 |
And there's the disconnect. The House is not the one dictating "give me everything I want or you get nothing at all" while holding seniors hostage in National Parks at gunpoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Compromise means give a little on both sides. I can keep on saying that, and I'll probably have to.
Hello again, Steve:
It IS the disconnect. Why should he negotiate settled law with a gun to his head? A law that you FOUGHT in the congress and LOST, FOUGHT in the Supreme Court and LOST, and FOUGHT in the last election, and LOST?Quote:
And there's the disconnect. Compromise means give a little on both sides.
I KNOW you say the last election doesn't matter, but it DOES. It was ONLY 8 months ago, and ONE of the candidates said his FIRST job was to repeal Obamacare... That was your BIGGEST shot to date to end the dreaded Obamacare, but he LOST.
Why should he negotiate now? Why would you destroy the country if he doesn't?
Excon
I can't believe you guys think governing by yesterday's headlines is a good idea. That's pretty delusional.
What is the settled law you speak of ? The budget ended officially when the deadline passed. OK I'll answer what "settled law " you speak of . You are speaking of Obamacare ;a law deemed passed in a parliamentary trick called reconciliation... which is in fact a BUDGETARY move. That makes ALL of Obamacare ,and ALL it's details subject to the budgetary process.Quote:
You want the president to negotiate SETTLED law,
Let me tell you what settle law REALLY is . A law is settled law when both parties agree that something is untouchable . Only then is it "settled law" . EVERYTHING else is subject to debate and negotiation with both parties participating .
Why is Medicare settled law ? Because it was a bipartisan law . Was Obamacare ? No... Not one House Republic voted for the bill on final passage. Nor did any Senate Republic. Not even Olympia Snowejob .
Obamacare is not settled law because the American people are deeply divided over it .
Finally there is nothing settled in big omnibus bills where one pork sausage after another resides to get funded another year ;or 3 months... whatever ,without a debate on the merit of the funding .
Now ,were the Bush tax cuts "settled law " when they were passed through reconciliation ? Of course not .Congress debated the merits of them every year they were enacted .They were held hostage with every negotiation for a decade.. and finally ,because they were passed by reconciliation ,they met their expiration date .
What you are REALLY saying is that only the Dems have the right to amend it (which has happened a few times already to this settled law). Are we to understand that when you admit that the law needs "tweeking " that you aren't in fact suggesting that the "settled law " be changed? If the prevailing mood of the nation changes and for some odd reason ,the majority of the nation calls for a universal system ,will this "settle law " be subject to repeal then ?
You guys really need better talking points.
Dems never shut the government down though, or took hostages.
The hell they didn't .it was frequently employed by the Dems in the 1980s
When did the government shut down?
A default would be a disaster for the world's economy and I'm afraid because stocks could plunge like 2008. Why can't the Republicans control those teabagger idiots? The main political parties in Canada have some extreme members but the party establishment keeps them in line by not giving them cabinet positions and expels them from the party if they cross the crazy line.
Under Ford Rep Pres Dem Congress 1 1976Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Under Carter Dem Pres Dem Congress : 1977-1980 5 separate shut downs
Under Reagan Rep Pres Dem Congress 1981--1988 8 separate times .
Under Bush Rep Pres Dem Congress 1990 once
Under Clintoon Dem Pres Republic Congress once
There will not be a default .that is just a scare tactic by Emperor Zero . There is more than enough daily revenues to cover the debt obligations . It's up to him to do his job and pay the debt obligations from the tax revenues if he can't come to an agreement on the debt ceiling . You want to talk of a disaster... a disaster is the uncontrolled spending of Washington that goes on unrestrained .The lefty Dems won't address the out of control spending . The beltway establishment Repubics have not done any better . The only group in Washington that has an eye on reigning in out of control spending is the ones you deride as "tea baggers " . When the emperor campaigned in 2008 he called the out of control spending "unpatriotic " .Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
Hello again, tom:
Look.. This isn't about settled law being written in stone.. It's about your tactics.. Inside the halls of congress, you may bring up ANY bill you choose to accomplish ANY goal you want..Quote:
What is the settled law you speak of ?
What you CAN'T do, is hold the country hostage until you get what you want... And, you've got right wing terrorists who want to TEAR it down.
Excon
There will never be resolution with that type of inflamatory rhetoric being used by the emperor. But during yesterday's presser ,the emperor spilled the beans and revealed the real problem. He doesn't want to make tough calls on the budget.
And by the way, you know, I often hear people say, well, in the past it's been dealt with all the time. The truth of the matter is, if you look at the history, people posture about the debt ceiling frequently, but the way the debt ceiling often got passed was, you'd stick the debt ceiling onto a budget negotiation once it was completed because people figured, well, I don't want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote; let me do it all at once.
So when he opposed the debt ceiling increase in 2007 ,he was just posturing .
He wants the vote 'present ' slip the debt ceiling increase into an huge omnibus spending bill so the people won't notice that the debt has ballooned to $17 trillion +... and that is the real fiscal cliff.
Lol, first you argue about it being settled law and now it's not written in stone. I just said it yesterday, always moving the goalpost. And for a regime that's holding seniors hostage at gunpoint in Yellowstone your complaint about tactics is certainly not very moving.
P.S. You were certainly not a fan of unconditional surrender when Dems were the minority.
Tal said something about TParty's whims to blame, but Obama is the only one subject to whims, his own, inflicting as much pain as possible by doing inexcusable things like holding seniors hostage at gunpoint in Yellowstone.
The public sees through this and blames both sides rather equally, even though you wouldn't know that by the headlines.
POLL: GOP GETS THE BLAME IN SHUTDOWN
Not exactly.
The emperor's sheen is gone, too, with a low approval rating of 37 percent.Quote:
Overall, 62 percent mainly blamed Republicans for the shutdown. About half said Obama or the Democrats in Congress bear much responsibility.
Asked if she blamed Obama, House Republicans, Senate Democrats or the tea party for the shutdown, Martha Blair, 71, of Kerrville, Texas, said, yes, you bet. All of them.
"Somebody needs to jerk those guys together to get a solution, instead of just saying 'no,'" said Blair, an independent. "It's just so frustrating." It's also costly: She's paid to fly with a group to four national parks in Arizona and California next month and says she can't get her money back or reschedule if the parks remain closed.
And a majority want Obama to get off his high horse and make a deal.Quote:
Most Americans disapprove of the way Obama is handling his job, the poll suggests, with 53 percent unhappy with his performance and 37 percent approving of it. Congress is scraping rock bottom, with a ghastly approval rating of 5 percent.
Indeed, anyone making headlines in the dispute has earned poor marks for his or her trouble, whether it's Democrat Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, or Republican John Boehner, the House speaker, both with a favorability rating of 18 percent.
So if your hopes are pinned on pressure to make Republicans cave, and they are, too darn bad. The people think they all suck and expect a compromise.Quote:
Fifty-two percent said Obama is not doing enough to cooperate with Republicans to end the shutdown; 63 percent say Republicans aren't doing enough to cooperate with him.
Looks like another "cave" is in the making .
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...rats_RINOs.jpg
If we default
I will drive my Renault
Through the White House Gate
And accept my Fate
Some say a Renault will burst into fire, some say ice.
Ice 9 sounds good to me.
Or - just 42.
Dingy Harry had another presser to whine about those Republican anarchists again (had to throw that in for those of complaining of name calling and such), only this time Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray dropped by and asked him to reconsider his "just say no" strategy.
Reid's response says it all, telling Gray "I'm on Your Side; Don't Screw It Up."
Don't screw what up Harry? You mean not everyone in your own party believes in you're my way or the highway strategy, that someone ought to be talking to Republicans and working out a compromise?
In another dumbfounding example of this regime's NPS gone wild in the shutdown charade, according to them only certain national parks and historical sites are subject to the "first amendment exception" that I don't quite get anyway, these sites belong to us.
So wait, the first amendment trumps all - but only at certain parks of their choosing? I don't think so, and I'm more than a little concerned that our lib friends here don't seem bothered by the abuses of the current regime.Quote:
Rangers [in Washington D.C.] told visitors Wednesday that they could not deny entry to anyone who wanted to exercise First Amendment rights, and could not interrogate visitors, which effectively means the monument is open to those aware of the loophole.
“The First Amendment trumps all,” a Park Service ranger told visitors…
Michael Litterst, a National Park Service spokesman, said the First Amendment exception applies only to several Washington and Philadelphia parks related to the government and its history, “due to these parks’ long history of hosting First Amendment events, their expansive outdoor grounds, and their location in major metropolitan areas.”
“You could not host a First Amendment rally at Chaco Culture, Grand Canyon, Manassas or any one of the 395 other parks where such activities are prohibited during the shutdown. They can be held only at the National Mall and Memorial Parks, the areas of the White House administered by the NPS, and Independence National Historical Park,” he said.
The whole damn country and the government belongs to US, so how can a minority in the house (TParty) shut it down in the first place?
Get it running, or get gone!! I wouldn't negotiate such dumb terms either. Who would?
Because it isn't them . It's the emperor who is holding the country hostage. The Repubics have moved their position more than once in the last couple weeks. It's the emperor who likes drawing red lines you know .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:13 AM. |