Our country is in the best of hands ....when it costs more to shut down open air parks than keep them open...and "it's for the children."
In a press release, Palazzo noted: "This is an open-air memorial that the public has 24/7 access to under normal circumstances--even when Park Service personnel aren't present. It actually requires more effort and expense to shut out these veterans from their Memorial than it would to simply let them through." We can vouch for that. We recall strolling through the memorial one afternoon in February 2004, before its official opening that April. As far as we remember, it was unsupervised. So shutting down the memorial was a political stunt that wasted taxpayer money.
Yesterday more veterans visited the memorial. PJMedia reports they were met by an "SEIU rent-a-mob" (that's the Service Employees International Union). "About 20 protesters arrived on the scene chanting 'Boehner, get us back to work' and claiming"--falsely, it seems--"they were federal employees furloughed because of the shutdown." One of the protesters told PJMedia's Patrick Poole he was being paid $15 an hour.
As for the kids with cancer, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday on the consequences of cuts to the National Institutes of Health: "Director Francis Collins said about 200 patients who otherwise would be admitted to the NIH Clinical Center for clinical trials each week will be turned away. This includes about 30 children, most of them cancer patients, he said."
The Washington Post's left-liberal Wonkblog picked up the story: "As long as the government is shut down, the National Institutes of Health will turn away roughly 200 patients each week from its clinical research center, including children with cancer."
Healio.com reports that the House today passed a bill to restore NIH funding--but Obama has already issued a veto threat. Yesterday, as the Washington Free Beacon notes, CNN's Dana Bash asked Reid about it at a press conference:
Bash: You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials. The House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what you've said, will you at least pass that? And if not, aren't you playing the same political games that Republicans are?
Reid: Listen, Sen. Durbin explained that very well, and he did it here, did it on the floor earlier, as did Sen. Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? It's obvious what's going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is ObamaCare. They are obsessed. I don't know what other word I can use. They're obsessed with this ObamaCare. It's working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.
Bash: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn't you do it?
Reid: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is--to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you're irresponsible and reckless--
Bash: I'm just asking a question.
Even diehard partisans in the press are on the defensive. "Come On, No. Harry Reid Doesn't Hate Kids With Cancer," reads a headline on The Atlantic's website. When you feel compelled to answer a question like that, it's a sign you aren't winning the argument.