Jump to content

The Senate Shut Down The Government


Flip Flop
 Share

Recommended Posts

The House sent a bill that funding the entire government except for Obamacare. The Senate decided not to accept funding for all non-Obamacare governmental activities. So, unless they work administering Obamacare, all of those hundreds of thousands of furloughed workers are at home because the Senate refused to authorized funding for their jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 341
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The House offered to fund the government at sequester levels for 6 weeks in exchange for complete defunding Obamacare. And you think the Senate is the unreasonable chamber in this one?

I'll ask the same question that I've asked before. Suppose this were 2007 and Pelosi/Reid offered to keep the government running for two months if Bush would accept complete repeal of his tax cuts and the Patriot Act. Would you consider that reasonable? Would you claim that Bush were responsible for the shutdown if he said no? Would you demand that Bush "negotiate" with Democrats on that offer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The House offered to fund the government at sequester levels for 6 weeks in exchange for complete defunding Obamacare. And you think the Senate is the unreasonable chamber in this one?

I'll ask the same question that I've asked before. Suppose this were 2007 and Pelosi/Reid offered to keep the government running for two months if Bush would accept complete repeal of his tax cuts and the Patriot Act. Would you consider that reasonable? Would you claim that Bush were responsible for the shutdown if he said no? Would you demand that Bush "negotiate" with Democrats on that offer?

It is not 2007. The Patriot act was not a partisan bill. The Senate passed the Patriot Act 98-1. Hardly apples to apples.

Perhaps you can play your game honestly. If Republicans passed a bill that every democrat voted against. What would you expect them to do?

This is pitiful... The narrative is not going to change at all with this.

You think I imagine myself as someone who can influence the narrative?

The%20Matrix%20_DivX_%20280_0001.jpg

"You think thats air your breathing? Hmm..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not 2007. The Patriot act was not a partisan bill. The Senate passed the Patriot Act 98-1. Hardly apples to apples.

Perhaps you can play your game honestly. If Republicans passed a bill that every democrat voted against. What would you expect them to do?

It should not matter what year it is. If the situation is not reasonable when you flip the parties, then it's not reasonable now. The 2003 tax law was opposed by almost every Democrat. It passed 51-49. By 2007, the Bush tax cuts were unpopular.

So again, if the Democrats offered to continue funding government for six weeks only if Bush agreed to repeal the tax cuts, would you say they were being reasonable? Would you say that Bush should "compromise" with them? Would you blame Bush for shutting down the government if he said no?

Because if you can't say that offering six weeks of funding in exchange for repeal of a signature piece of legislation is perfectly reasonable when it's Democrats making the demands on Bush, then you can't say that the Senate is the one who shut down the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. I still blame the house. Why would the senate pick and choose who gets funding. It should be 100%. no piecemeal.

Obama>>>>

Just let them sweat. They are roasting in the mess they made.

And the harder they try with this stuff the more ridiculous they look. The Republicans demanded this shutdown if they could not repeal Obamacare. They got what the Tea Party wing wanted. Now they can live with the consequences of it.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the harder they try with this stuff the more ridiculous they look. The Republicans demanded this shutdown if they could not repeal Obamacare. They got what the Tea Party wing wanted. Now they can live with the consequences of it.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Ted cruz is getting lynched behind closed doors. Soon the party will start to revolt in the open against the tea party. We are already talking about people defecting in the house to join the dems to oppose this shutdown. Obama just has to continue to sip his mai tai and watch at the end happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ted cruz is getting lynched behind closed doors. Soon the party will start to revolt in the open against the tea party. We are already talking about people defecting in the house to join the dems to oppose this shutdown. Obama just has to continue to sip his mai tai and watch at the end happens.

We'll see. You're right that Cruz is getting blasted within his own party. He didn't help himself when, in the face of criticisms and questions about his strategy for an end game, he called his fellow Republicans "defeatists". And there are signs that moderates are breaking with the Tea Party.

The real question at this point is whether the moderates fear the general voters more than they fear a primary challenge. Because any Republican in the House that breaks to support a discharge petition or otherwise breaks this impasse by siding with Democrats is going to get a primary challenge.

And Flip Flop, I'm asking for a simple explanation here - help me understand how Republicans are being the reasonable and responsible ones when they offer six weeks of sequester-level funding in exchange for a full repeal of Obamacare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should not matter what year it is. If the situation is not reasonable when you flip the parties, then it's not reasonable now. The 2003 tax law was opposed by almost every Democrat. It passed 51-49. By 2007, the Bush tax cuts were unpopular.

So again, if the Democrats offered to continue funding government for six weeks only if Bush agreed to repeal the tax cuts, would you say they were being reasonable? Would you say that Bush should "compromise" with them? Would you blame Bush for shutting down the government if he said no?

Because if you can't say that offering six weeks of funding in exchange for repeal of a signature piece of legislation is perfectly reasonable when it's Democrats making the demands on Bush, then you can't say that the Senate is the one who shut down the government.

Characterize it how you want. The fact is that the Senate refused to authorize the House spending bill. Stack thirty adjectives on the front of the action and it remains the same action. The senate refused to authorize the House spending bill. You think their action was correct because in your opinion the House's bill was unreasonable.

The bill that the house sent and the senate refused. To whit, the senate shut it down. I dont have the time or inclination to fight over the characterizations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. I still blame the house. Why would the senate pick and choose who gets funding. It should be 100%. no piecemeal.

Obama>>>>

Just let them sweat. They are roasting in the mess they made.

A greater percentage of people are against Obamacare than voted for Obama, so, it stands to reason the House is simply looking out for the majority of the people.

And who cares about any overpaid, unterminatable, over-pensioned individual who gives zero rat's azz about you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Senate is basically saying; "if we can't have funding for everything we want, then the 'people' get nothing!!!" Give 'em He!! Harry

And the President is putting the exclamation point on the nothing. They even shut down Mount Vernon and its privately owned. Hey, look on the bright side. If the president is spending his time sending reinforcements to stop the hordes from entering our national monuments it is practice for the possibility that he may need to send reinforcements to Americans abroad, if that happens to come up. Edited by Flip Flop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the President is putting the exclamation point on the nothing. They even shut down Mount Vernon and its privately owned. Hey, look on the bright side. If the president is spending his time sending reinforcements to stop the hordes from entering our national monuments it is practice for the possibility that he may need to send reinforcements to Americans abroad, if that happens to come up.

It was a calculated risk, if a risk at all. Obama and the Democrats pretty much knew they could convince the American sheep that the 'Pubs were to blame for not getting to see old faithful or their drivers license renewed. We have all the roads and bridges we can keep up, the military is funded...eff government! I don't need 'em!

Edited by Truthhurts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Characterize it how you want. The fact is that the Senate refused to authorize the House spending bill. Stack thirty adjectives on the front of the action and it remains the same action. The senate refused to authorize the House spending bill. You think their action was correct because in your opinion the House's bill was unreasonable.

The bill that the house sent and the senate refused. To whit, the senate shut it down. I dont have the time or inclination to fight over the characterizations.

It's not a "characterization", it's the simple factual history of what happened.

The Republican bill that was shot down offered six weeks of funding at sequester levels in exchange for a complete defunding of Obamacare.

Do you think that was reasonable? If it were the Democrats offering six weeks of funding only if Bush agreed to repeal all of the tax cuts, would you blame Bush for saying no?

The facts matter. You can't pretend like this is just some abstract "garsh why don't both sides compromise" nonsense. The bill passed by the Republican House had a very specific offer - six weeks of sequester level funding in exchange for ending Obamacare.

No rational person looks at that and thinks, "well that seems reasonable."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the President is putting the exclamation point on the nothing. They even shut down Mount Vernon and its privately owned. Hey, look on the bright side. If the president is spending his time sending reinforcements to stop the hordes from entering our national monuments it is practice for the possibility that he may need to send reinforcements to Americans abroad, if that happens to come up.

The park service shut down parts of the parking lot, which the people at Mount Vernon admitted was probably owned by the federal government. You can't even get your facts right.

And again, do you think that the Republican bill which offered six weeks of sequester level funding in exchange for a complete repeal of Obamacare was responsible and reasonable?

YES or NO? Why are you scared to answer that question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A greater percentage of people are against Obamacare than voted for Obama, so, it stands to reason the House is simply looking out for the majority of the people.

And who cares about any overpaid, unterminatable, over-pensioned individual who gives zero rat's azz about you?

And I am one of those people,but we do not want the government shutdown. that is even more clear than those that support Obamacare. They are not following the will of the people. People do not want the government shutdown, and I want them to suffer for it.

Let the timer continue to count down. It is already clear the moderates are starting to worry. Obama just has to relax and wait for them to crumble. No need to compromise. THEY GET NOTHING THEY LOSE.

I care about the people trying to feed their family. Those officers that were doing their job the other day are not getting paid for their work. The people waiting for treatment are getting screwed over this. Even the veterans going to visit their monument. Those are the people I care about. What if you had a friend or family member who had cancer and could not get treatment because of this mess? how would you feel then? What if they died because they did not get treatment in time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a "characterization", it's the simple factual history of what happened.

The Republican bill that was shot down offered six weeks of funding at sequester levels in exchange for a complete defunding of Obamacare.

Do you think that was reasonable? If it were the Democrats offering six weeks of funding only if Bush agreed to repeal all of the tax cuts, would you blame Bush for saying no?

The facts matter. You can't pretend like this is just some abstract "garsh why don't both sides compromise" nonsense. The bill passed by the Republican House had a very specific offer - six weeks of sequester level funding in exchange for ending Obamacare.

No rational person looks at that and thinks, "well that seems reasonable."

They're just looking out for the interests of thr majority of Americans. Don't see that as a bad thing. What are you afraid might happen, please describe what some of the pieces of the falling sky might look like to us average Joes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I am one of those people,but we do not want the government shutdown. that is even more clear than those that support Obamacare. They are not following the will of the people. People do not want the government shutdown, and I want them to suffer for it.

Let the timer continue to count down. It is already clear the moderates are starting to worry. Obama just has to relax and wait for them to crumble. No need to compromise. THEY GET NOTHING THEY LOSE.

You are correct, the sheep will blame the 'Pubs and they will have to cave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...