|
On October 07 2013 09:28 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised. If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that!
There is nothing to negotiate over unless you want this exact same shit to be repeated over and over to the country going forward. What about if the Democrats give in and then the Republicans want even MORE next time? This is not the way to do business unless you want to make elections more meaningless than they already have been.
|
On October 07 2013 09:28 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised. If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that!
This is such a messed up mentality.
If somebody gets raped don't say "Well you're partially to blame, too, for not negotiating. If you had sex with the person they may not have raped you."
If somebody holds you to ransom it's not your fucking fault.
|
On October 07 2013 09:53 Lachrymose wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:28 radscorpion9 wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised. If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that! This is such a messed up mentality. If somebody gets raped don't say "Well you're partially to blame, too, for not negotiating. If you had sex with the person they may not have raped you." If somebody holds you to ransom it's not your fucking fault. Yep. Demanding spending reforms when your the majority party in control of the house [where all spending bills must originate], and using the exact same tactic used 27 times since 1979 in order to achieve political concessions, is akin to rape, hostage taking, anarchy and I imagine its also roughly the american equivalent to the taliban too, right?
Holy shit are liberals boring and ridiculous.
|
Democrats: "We won't negotiate while being held hostage."
Republicans: "We aren't happy and felt we haven't had proper negotiations for the past 3 years."
The Democrats aren't even asking why the Republicans are "holding them hostage." Maybe it's because they haven't been listening to them whatsoever for the past 3 years?
edit: I'm exaggerating of course there have been some negotiations...Dems reduced the budget down to a more reasonable number that the Republicans were looking for, but the real issues with the Republicans were with the AFA which was always strictly off limits.
|
With just the above debate.
The Democrats are perfectly in the right not to negotiate, as they were elected.
Why should an unelected party be the one to make the calls? I'm not looking for an answer by the way, its a rhetorical question. Its called Democracy, stupids.
Otherwise there's no point even having an election, if unelected parties get to control what happens to the country anyway.
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 07 2013 09:58 LuckyFool wrote:
Democrats: "We won't negotiate while being held hostage."
Republicans: "We aren't happy and felt we haven't had proper negotiations for the past 3 years."
The Democrats aren't even asking why the Republicans are "holding them hostage." Maybe it's because they haven't been listening to them whatsoever for the past 3 years?
edit: I'm exaggerating of course there have been some negotiations...Dems reduced the budget down to a more reasonable number that the Republicans were looking for, but the real issues with the Republicans were with the AFA which was always strictly off limits.
Are you fucking kidding? The entire ACA is one gigantic compromise. The reason the democrats went with that instead of with a single payer system is that the ACA was originally a Republican bill! Republicans have repeatedly stated that they want nothing more than to get in Obama and the democrats way and be obstructionist, and you complain that when the democrats do compromise, it's not actual compromise because the republicans want more? What the fuck does it take to qualify as compromise with the republicans? Let them have their way 100% of the time and just get their agenda going? Let them run roughshod over you?
You're so full of shit I can scarcely believe it. Let's not forget that the Republicans, when they have power, run roughshod over the democrats and give no fucks, but the democrats didn't resort to these tactics. I distinctly recall Cheney in an interview being asked about policies that were unpopular, and Cheney's answer amounted to "So what, we won, now we get to do what we want." And still, you bitch about the republicans... being ignored? Has it occurred to you that maybe a majority of people don't want republican policies? If people wanted Republican policies, they would have elected Republicans. (not to mention that districts all over the country are gerrymandered in favor of Republicans overall).
There's no compromise to be had here. The Democrats say yes, the Republicans say no. There's no middle ground to meet there.
|
This isn't a negotiation over legislation trades. It's a negotiation over keeping the government open. It's against a fundamental premise of governance for a government shutdown to be a bargaining chip. If you want to negotiate on the ACA you need to give something for it. What are Republicans offering besides something that isn't theirs to give or take?
If you want a negotiation, bring something to the table. Running a responsible government is not a bargaining chip.
|
Maybe it's because they haven't been listening to them whatsoever for the past 3 years?
I'm pretty sure everyone has been (reluctantly) listening to the Tea Party. You seem to equate "listening" with agreeing. The Democrats aren't going to go for what the people at the forefront of this shutdown hold politically. It's not going to happen.
I'm not really sure what you're expecting. The Democrats want to create a program that does X, the Republicans (or at least a bloc of them) don't want any programs pretty much on principle unless they're programs to get rid of other programs/policies/p-words. So what's there to compromise on? What do you actually want the Democrats to change about their existent policies?
|
On October 07 2013 10:09 sluggaslamoo wrote:
With just the above debate.
The Democrats are perfectly in the right not to negotiate, as they were elected.
Why should an unelected party be the one to make the calls? I'm not looking for an answer by the way, its a rhetorical question. Its called Democracy, stupids.
Otherwise there's no point even having an election, if unelected parties get to control what happens to the country anyway. Are you fucking trolling? Both parties were elected, and for that matter, both parties control part of congress, which have specific constitutional duties and powers. Divided Government was the purpose of the constitution and its the norm of American politics-- being the case over 80% of the time. The house is a legitimate vehicle of legislation, and in order to get things done in America you must work with the house. On October 07 2013 10:16 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote + Maybe it's because they haven't been listening to them whatsoever for the past 3 years? I'm pretty sure everyone has been (reluctantly) listening to the Tea Party. You seem to equate "listening" with agreeing. The Democrats aren't going to go for what the people at the forefront of this shutdown hold politically. It's not going to happen. I'm not really sure what you're expecting. The Democrats want to create a program that does X, the Republicans (or at least a bloc of them) don't want any programs pretty much on principle unless they're programs to get rid of other programs/policies/p-words. So what's there to compromise on? What do you actually want the Democrats to change about their existent policies? Every single time theres any debate about spending or the future of any legislation Obama immediately screams he wont negotiate, names particular republicans and insults them in the press, demands concessions far to the left of any sitting Democrat in the house or the senate, and pretends ordinary constitutional order is some grand and radical attack on the foundation of the country [ala his pretense that the countries being held ransom]. If you construe that as listening in any serious sense than your simply deluded. Due to historical precedent the President has to work with Congress in order to back particular deals and legislation, hes shirking his duties and acting irresponsibly.
|
Even our prime minister said "You can't really give in because if he gives in, he is firstly giving in on a policy for which he campaigned, won the election and [was] re-elected. If he gives in now, what is he going to do in a month's time when he faces it again?"
I found this situation absolutely hilarious. You can insist that US political system is working as intended, but shutting down majority of the government just because a minority of people don't agree with an issue, that's definitely a fail in outsider's eye.
It really doesn't matter what the democrats or the republicans says, but undecided voters will find it hard to side with republican in this issue that is for sure.
|
On October 07 2013 09:56 Dazed_Spy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:53 Lachrymose wrote:On October 07 2013 09:28 radscorpion9 wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised. If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that! This is such a messed up mentality. If somebody gets raped don't say "Well you're partially to blame, too, for not negotiating. If you had sex with the person they may not have raped you." If somebody holds you to ransom it's not your fucking fault. Yep. Demanding spending reforms when your the majority party in control of the house [where all spending bills must originate], and using the exact same tactic used 27 times since 1979 in order to achieve political concessions, is akin to rape, hostage taking, anarchy and I imagine its also roughly the american equivalent to the taliban too, right? Holy shit are liberals boring and ridiculous.
Holy shit you're boring, not educated enough on the topic, and ridiculous.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdown_in_the_United_States
Read this article, especially the parts about how we've only had real shutdowns since 81.
Also notice that 9 of those are under reagan.
Also notice that they took 4 days on average (11 shutdowns, 45 total days).
If you exclude the outlier that was the second clinton shutdown (which may I remind you was based on overall budget balancing) which lasted for 21 days, the average shutdown since shutdowns actually threatened government workers has been about 2.1 days.
So no, you don't understand the gravity of the situation. Even the clinton-gingrich shutdown, which was by far the second most important shutdown, didn't have demands of anywhere near this severity.
Realistic negotiations at this point would end the careers of almost every single republican and democrat congressman. For negotiations to be equal, republicans would have to offer something ridiculous like free abortions and gay marriages and mandatory gun licenses for everyone everywhere. They won't. Democrats would have to give up the one major piece of legislation for the past 5 years.
This is nothing more than a publicity stunt. Wonder why? Because it's the start of an election season. So all these little shits can get an 'I fought Obamacare' badge for their campaign.
|
On October 07 2013 08:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem. The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court. The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times. Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law. Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down. They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress. The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown.
On October 07 2013 09:06 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election.
I just dont understand how these are acceptable arguments.
There is no acknowledgment of the validity of opposing party arguments. Are the both of you really so naive to think that the republican party is the sole cause of all these problems? Do you think that they are a secret society of evil people whose mission is to destroy the world as we know it? Whatever republican viewpoints you disagree with are just as justifiable to republicans as your own views are justifiable to you. You are free to disagree with them, but for the love of god stop please stop trying to act like you are the victims of republican stupidity and incompetence. There are 2 sides to every argument, I dont know why so many people forget that when debating politics.
|
On October 07 2013 10:20 furymonkey wrote:
Even our prime minister said "You can't really give in because if he gives in, he is firstly giving in on a policy for which he campaigned, won the election and [was] re-elected. If he gives in now, what is he going to do in a month's time when he faces it again?"
I found this situation absolutely hilarious. You can insist that US political system is working as intended, but shutting down majority of the government just because a minority of people don't agree with an issue, that's definitely a fail in outsider's eye.
It really doesn't matter what the democrats or the republicans says, but undecided voters will find it hard to side with republican in this issue that is for sure.
What's more interesting is who will be able to shift the blame to the other party in the eyes of the voter - thus far Republicans did a splendid job marketing their shit 
Republicans may act like dicks, but if Democrats cave AND cannot sell their policies they are just pussies. And we all know dicks tend to fuck pussies.
|
On October 07 2013 10:23 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:54 Gorsameth wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem. The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court. The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times. Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law. Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down. They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress. The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown. Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:06 kwizach wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election. I just dont understand how these are acceptable arguments. There is no acknowledgment of the validity of opposing party arguments. Are the both of you really so naive to think that the republican party is the sole cause of all these problems? Do you think that they are a secret society of evil people whose mission is to destroy the world as we know it? Whatever republican viewpoints you disagree with are just as justifiable to republicans as your own views are justifiable to you. You are free to disagree with them, but for the love of god stop please stop trying to act like you are the victims of republican stupidity and incompetence. There are 2 sides to every argument, I dont know why so many people forget that when debating politics.
Look. The magnitude of this situation is about the same as if a democratic congress shut down the budget unless Bush Jr. cut the defense budget in half in 2003 (during the height of Iraq and Afghanistan).
Sure there are two sides. One side is ridiculous.
You can't demand the moon when you only have a handful of pennies to offer.
|
What are the consequences of the debt ceiling not being raised? Can't be that bad if you can just raise it? Seems like a silly concept overall.
|
On October 07 2013 10:23 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:54 Gorsameth wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem. The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court. The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times. Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law. Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down. They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress. The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown. Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:06 kwizach wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election. I just dont understand how these are acceptable arguments. There is no acknowledgment of the validity of opposing party arguments. Are the both of you really so naive to think that the republican party is the sole cause of all these problems? Do you think that they are a secret society of evil people whose mission is to destroy the world as we know it? Whatever republican viewpoints you disagree with are just as justifiable to republicans as your own views are justifiable to you. You are free to disagree with them, but for the love of god stop please stop trying to act like you are the victims of republican stupidity and incompetence. There are 2 sides to every argument, I dont know why so many people forget that when debating politics.
We were talking about who was to blame with regards to the current shutdown (and possibly default) and its consequences. The Republican party is to blame for this. Nobody's talking about "Republican viewpoints". We're talking about the strategy they've adopted to try to obtain what they want. What exactly are you failing to understand about this?
|
On October 07 2013 10:35 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 10:23 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:54 Gorsameth wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem. The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court. The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times. Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law. Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down. They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress. The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown. On October 07 2013 09:06 kwizach wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election. I just dont understand how these are acceptable arguments. There is no acknowledgment of the validity of opposing party arguments. Are the both of you really so naive to think that the republican party is the sole cause of all these problems? Do you think that they are a secret society of evil people whose mission is to destroy the world as we know it? Whatever republican viewpoints you disagree with are just as justifiable to republicans as your own views are justifiable to you. You are free to disagree with them, but for the love of god stop please stop trying to act like you are the victims of republican stupidity and incompetence. There are 2 sides to every argument, I dont know why so many people forget that when debating politics. We were talking about who was to blame with regards to the current shutdown (and possibly default) and its consequences. The Republican party is to blame for this. Nobody's talking about "Republican viewpoints". We're talking about the strategy they've adopted to try to obtain what they want. What exactly are you failing to understand about this?
thanks for proving my point, i guess. I dont know why I bothered getting involved in a politics thread.
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 07 2013 10:33 Steel wrote:
What are the consequences of the debt ceiling not being raised? Can't be that bad if you can just raise it? Seems like a silly concept overall.
It's hard to understand without looking into it because these things are mislabeled and obfuscated intentionally. What's actually being raised is the deficit limit. We increase the size of the deficit to pay back debts that are owed immediately, and in that way we ensure that we don't default on debts, until such a time as spending decreases or income increases (or both), and we reduce the deficit overall. If we do not increase the size of the deficit, we will default on the debt, meaning that people who are owed money will not receive the money they are owed, which then has effects on their spending, and with the money multiplier, can have disastrous results overall.
|
On October 07 2013 10:39 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 10:35 kwizach wrote:On October 07 2013 10:23 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:54 Gorsameth wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem. The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court. The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times. Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law. Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down. They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress. The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown. On October 07 2013 09:06 kwizach wrote:On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem. Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election. I just dont understand how these are acceptable arguments. There is no acknowledgment of the validity of opposing party arguments. Are the both of you really so naive to think that the republican party is the sole cause of all these problems? Do you think that they are a secret society of evil people whose mission is to destroy the world as we know it? Whatever republican viewpoints you disagree with are just as justifiable to republicans as your own views are justifiable to you. You are free to disagree with them, but for the love of god stop please stop trying to act like you are the victims of republican stupidity and incompetence. There are 2 sides to every argument, I dont know why so many people forget that when debating politics. We were talking about who was to blame with regards to the current shutdown (and possibly default) and its consequences. The Republican party is to blame for this. Nobody's talking about "Republican viewpoints". We're talking about the strategy they've adopted to try to obtain what they want. What exactly are you failing to understand about this? thanks for proving my point, i guess. I dont know why I bothered getting involved in a politics thread.
How exactly am I supposed to have proven your point? You mentioned "Republican viewpoints" being "justifiable to republicans as [our] own views are justifiable to [us]", when that was completely off-topic. I'll repeat: we are not blaming Republicans for their viewpoints. We are blaming Republicans for the strategy they have adopted to try to obtain what they want.
|
On October 07 2013 10:15 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:58 LuckyFool wrote:
Democrats: "We won't negotiate while being held hostage."
Republicans: "We aren't happy and felt we haven't had proper negotiations for the past 3 years."
The Democrats aren't even asking why the Republicans are "holding them hostage." Maybe it's because they haven't been listening to them whatsoever for the past 3 years?
edit: I'm exaggerating of course there have been some negotiations...Dems reduced the budget down to a more reasonable number that the Republicans were looking for, but the real issues with the Republicans were with the AFA which was always strictly off limits. Are you fucking kidding? The entire ACA is one gigantic compromise. The reason the democrats went with that instead of with a single payer system is that the ACA was originally a Republican bill! Republicans have repeatedly stated that they want nothing more than to get in Obama and the democrats way and be obstructionist, and you complain that when the democrats do compromise, it's not actual compromise because the republicans want more? What the fuck does it take to qualify as compromise with the republicans? Let them have their way 100% of the time and just get their agenda going? Let them run roughshod over you? You're so full of shit I can scarcely believe it. Let's not forget that the Republicans, when they have power, run roughshod over the democrats and give no fucks, but the democrats didn't resort to these tactics. I distinctly recall Cheney in an interview being asked about policies that were unpopular, and Cheney's answer amounted to "So what, we won, now we get to do what we want." And still, you bitch about the republicans... being ignored? Has it occurred to you that maybe a majority of people don't want republican policies? If people wanted Republican policies, they would have elected Republicans. (not to mention that districts all over the country are gerrymandered in favor of Republicans overall). There's no compromise to be had here. The Democrats say yes, the Republicans say no. There's no middle ground to meet there.
If there's no compromise to be had here what exactly do you recommend we do? Keep the government shut down, default the debt and let the economy go to shit all because the Republicans are throwing a temper tantrum?
The United States...powerless to prevent a debt default...I would respond to your other points but since you're already calling me full of shit I don't think you really care much about hearing from the other side of the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
