struggling pockets. that s a terrible idea. kicking this back to the states. you re going to give a governor discretion over how they can spend this money. chris christie would be able to fill potholes as opposed to filling hungry people s stomachs. what if they did get what they wanted? what would that mean? it would mean more pain for tens of millions of americans who are veterans and people with disabilities. i can t for the life of me understand why it seems like the only play in the entire modern republican party playbook is taking food shelter, and other necessities out of the household budgets of struggling americans, including lower middle-class americans and poor americans. why are there more people on
groceries and then have to drive back. you can go to a fairway in harlem, and the bronx bottom line, in new york it s it s an uphill climb to find good deals. it s disgusting they are letting politics and further but politics getting in the way of improving somebody s quality of life, and i don t mean just somebody, i mean vast numbers of people. you have about a quarter of a billion dollars that is spent at walmart by new york city residents outside of the city on annual basis. the mayor, the city council of new york city would rather have people going to a food shelter and getting food from the government than going to ben stein? i would bet you in the name of protecting mom and pop
you be fortunately is latest proposal from house conditions does just that. in a partisan attempt to the apiece a small group of tea party republican who s forced the government to shutdown in the first place. it could not be more strongly worded than that. obviously the white house has major issues with the anti-obama care provisions tucked into the house proposal. note the juxtaposition. yed when the president was at the food shelter in the washington wag he talked about how if the republicans don t stop playing games we stand a good chance of defaulting. almost in the same breath, he said the senate is making progress. there s progress being made over in the senate and he almost brought all the leaders over to the white house yesterday presumably to talk about that plan. that is in essence, i don t want to say it s a complete blessing of the senate plan but a strong indication from the president that he strongly prefers what is c coming out of the senate right now. a white house of
shawn ak an. it is unbelievably side. the u.s. medic is not a unique situation. routers has exposed the macro function of pentagon bureaucracy and impacts the soldier at ground level if they are at home, wages will be garnished and leaving paychecks down to pennies or hundred dollars. and this particular medic had to go to the food shelter to pay for what he needed. you have the bureaucracy that can t mote the needs of pay. every unit deals with paid dysfunctions. and i have had pay garnished from me. i gave up. pentagon was so complex and it is indicative of a bureaucracy that is calcifying. the same thing happen to you and you get your paycheck and little by little it is not there and diminishing over time. and then what happens to get
the supreme court to affirm that. one, it is unprecedented. never before in the history of the country is there a law like this. the supreme court doesn t have to overturn anything to uphold the law. and unlimited in scope. there will not be a dividing line to limit congress going forward. if they can make you buy health insurance they will make you buy water, food shelter and clothing. mike: that will be the next thing that congress will past. guest: the law is unnecessary. congress wanted address the problem, they had a constitutional way of doing it through tax and spend authority and not any idea there but could have done it in a another way. and they chose an unconstitutional path to achieve a goal that may otherwise to have merit. one last thing you brought up first. it is unpopular and majority