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.
No, the republicans will give up. They have two options: 1. Offer something so drastic that it will end all of their political careers. That is what obamacare is worth. 2. Give up, say you're doing it to save the lives of workers, blah blah blah, at best, neutral to slightly positive pr. At worst, slightly negative pr. Negative PR is unlikely, as most conservative media outlets probably don't want to alienate their audience. This option is the entire point of this exercise.
Democrats also have two options. 1. Give up obamacare. This will mean almost none of them are re-elected. 2. Wait for republicans to cave.
And please, no more of the "It's only a year" bullshit on this page. If this bill is delayed for a year, guess what happens in a year from now? Guess what happens a year from now immediately before a congressional election?
You guessed it: The exact same thing. Looking at history, the rule of government shutdowns is that if they work once, why not try it again?
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.
The Republicans can back down and stop this ridiculous temper tantrum. Their entire current strategy is basically a kid screaming "if I can't have my own way, I won't play!", only it's worse than that. It's like an argument over the rules for a game of backyard football, where one guy says "Well, if we don't play with this ruleset, I'm gonna take the ball, and stab it full of holes."
I don't care what their policies are or what their viewpoints are: this is not an acceptable tactic for enacting your will upon the country.
On October 07 2013 10:57 Jormundr wrote: No, the republicans will give up. They have two options: 1. Offer something so drastic that it will end all of their political careers. That is what obamacare is worth. 2. Give up, say you're doing it to save the lives of workers, blah blah blah, at best, neutral to slightly positive pr. At worst, slightly negative pr. Negative PR is unlikely, as most conservative media outlets probably don't want to alienate their audience. This option is the entire point of this exercise.
Truly, this fiasco is a test of whether or not the American public is actually informed. To anybody a modicum of intelligence and a reasonable conscience, the line of action house republicans have taken is political suicide. In any other industry, what they're doing is blackmail. It's as simple as that. Anybody with an ounce of sense can see how outright harmful and ridiculous their tactics are.
The problem is, what happens if they don't get called on it? What if the problem is actually the American public? That's what I'm scared of. Obviously some of those reps can operate with impunity with the way their districts are drawn, but I'd even go so far as to say the tea party just managed to potentially throw the next presidential election from an easy republican win to an actual toss-up. So there's that.
On October 07 2013 10:57 Jormundr wrote: No, the republicans will give up. They have two options: 1. Offer something so drastic that it will end all of their political careers. That is what obamacare is worth. 2. Give up, say you're doing it to save the lives of workers, blah blah blah, at best, neutral to slightly positive pr. At worst, slightly negative pr. Negative PR is unlikely, as most conservative media outlets probably don't want to alienate their audience. This option is the entire point of this exercise.
Truly, this fiasco is a test of whether or not the American public is actually informed. To anybody a modicum of intelligence and a reasonable conscience, the line of action house republicans have taken is political suicide. In any other industry, what they're doing is blackmail. It's as simple as that. Anybody with an ounce of sense can see how outright harmful and ridiculous their tactics are.
The problem is, what happens if they don't get called on it? What if the problem is actually the American public? That's what I'm scared of. Obviously some of those reps can operate with impunity with the way their districts are drawn, but I'd even go so far as to say the tea party just managed to potentially throw the next presidential election from an easy republican win to an actual toss-up. So there's that.
I dunno, the Liberal party (conservative right-wing ironically) did the same thing here and it worked well for them. In the end uninformed voters believed that the Labor party was incompetent and didn't fullfill any "promises", when in fact Labor almost called for a double-disillusion election because the Liberals wouldn't let them get a single bill through the door.
Basic tactics I saw were - Stop incumbent government from doing anything, then tell all the voters that the government lied and broke its promises.
- Pretend to negotiate with government, if the government reforms to some worthless frankensteined version of the policy, accept it and then tell the voters how worthless it is and how it doesn't work and that they will remove it next election.
- If the government doesn't reform the policy to something that is worthless, tell the voters that the government is arrogant and not willing to negotiate because the policy in its current state will "ruin the economy".
Unfortunately the damage was already done, and it was risky for Labor to call another election at risk of losing because of the sudden drop in popularity, heads I win, tails you lose.
Labor ended up in big trouble anyway, when they didn't call the double-disillusion, and instead "came to an agreement", the resulting policies were so bad that the Liberals were able to leverage the worthlessness of the resulting policies to their advantage and chose to get rid of it anyway despite Labor doing pretty much everything they asked (#2 on said tactics list). Never underestimate the power of the average voter.
I think this is an experiment for the long term. I know the republicans do this a lot, sometimes they aren't really thinking about the current election. Especially when its looking like an easy win or loss that's when they start trying stuff.
I know that spin doctors from Australia and America research and collaborate between each other. I think it was experimented in Australia and it worked so they are going to experiment to see what happens in the US.
Obviously same for the Democrats, Labor made a big mistake in trying to negotiate with the Liberals. You're always better off going hard ball and having an all or nothing approach. In the end the opposition party is always going to be two-faced about "negotiations".
On October 07 2013 10:57 Jormundr wrote: No, the republicans will give up. They have two options: 1. Offer something so drastic that it will end all of their political careers. That is what obamacare is worth. 2. Give up, say you're doing it to save the lives of workers, blah blah blah, at best, neutral to slightly positive pr. At worst, slightly negative pr. Negative PR is unlikely, as most conservative media outlets probably don't want to alienate their audience. This option is the entire point of this exercise.
Truly, this fiasco is a test of whether or not the American public is actually informed. To anybody a modicum of intelligence and a reasonable conscience, the line of action house republicans have taken is political suicide. In any other industry, what they're doing is blackmail. It's as simple as that. Anybody with an ounce of sense can see how outright harmful and ridiculous their tactics are.
The problem is, what happens if they don't get called on it? What if the problem is actually the American public? That's what I'm scared of. Obviously some of those reps can operate with impunity with the way their districts are drawn, but I'd even go so far as to say the tea party just managed to potentially throw the next presidential election from an easy republican win to an actual toss-up. So there's that.
I dunno, the Liberal party (conservative right-wing ironically) did the same thing here and it worked well for them. In the end uninformed voters believed that the Labor party was incompetent and didn't fullfill any "promises", when in fact Labor almost called for a double-disillusion election because the Liberals wouldn't let them get a single bill through the door.
Basic tactics I saw were - Stop incumbent government from doing anything, then tell all the voters that the government lied and broke its promises.
- Pretend to negotiate with government, if the government reforms to some worthless frankensteined version of the policy, accept it and then tell the voters how worthless it is and how it doesn't work and that they will remove it next election.
- If the government doesn't reform the policy to something that is worthless, tell the voters that the government is arrogant and not willing to negotiate because the policy in its current state will "ruin the economy".
Unfortunately the damage was already done, and it was risky for Labor to call another election at risk of losing because of the sudden drop in popularity, heads I win, tails you lose.
Labor ended up in big trouble anyway, when they didn't call the double-disillusion, and instead "came to an agreement", the resulting policies were so bad that the Liberals were able to leverage the worthlessness of the resulting policies to their advantage and chose to get rid of it anyway despite Labor doing pretty much everything they asked (#2 on said tactics list). Never underestimate the power of the average voter.
I think this is an experiment for the long term. I know the republicans do this a lot, sometimes they aren't really thinking about the current election. Especially when its looking like an easy win or loss that's when they start trying stuff.
I know that spin doctors from Australia and America research and collaborate between each other. I think it was experimented in Australia and it worked so they are going to experiment to see what happens in the US.
Obviously same for the Democrats, Labor made a big mistake in trying to negotiate with the Liberals. You're always better off going hard ball and having an all or nothing approach. In the end the opposition party is always going to be two-faced about "negotiations".
The fact of the matter is that most people don't have the time or inclination to ensure that they remain informed in enough detail about the workings of government to really know what's going on. It's not even really their fault, it's the culture. Instead, they listen to sound bites on the 6 o'clock news of whichever channel they grew up listening to, and which suits their bias. Republicans and right wingers listen to FOX, Democrats listen to MSNBC or CNN or something. They don't get the full story, they get a biased, short description that lacks any essential details, and they come away convinced they know what's going on.
I can't even be mad about them doing it either because it really isn't their fault. News stopped being about delivering the actual news and it became about sensationalist short stories and tidbits to get the highest ratings. People spend too much time in this country working and not enough enjoying themselves, so I can certainly understand people not wanting to spend their free time reading up on politics. (The United States frankly sucks balls compared to Europe when it comes to vacation time, hours worked, etc.)
So it's not even really a question of intelligence or competence on the part of the general populace, the cards are heavily and deliberately stacked against them being informed on politics. And yeah, corporations and major businesses like it this way.
On October 07 2013 10:57 Jormundr wrote: No, the republicans will give up. They have two options: 1. Offer something so drastic that it will end all of their political careers. That is what obamacare is worth. 2. Give up, say you're doing it to save the lives of workers, blah blah blah, at best, neutral to slightly positive pr. At worst, slightly negative pr. Negative PR is unlikely, as most conservative media outlets probably don't want to alienate their audience. This option is the entire point of this exercise.
The problem is, what happens if they don't get called on it? What if the problem is actually the American public? That's what I'm scared of. Obviously some of those reps can operate with impunity with the way their districts are drawn, but I'd even go so far as to say the tea party just managed to potentially throw the next presidential election from an easy republican win to an actual toss-up. So there's that.
I heard a guy blame the Democrats for the shut down. He actually told his ten year old daughter that the shut down was because of a socialist healthcare system.
I think there are a decent sized bloc of voters who are very sympathetic towards the tea party and who believe that this is necessary to stop Obamacare. If there's one thing I've learned in the last few years it's that some Americans are so opposed to helping others that they'll go so far as to support people who shut down the entire government.
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.
The Republicans can back down and stop this ridiculous temper tantrum. Their entire current strategy is basically a kid screaming "if I can't have my own way, I won't play!", only it's worse than that. It's like an argument over the rules for a game of backyard football, where one guy says "Well, if we don't play with this ruleset, I'm gonna take the ball, and stab it full of holes."
I don't care what their policies are or what their viewpoints are: this is not an acceptable tactic for enacting your will upon the country.
Seriously? It's the REPUBLICANS who are throwing a temper tantrum?
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.
The Republicans can back down and stop this ridiculous temper tantrum. Their entire current strategy is basically a kid screaming "if I can't have my own way, I won't play!", only it's worse than that. It's like an argument over the rules for a game of backyard football, where one guy says "Well, if we don't play with this ruleset, I'm gonna take the ball, and stab it full of holes."
I don't care what their policies are or what their viewpoints are: this is not an acceptable tactic for enacting your will upon the country.
Seriously? It's the REPUBLICANS who are throwing a temper tantrum?
Yeah the way he/she worded that "If I can't have my own way, I won't play" makes me think of Democrats refusing to negotiate until the goverment is open. Not the republicans trying to talk things out.
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.
The Republicans can back down and stop this ridiculous temper tantrum. Their entire current strategy is basically a kid screaming "if I can't have my own way, I won't play!", only it's worse than that. It's like an argument over the rules for a game of backyard football, where one guy says "Well, if we don't play with this ruleset, I'm gonna take the ball, and stab it full of holes."
I don't care what their policies are or what their viewpoints are: this is not an acceptable tactic for enacting your will upon the country.
Seriously? It's the REPUBLICANS who are throwing a temper tantrum?
They are the ones who are demanding that enacted legislation which has been the major project of their opposition for years and years be removed or significantly reduced while holding the government hostage, I would call that that political version of throwing a temper tantrum. "If I can't have the government I want, NOBODY CAN HAVE IT!" Obama and the democrats have repeatedly said they would be willing to discuss the ACA further after the government has been re-opened, but they actually can't (not won't, can't) agree to the republican demands. It's not a political option for them.
Please note that I haven't even said anything about the ACA in this at all: it's actually irrelevant to this discussion whether the law is good or not. This tactic cannot be made valid by acknowledging it and allowing it to work.
You do not negotiate policy over funding the government. You just don't. If this tactic is validated, every time you get a situation in which the house is run by the party that does not control both the senate and presidency, they'll hold the government hostage again unless everyone agrees to do what they want.
Democrats -- If the Republicans offered to raise the debt ceiling to a number where Obama would not be in office (21 trillion-ish?) to delay Obamacare by 1 year, do you think they should do it?
The fact that people here still believe the Republicans are the good guys is a lesson for everyone.
Just because you're a nerd, doesn't mean you're smart. People are explaining point blank what they are doing, and there are people in here going "Lalala Evil Democrats! Both sides are bad!".
Also, compromising the slightest on this tantrum is paramount to changing the American Government. If this works, this means that shutting down the government for any reason is a viable tactic. Instead of ever being a last ditch, it becomes commonplace. Now, for some people, that sounds kinda good, but generally those are rich people or people who fear "GOVERNMENT" but don't actualy know what government is or does.
Democracy sucks (susceptible to corruption like everything else, conflicts of interest, dumb/uninformed voters). Anybody have a better idea?
Nope, I guess this is the best we can do for now. Though I think the field of psychology should be fleshed out more before we experiment with dee ultimate form of government. Unless we find out humans can't be governed, then we'd have an excuse for anarchy, ZING
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.
The Republicans can back down and stop this ridiculous temper tantrum. Their entire current strategy is basically a kid screaming "if I can't have my own way, I won't play!", only it's worse than that. It's like an argument over the rules for a game of backyard football, where one guy says "Well, if we don't play with this ruleset, I'm gonna take the ball, and stab it full of holes."
I don't care what their policies are or what their viewpoints are: this is not an acceptable tactic for enacting your will upon the country.
Seriously? It's the REPUBLICANS who are throwing a temper tantrum?
They are the ones who are demanding that enacted legislation which has been the major project of their opposition for years and years be removed or significantly reduced while holding the government hostage, I would call that that political version of throwing a temper tantrum. "If I can't have the government I want, NOBODY CAN HAVE IT!" Obama and the democrats have repeatedly said they would be willing to discuss the ACA further after the government has been re-opened, but they actually can't (not won't, can't) agree to the republican demands. It's not a political option for them.
Please note that I haven't even said anything about the ACA in this at all: it's actually irrelevant to this discussion whether the law is good or not. This tactic cannot be made valid by acknowledging it and allowing it to work.
You do not negotiate policy over funding the government. You just don't. If this tactic is validated, every time you get a situation in which the house is run by the party that does not control both the senate and presidency, they'll hold the government hostage again unless everyone agrees to do what they want.
It's a check/balance in the constitution there so that the other 2 branches of government can run the whole country any way they want. Before the government shut down the house sent over 3 different bills, 1st to de-fund, 2nd to delay the mandate by 1 year, 3rd JUST to have the healthcare law apply to all of the congressmen just as it does to their constituents, and the democrats wouldn't even go to a fucking committee. Shows how much they wanted to stop the government shutdown. republicans are willing to compromise, the democrats will not.
Who is shutting down WWII monuments, state funded national parks, and even part of the fucking ocean? The democrats. Who is unwilling to compromise at all? The democrats. Every president who has been in office during a government shutdown has compromised and talked to the opposition except one... Obama. Clinton was talking with the republicans on a daily basis to try and work something out. So who is throwing a temper tantrum just because they can't get their way 100%? I'll let you answer that one.
Republicans probably say Obama's claims to negotiate after re-opening the government is a lie. The tea party has felt ignored (whether they actually have been or not is up to debate) and feel this is the only way to get their voice heard. Sure it's not right and they agree, but what else would you do if you feel you were being ignored? They've tried to re-open "most" of the government until they hash out their struggles with the ACA but Dems are basically saying "Agree to it now or nothing. We passed this in the supreme court, re-elected our president, we don't need to listen to you extremists who are doing nothing but pushing some ideological crusade."
It's literally like Obama is using the same words you would use to describe terrorists as he is when referring to the tea party...shouldn't we be interested in unifying our country instead of driving it further apart? Like it or not the tea party still makes up a huge part of this country, sure it's mainly just the upper middle class and older citizens, but they're citizens just as the lower class and deserve to speak their mind too, equality and fairness for all, tolerance for differing opinions without bias or discrimination, aren't these things we all want at the end of the day? I guess people could see the tea party as NOT being interested in the lower class at all which makes sense too.
I guess I just have a problem when I see the parties with such hate against each other and now we're at a point where "Negotiation is out of the question." I fail to see how negotiation is ever a bad idea especially when the two sides are such odds. Regardless of how fucking insane the tactics are.
Oh wells, the whole situation is just shitty. I hate politics but am also equally fascinated with all of this at the same time lol.
On October 07 2013 15:08 KwarK wrote: Still the Republicans mate.
I knew that was coming lol.
If you already know the answer then there's no point in asking, is there?
Negotiation is out of the question because this is a fucking insane tactic, it has nothing to do with what is actually being "bargained" for. Putting the focus on the ACA or other Republican demands is just moving the goalposts. The Republicans are certainly free to try and stop or amend the ACA - that they've tried and failed 40 times may be an indication that they don't have enough clout to do it yet. Doesn't mean they're justified in holding the entire country hostage in yet another attempt to shut it down. You can't just bypass democratic procedure so blatantly, it's an awful precedent to set.
Then again, all this has been stated much more clearly and eloquently than I have, so what's the point. If you've already decided the Democrats are the bad guys, not much here is going to change your mind, and you will undergo whatever mental gymnastics necessary to justify your stance. If you're convinced that the Republicans are fucking up here, then you're mostly feeling affirmed by most people agreeing with you here, but ultimately you're probably not changing any minds, just standing around going, "yep they crazy".
On October 07 2013 15:08 KwarK wrote: Still the Republicans mate.
I knew that was coming lol.
If you already know the answer then there's no point in asking, is there?
Negotiation is out of the question because this is a fucking insane tactic, it has nothing to do with what is actually being "bargained" for.
No, I knew it wouldn't change any of your minds because you have to look past all that in the first place to say it's the republicans who are throwing the temper tantrum.
Negotiation is an insane tactic? Apparently Obama can negotiate with Iran, but not the republicans? I guess all 5 presidents in 17 different government shutdowns who negotiated with the opposing party are "fucking insane" then too.
EPT
