So this guy was getting the ranger to go ‘I’m sorry you won’t be paying me because you were acting like children.’
3 Likes
So what? The Senate & the House both have to agree on a budget and sometimes they don’t agree on the budget that one of them has drafted. Just because the Senate didn’t agree with the House budget doesn’t mean you get to go “Ah ha, see its really the Democrats fault!” No, the main reason for the shutdown is the Republicans. They said, “sure we’ll pass a CR but first you have to delay Obamacare.”
The Senate responded with a big fat NO. Thus shutdown. Thus its the Republican’s fault. Am I making this clear enough?
4 Likes
Christ, what an asshole!
4 Likes
Actually, 10 Democrats voted for it, and ALL Republicans voted for it . . . . in the House.
It never was allowed to come to a vote in the Senate.
Facts count. . .
2 Likes
And the Republicans have countered with offers every time.
Reid and Obama REFUSE to Negotiate.
Hint: Negotiation requires BOTH sides to compromise. Only one side has.
Again, Facts matter, but apparently not if you’re a Democratic Party Partisan.
2 Likes
Conceding to extreme demands tacked to a CR bill isn’t “cooperating.” It’s conceding to extremists. The ball is squarely in the Republican’s court to pass a clean CR, or at least put one up for a vote. Tacking wish lists full of extreme demands onto the CR is deliberately sabotaging any resolution.
Ah yes, “extreme”. The generic, catch-all attack of the Left. But passing the PPACA by a midnight, party-line vote using “Budget Reconciliation” to prevent both a filibuster and any amendments is PERFECTLY normal.
There’s no possibility of a discussion here, you are a hyper-partisan who clearly can’t think past the talking points you’ve been given to repeat. Bye.
10 Likes
Yes, indeed they do. So let’s look at the facts, shall we. To wit, the vote results for that bill at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/h88 and see what they say:
Yea: 221 Republicans, 0 Democrats
Nay: 10 Republicans, 197 Democrats
Not voting: 1 Republican, 3 Democrats
So, where exactly do you get that 10 Democrats voted for it when the vote had 0 Democrats voting for it?
12 Likes
We are not talking the same vote. I linked HConRes 25, All the Republicans, 10 Dems, 1 not voting. . .
Changing the goalposts does not change the facts stated. . .
1 Like
Facts? What facts? You haven’t presented any facts. So tell me Salgak, since you’re a Republican would you be OK with the Democrats shutting down the government until the Republican’s agreed to say pass mandatory background checks? This isn’t about spending, the Senate has already agreed to a CR at the levels the Republican’s would be happy with. This is about the Republican’s shutting down the government because they want Obamacare delayed at the very least. That is extortion, not a negotiation.
9 Likes
Ah, yes, the Stupid and Easily Controlled argument. And, of course, throwing the “partisan” flag. Hint: we’re ALL partisans. You merely disagree with, and dislike, my position, and thus, attempt to minimize me by attaching a one-size-fits-all label.
Kindly explain, then, why, just a few months ago, when Gun Control was all the rage, we were inflicted with the “But if it saves the life of just one child, it’s justified” argument, and yet when asked about saving the life of just one child yesterday, Senator Reid replied, “Why would I want to do that ???”
I’ve already grasped that you don’t like me, or what I believe and stand for. I’m not here to make friends, I’m here to argue a point in the OTHER Echo Chamber. . .
Look, I don't love the Democrats but at least they aren't trying to burn down the government for political gain. Ideally we'd have a third party, or even better we'd have a Republican party that wasn't batshit insane. Nope. Then they say Obama/the Senate aren't compromising/negotiating when they aren't doing anything of the sort. You don't compromise/negotiate by saying "give me what I want, or I'll do this to the government". That is plain extortion.
And many people still think that Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same.
Sigh… when will they learn? There really is some vital differences (overall) and there’s such a thing as a lesser evil and voting consecutively for said lesser evil truly matters… that is, if we’d ever just try it in the first place (which we never have). It’s tragic and I hope one good that comes out of this mess is people stop embracing false equivalency (despite their warranted loathing for Democrats) and finally after all these decades stop playing ping-pong.
3 Likes
ACA was passed by a different Congress. Congress changes over time. You have to find compromise on the current bills with the current congress, and not say “well someone else agreed to this a year ago, so you’re stuck with it now.” I will agree that the Hastert rule is making this easy for the Reps, but that’s a rule that the house has allowed. Likewise, The Dems are refusing to allow votes on various piecemeal bills in the Senate, so again, both sides are at fault.
“War in Iran”?
Uhhhh. . . .
What I cited is the vote for passage on HConRes25, directly from the votes link on the page you provided the link to. You seem to be reading the columns as Yea or Nay, despite them being clearly labeled Republican and Democrat.
17 Likes
You have to find compromise on the current bills with the current congress, and not say “well someone else agreed to this a year ago, so you’re stuck with it now.”
The ACA is not a “current bill.” Rather, it is established law, passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States. What you’re describing is not governance as it’s been done in the last 100+ years, it’s something entirely new.
If members of Congress are unhappy with the ACA as passed and signed into law, then they should pursue the standard process for amendment and/or repeal of existing law. If they don’t like that process, they should pursue a change of rules for the House of Representatives to modify that process to be more to their liking.
They should not hold the entire US economy hostage because they couldn’t get the law repealed within established rules (after 41 attempts).
9 Likes
How disingenuous. That’s the Ryan budget, which was drafted and voted on in an entirely symbolic fashion. It’s a profoundly lopsided and and cannibalistic bill which was never intended to be passed. It was a political statement. You’re either profoundly uninformed, you’re trying to be intentionally misleading, or you’re trolling. Additionally, I think that the ‘hive mind’ here at BoingBoing is much more suspicious of both parties than you may be aware. It’s just that in this case, the Republicans are acting with historical levels of narcissism.
5 Likes
I don’t think they are exactly the same, but both sides have moved more to the right and owe far too much to campaign donors who are mostly one and the same. I have voted for the lesser evil, but I’m pretty fucking sick of evil altogether in its lesser or larger form. Sorry, I think my headache is making me a class A grouch.
ACA is the law. It has been for three years. It passed both houses of Congress, was signed by the President, and upheld by the Supreme Court. Thus it is legal under the constitution. If the Republican’s want to repeal it, delay it, they can do that through the legislative process. Or rather they can’t, because they’ve tried like 40 times and failed.
Which is why they’re holding the government hostage instead of passing a clean CR without frivolous demands.
As for the piecemeal bills, why would the Democrats pass those bills? The Republican’s deserve nothing for shutting down the government. Passing those bills would be rewarding them for their actions, and only encourage them to do this all again for the debt ceiling and any other crisis that they can make happen by holding the government hostage. If Republican’s want to fund the government, the Senate has a clean CR that they can agree/disagree on. Otherwise, no deal.
7 Likes
