like you who have strong views on socialism to participate in these programs. Fair enough, or do you perhaps object to socialism only when it doesn't benefit you yourself?

Anna Chacko

October 8, 2013 - 3:57pm

Social Security and Medicare are the consequences of our paying taxes and have nothing to do with socialism. Medicaid may be a different kettle of fish. When we worked we paid our taxes- these constitute the benefits of our paying our taxes. The government impacting Social Security and Medicare is about as responsible as our refusing to pay our taxes.

Anna Chacko

October 8, 2013 - 3:56pm

Social Security and Medicare are the consequences of our paying taxes and have nothing to do with socialism. Medicaid may be a different kettle of fish. When we worked we paid our taxes- these constitute the benefits of our paying our taxes. The government impacting Social Security and Medicare is about as responsible as our refusing to pay our taxes.

Al Navarro

October 8, 2013 - 5:45pm

Anna, If you live an average lifetime, you will collect far more from Social Security and Medicare than you paid in. That is what socialism is -- everybody puts into the pot according to his ability to pay, and those in need take from the pot to sustain themselves. As I said, you will very likely end up taking far more from that pot than you ever put in. And who will pay the difference? -- other people. That is how socialism works.

NAC1013

October 8, 2013 - 8:11pm

Al - Maybe you should redo your math. The average worker pays more in SSA tax than received because you forgot about the employer contribution. If it was used for retirement benefits, the fund would be solvent but how many millions are getting disability benefits that do not deserve it and how many are getting SSI that never paid into the system?

Larry Holman

October 8, 2013 - 3:38pm

Well said, Mr. Navarro! My guess is that airborneveteran has probably chosen to believe all the lies told to him about the Affordable Care Act. I think if he knew the truth about it, he would not be so afraid of it.

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:38pm

Funny Larry, I wonder if you have ever read the Affordable Care Act for yourself, or whether you are just listening to selected voices telling you how much you should love it.....

Larry Burgess

October 8, 2013 - 3:02pm

It's time for the citizens to take back control of government!! In the upcomimg elections, remember how these politicians take care of themselves and not the people they are supposed to represent!! Remember and vote accordingly

MBeware

October 9, 2013 - 1:46am

Well said, Larry! I think we should vote all present members of Congress out, have the system revamped so that each member gets to serve only one six-year term, not subject to re-election, and have an election every two years in which we elect one-third of the members. We would then have some experienced and some not-so-experienced members, and there would be no reason for our representatives to spend so much time out trying to raise funds for re-election. We might even be lucky enough to have representation by those whom we send to Washington for that express purpose. Certainly this system would be no worse than what we have now, and I believe it would be a great improvement.

David Jay Crispin

October 8, 2013 - 2:51pm

What exactly do you expect the Democrats to do? Give in to blackmail? Allow the lunatics to run the asylum? Come on, man!

Larry Holman

October 8, 2013 - 3:35pm

I agree with you, Mr. Crispin! The extremists need to be purged!

Jared T

October 8, 2013 - 4:37pm

I find it ironic that the political left in America are the only ones seriously calling for the silencing of people they disagree with.....

Add new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Tell us what you think