Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Shut it down!

View Poll Results: Will the Govt. get shutdown?
Poll Options:
Yup 9 votes (64.29%)
Nope 5 votes (35.71%)
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll
Shut it down! (Page 6)
Thread Tools
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2013, 07:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV View Post
Check out how much money the fed pays out in wheat, corn, oil, gun subsidies. (If you confused about guns they call it foreign aid.) Then compare that number to the budget deficite. Then compare the wheat and corn subsidies to the Feds standard of living and inflation. Then also compare them to obesity rates.

I know correlation isn't causation but something stinks.

I honestly don't understand your point. How does this relate to the principal that higher volume sales usually, if not always leads to being able to lower costs?
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2013, 08:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by el chupacabra View Post
When just closing parks wasn't upsetting the nation enough the administration decided to pay people to put up cones to block turnouts overlooking the scenery. Glad to see people are being furloughed for this "essential" task. They're reeally running out of ideas to demonstrate their own importance aren't they?
Petty bullshit.

I read about how they shut down a self-service pay station at a fishing place.

That place has never seen any action from a park ranger for months and months, but as soon as the shut down came, they summoned people to do petty shit.

Then again, this perfectly demonstrates what little people are in charge in DC right now.

-t
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 04:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I'm not interested in playing "gotcha" games, Paco500.
You catch me out on one thing- I said I was done. Clearly I was incorrect. A few things.

1. Nothing says towing a party line like using the phrase "gotcha." Pointing out when someone has made an error of fact in their argument is not "gotcha". It's reality.

2. Read some Hemingway. Join twitter. You seem to be of the belief that any argument that can be made in 10 words will only improve with 400. This is incorrect.

3. Governors are responsible for redistricting in the same way the Senate is responsible for selecting the president's cabinet. Yes they both have the role of approving the outcome of decisions made by others. You asserted (either by mistake or ignorance) that the governors were responsible for redistricting. They are not. This is fact. Another 20 paragraphs will not make it so.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 04:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Where's the huge difference, Paco500? That's what I'm asking you.
I can be sure if you simply don't understand the significance of statistical information or the statistical information does not fit your agenda so you are denying it. Again, my point was that it is not advisable to use polling data as a form of representative government. My one point of evidence (and it seemed a relevant one as we are discussing O-Care) was that depending on how you ask a question you get a large difference in results. To sum up:

Obamacare:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 29
ACA:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 22
7% Difference - Statistically significant

Obamacare:
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 46
ACA:
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 37
9% Difference - Statistically significant

Obamacare:
Don't know: 12
ACA:
Don't know: 30
18% Difference - Statistically significant

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I can't imagine the importance of reiterating that Obamacare was among the biggest issues of the last election unless you're suggesting some implied mandate or support from the result of that election. If that is what you maintain (as many others have as well), well then you're going to get polling results to debate the notion.
Well you are kind of right here- well done! However, the causation is somewhat confused. The shutdown was caused because the Republican controlled congress has asserted that the majority of the American People are against Obamacare and it is their duty to stop it. Others on this board have said the same. The only thing they can point to is polling data, as the election results don't show that. I was answering an assertion. Not the other way around.

The question was asked. The people answered. The law was written. The Courts said it was ok. The wheels are coming off the country because some people can't accept that.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 04:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Could you point this out please? The American people, as they often do, have produced a check and balance with both parties represented through the Executive and Legislative branches of govt.
I had to call this out. It's non-sense. The check and balance was produced passively- possibly by the brilliance of design of the founding fathers, possibly because of a long history of gerrymandering by both sides. The American people actively voted to have one party in power for both branches of government. The way the system works means that didn't happen. This is not sour-grapes. I'm not even sure it's a bad thing (Although living under in a parliamentary has taught me the benefit of single party control, even when I don't agree with them). It is fact. The republicans lost the election by every measure except one- and that one matters, but it wasn't what the American people wanted on election day and to claim it was is disingenuous at best.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 10:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
I can be sure if you simply don't understand the significance of statistical information or the statistical information does not fit your agenda so you are denying it. Again, my point was that it is not advisable to use polling data as a form of representative government. My one point of evidence (and it seemed a relevant one as we are discussing O-Care) was that depending on how you ask a question you get a large difference in results. To sum up:

Obamacare:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 29
ACA:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 22
7% Difference - Statistically significant

Obamacare:
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 46
ACA:
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 37
9% Difference - Statistically significant

Obamacare:
Don't know: 12
ACA:
Don't know: 30
18% Difference - Statistically significant
So... you're citing the differences of 7%, 9%, and 18% as statistically significant in making your argument about the problem of polling, but I can't cite the statistical significance in the differences between support and opposition as indicative of public sentiment on a piece of legislation? Let me demonstrate your error in logic;

Obamacare:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 29
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 46
17% Difference between support and opposition

ACA:
Very positive/Somewhat positive: 22
Very Negative/Somewhat negative: 37
15% Difference between support and opposition

You see, there is a much less significant, 2% difference in the ratio of opposition to support regardless of how you ask the question and both show a statistically significant, greater distaste for the legislation; 17% and 15% greater opposition respectively. All you're saying is that people are more familiar with the term "Obamacare" than they are "ACA" or "Affordable Care Act", not there are any meaningful differences in support or opposition to the legislation. Overall -- again, the support:opposition ratio aligns very well with polling that explains the legislation using neither term.

Now if you're trying to make the point that one should not necessarily govern from polling data, I'm inclined to agree. This kind of leadership leads to abject confusion around policy such as the US Administration's bungling of the Syrian conflict. However, as representatives, it does behoove them to at least maintain awareness of the will and pulse of the people. Polls are among the more elegant ways of scientifically gauging something as otherwise ambiguous as the collective emotion, will, or advocacy.

Well you are kind of right here- well done!
Okay, please quit with the patronizing here. You're not qualified.

However, the causation is somewhat confused. The shutdown was caused because the Republican controlled congress has asserted that the majority of the American People are against Obamacare and it is their duty to stop it. Others on this board have said the same. The only thing they can point to is polling data, as the election results don't show that. I was answering an assertion. Not the other way around.
You're speculating. If Republicans were truly this driven by polling data, having watched their own approval ratings plummet to historic lows; they'd have bailed this endeavor two weeks ago. They are against Obamacare. Period. They believe they understand the legislation and they believe it's destructive. They're leveraging any opportunity at their disposal to hamper the legislation and overall spending and they do not see the election results of 2012 as a mandate for mob-rules legislative whimsy. For example --

The question was asked.
The questions were:
  • Should poor people and their children have access to health insurance? The answer was yes.
  • Should those with pre-existing conditions be uninsurable? The answer was no.
  • Should health care cost less overall? The answer is yes.
  • Does everyone have a role in facilitating the above? The answer is yes.

Had they asked the following:
  • Should businesses be granted amnesty on the mandate while individuals remain under the mandate? The answer is no. The people have spoken, but...
  • Should Congress and federal staff be exempted from the legislation? The answer is no. Obama unilaterally exempted them from the legislation.
  • Should there be waivers for mini-med plans only the largest corporate entities in Washington were effectively able to lobby? The answer is no.
  • Should important consumer protections mandated of insurers be waived for a small handful of insurers with the largest corporate lobby in Washington? The answer is no.
  • Should the 1099 tax filing requirement be waived? The answer is no.
  • Should eligibility for coverage be determined on self-reporting? The answer is no.

What you're missing is that this implementation of the ACA is not what was written, or what Congress passed, or the Supreme Court heard, or anywhere close to a reasonable interpretation of what the collective wanted from health care reform.

The people answered.
Yes. They produced a House at odds with a Senate and the President. The people do not generally support a mob-rules environment of legislative whimsy and often implement checks and balances from their polling places and elections. Just as they did in 2010 and 2012.

The law was written.
Yes, it was. And because it was written so poorly, it could not get the 60 Democratic votes necessary to break opposition with a clear split in House and Senate Democrats. After a successful bribe of Nebraska's representative with a "Cornhusker kickback" they later tookback and a change in a legislative, filibuster-proof process that was to be specifically for budget reconciliation allowing passage of health care reform; the highly-contentious and questionable ACA was born.

The Courts said it was ok.
The Courts said the individual mandate was okay as a tax, not that you could arbitrarily manipulate tax law to enforce it on some and not on others at whim with zero congressional oversight.

The wheels are coming off the country because some people can't accept that.
The wheels are coming off the country because the wheels have been coming off the country. There are some who believe you should attempt to stop a vehicle when its wheels are coming off, particularly with one's own family in it. Others are okay with allowing the vehicle to careen wherever it may because A. when it flies off an overpass and crashes into a ball of fire -- some Republicans will be able to say "see I told you so" and pick up a few votes; B. some Democrats are merely protecting their single accomplishment in 5 years, good or bad; and C. some Democrats fear if you give in to Republicans at these critical moments, you'll set an unacceptable precedent of compromise.
ebuddy
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 11:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
2. Read some Hemingway. Join twitter. You seem to be of the belief that any argument that can be made in 10 words will only improve with 400. This is incorrect.
Translation: "I have run out of arguments.".

-t
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 11:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
1. Nothing says towing a party line like using the phrase "gotcha." Pointing out when someone has made an error of fact in their argument is not "gotcha". It's reality.
Reality is a little more complex than the above, simpleton reasoning would imply. You see, perceptions are derived from a diverse array of inputs and/or facts. These inputs are not necessarily subject to Paco500's expediency filtration and therefore, exist in reality. A "gotcha" is such by virtue of its relative meaninglessness in bolstering or countering an argument. In this case, I could've merely reiterated the importance of the governor in the redistricting process and this toned-down approach would not have made my argument less compelling. i.e. I am guilty of flowery rhetoric to be sure, but this does not detract from my argument; that the Republican "success" you're attempting to marginalize as not representing the will of the American people is mistaken. Your analysis fails to account for the studies suggesting "gerrymandering" is a wash and it breezed past the role of the governor in the redistricting process. Inputs. Even in your myopic analysis; the successes gained began with the will of the people in their selections for governor. That is, if gerrymandering is ultimately responsible for their success in Congressional seats, gubernatorial races matter and also reflect the will of the people.

With all due respect, this degree of neglect disqualifies you from being an effective arbiter of reality. We likely disagree.

2. Read some Hemingway. Join twitter. You seem to be of the belief that any argument that can be made in 10 words will only improve with 400. This is incorrect.
No. I believe repetition is the key to retention. I believe there are times when reality cannot be summed up in a small and tidy, partisan box. Twitter is perhaps the best example of this folly. Your citation of it as somehow authoritative here is revealing.

3. Governors are responsible for redistricting in the same way the Senate is responsible for selecting the president's cabinet. Yes they both have the role of approving the outcome of decisions made by others. You asserted (either by mistake or ignorance) that the governors were responsible for redistricting. They are not. This is fact. Another 20 paragraphs will not make it so.
The aforementioned, 20 paragraphs allows me to now say -- see above.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 03:58 PM
 
ebuddy, prior to the 2012 election, if I were to scan through the MacNN archives would I find you taking the presidential polling results seriously, or were you one of those people blowing them off? What did you think about Nate Silver?

Also, if the polling numbers shift to show a stronger support for the ACA, will your stance shift? Are people on the left supposed to be surprised that the polling numbers don't show overwhelming support for the ACA?
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
ebuddy, prior to the 2012 election, if I were to scan through the MacNN archives would I find you taking the presidential polling results seriously, or were you one of those people blowing them off? What did you think about Nate Silver?
You would likely find me both citing polls to defend my position and challenging aspects of tracking polls offered by others. I can tell you that I was pretty involved locally and made the mistake of thinking local trending would roll up on the national level. I was correct on their conclusions locally, but most definitely missed how they'd roll up into the national picture. For a time, the Presidential tracking polls were all over the place and it was really anyone's guess. Polling on the "ACA"/"Obamacare"/"major health care reform legislation" however, is much clearer. They are all essentially showing the same level of support or opposition and they differ very little from one another in their overall picture. i.e. had they consistently shown Obama up by 15% to 17%, they would've been much harder to ignore.

Why, did Nate Silver consistently have Obama up by 15% to 17% and were all polls essentially in agreement on this fact?

Also, if the polling numbers shift to show a stronger support for the ACA, will your stance shift? Are people on the left supposed to be surprised that the polling numbers don't show overwhelming support for the ACA?
My stance on what, Obamacare or polling? Neither, if most people support something and it's pretty clear -- I'm going to accept that most people clearly support something. This would neither change my own mind on Obamacare or on polling.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 06:16 PM
 
Maybe I don't understand something then. Do you think the tea party republicans are justified to shut down the government because of polls on ACA popularity?
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 08:03 PM
 
Bess, it was the Senate that shut the government down. The tea party doesn't have that kind of power.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 08:17 PM
 


-t
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2013, 09:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Bess, it was the Senate that shut the government down. The tea party doesn't have that kind of power.
It was the House Republicans that linked the funding of government to defunding Obamacare.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 07:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Maybe I don't understand something then. Do you think the tea party republicans are justified to shut down the government because of polls on ACA popularity?
I can tell you that I don't think Democrats are justified in shutting down the government because of polls on Tea Party popularity. This isn't a mob-rules system of government. Otherwise, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Republicans know you can't defund Obamacare, that's why they're asking for a delay in the individual mandate which seems pretty fair in light of the Corporate delay, particularly when the federal exchange web sites they've spent 4 years and $500 million on aren't working. They'd also like a repeal of the medical device tax which would pass among Senate Democrats in a heartbeat.

Compromise is when both parties come to agreement. Aside from the above, popular measures; Republicans have offered numerous bills to fund programs and bureaucracies out of the approximate 14% of the Federal government that is actually closed during a shutdown. The Senate won't hear it. Regardless of what this does to the American people, Senate Democrats have determined that the shutdown hurts them least and remain rigid to avoid setting a precedent of compromise. Political gain is not just-cause for shutting down the government, no.
ebuddy
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 10:24 AM
 
When the local Democrats start screaming to re-open the gov't and Reid and Obama are refusing to have SERIOUS discussions on both obamacare and the debt ceiling this tells you something. The Dems are not connecting the dots between the spending, waste in Gov't(GSA etc) and the cost over-runs with setting up the hackers dream and the other crap they have pulled, to see they have caused most of the crisis. We would not have to raise the debt ceiling if the house had been able to do their job without Reids stonewalling and President Stupids unwillingness to even discuss the problems. I am also pissed that the House hasn't been more vocal and proactive to call the Obama admin on the illegal, unconstitutional methods being used to screw us.

Right now they have to raise the Debt limit just to pay bills! Whats wrong with begging your credit card company to raise your limits so you can continue to pay your credit card debt with another credit card?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 04:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I can tell you that I don't think Democrats are justified in shutting down the government because of polls on Tea Party popularity. This isn't a mob-rules system of government. Otherwise, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Republicans know you can't defund Obamacare, that's why they're asking for a delay in the individual mandate which seems pretty fair in light of the Corporate delay, particularly when the federal exchange web sites they've spent 4 years and $500 million on aren't working. They'd also like a repeal of the medical device tax which would pass among Senate Democrats in a heartbeat.

Compromise is when both parties come to agreement. Aside from the above, popular measures; Republicans have offered numerous bills to fund programs and bureaucracies out of the approximate 14% of the Federal government that is actually closed during a shutdown. The Senate won't hear it. Regardless of what this does to the American people, Senate Democrats have determined that the shutdown hurts them least and remain rigid to avoid setting a precedent of compromise. Political gain is not just-cause for shutting down the government, no.

Why do you insist on getting in your little digs? It's like you're an intensely guarded ideological warrior or something.

It sounds like you are empathetic to the Republicans for the situation they are in, but I was just confused as to what all of this has to do with polling data. The polls make these arguments wildly incoherent on multiple fronts.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 04:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
When the local Democrats start screaming to re-open the gov't and Reid and Obama are refusing to have SERIOUS discussions on both obamacare and the debt ceiling this tells you something. The Dems are not connecting the dots between the spending, waste in Gov't(GSA etc) and the cost over-runs with setting up the hackers dream and the other crap they have pulled, to see they have caused most of the crisis. We would not have to raise the debt ceiling if the house had been able to do their job without Reids stonewalling and President Stupids unwillingness to even discuss the problems. I am also pissed that the House hasn't been more vocal and proactive to call the Obama admin on the illegal, unconstitutional methods being used to screw us.

Right now they have to raise the Debt limit just to pay bills! Whats wrong with begging your credit card company to raise your limits so you can continue to pay your credit card debt with another credit card?
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 05:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why do you insist on getting in your little digs? It's like you're an intensely guarded ideological warrior or something.
I love this. You ask a question loaded to the hilt with the assumption that it is Tea Party Republicans who have shut the government down when anyone other than intensely-guarded partisan warriors would accept that this phenomena requires the rigidity of both parties, and it's a "little dig" when I don't bite on your flame-bait.

It sounds like you are empathetic to the Republicans for the situation they are in, but I was just confused as to what all of this has to do with polling data. The polls make these arguments wildly incoherent on multiple fronts.
You tell me, I didn't bring them up to begin with. I merely corrected those who were trying to imply that distaste for the ACA was merely a figment of wordsmithing polls.
ebuddy
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 06:19 PM
 
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 13, 2013, 08:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I love this. You ask a question loaded to the hilt with the assumption that it is Tea Party Republicans who have shut the government down when anyone other than intensely-guarded partisan warriors would accept that this phenomena requires the rigidity of both parties, and it's a "little dig" when I don't bite on your flame-bait.
How dare you call out besson on this ?

If he stopped doing it, he wouldn't be able to post at all in the PWL.

-t
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I love this. You ask a question loaded to the hilt with the assumption that it is Tea Party Republicans who have shut the government down when anyone other than intensely-guarded partisan warriors would accept that this phenomena requires the rigidity of both parties, and it's a "little dig" when I don't bite on your flame-bait.
You're right, it was a false assumption. I didn't think people would earnestly embrace viewpoints this demented. It looks like some moderate Republicans like McCain recognize that this false equivalency thing is bunk too.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
You're right, it was a false assumption. I didn't think people would earnestly embrace viewpoints this demented. It looks like some moderate Republicans like McCain recognize that this false equivalency thing is bunk too.
You are aware that you can be a real hypocritical asshole, right ?

-t
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 02:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I didn't think people would earnestly embrace viewpoints this demented.
Control your emotions.

(Sorry I couldn't help myself)
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 02:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by el chupacabra View Post
Control your emotions.

(Sorry I couldn't help myself)

I'm not getting emotional about this, I meant that in a matter-of-fact manner.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 02:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
When the local Democrats start screaming to re-open the gov't and Reid and Obama are refusing to have SERIOUS discussions on both obamacare and the debt ceiling this tells you something. The Dems are not connecting the dots between the spending, waste in Gov't(GSA etc) and the cost over-runs with setting up the hackers dream and the other crap they have pulled, to see they have caused most of the crisis. We would not have to raise the debt ceiling if the house had been able to do their job without Reids stonewalling and President Stupids unwillingness to even discuss the problems. I am also pissed that the House hasn't been more vocal and proactive to call the Obama admin on the illegal, unconstitutional methods being used to screw us.

Right now they have to raise the Debt limit just to pay bills! Whats wrong with begging your credit card company to raise your limits so you can continue to pay your credit card debt with another credit card?
The debt limit was raised 18 times under Pres. Reagan. You know, the fool who tripled the national debt by cutting taxes for the rich and increase government spending.

Republicans didn't seem to care much about the debt ceiling or government spending when a Republican is the President.

We all know Republicans in congress only pretend to care about the debt ceiling when there is a Democrat sitting as the President.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 02:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I can tell you that I don't think Democrats are justified in shutting down the government because of polls on Tea Party popularity. This isn't a mob-rules system of government. Otherwise, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Republicans know you can't defund Obamacare, that's why they're asking for a delay in the individual mandate which seems pretty fair in light of the Corporate delay, particularly when the federal exchange web sites they've spent 4 years and $500 million on aren't working. They'd also like a repeal of the medical device tax which would pass among Senate Democrats in a heartbeat.
I love how this is the Republican BS talking point now after trying to defund Obamacare over 40 times.

So I guess either Republicans are douche-bags or just retarded. Maybe both.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Compromise is when both parties come to agreement. Aside from the above, popular measures; Republicans have offered numerous bills to fund programs and bureaucracies out of the approximate 14% of the Federal government that is actually closed during a shutdown. The Senate won't hear it. Regardless of what this does to the American people, Senate Democrats have determined that the shutdown hurts them least and remain rigid to avoid setting a precedent of compromise. Political gain is not just-cause for shutting down the government, no.
More BS Republican talking points.

Put forth a clean bill on the house floor to vote on.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 03:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
Well you are kind of right here- well done! However, the causation is somewhat confused. The shutdown was caused because the Republican controlled congress has asserted that the majority of the American People are against Obamacare and it is their duty to stop it. Others on this board have said the same. The only thing they can point to is polling data, as the election results don't show that. I was answering an assertion. Not the other way around.
Yes, we get that Republicans are douche-bags and most of America know that Republicans in congress are douche-bags according to polls.

Most people don't want to repeal or defund Obamacare.

Only 1/3 of Americans want Obamacare repeal, defunded, or delay.

New Poll: Only One-Third Of Americans Support Repealing, Defunding Or Delaying Obamacare - Forbes

Once again, proving Republicans are just douche-bags.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 03:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I love this. You ask a question loaded to the hilt with the assumption that it is Tea Party Republicans who have shut the government down when anyone other than intensely-guarded partisan warriors would accept that this phenomena requires the rigidity of both parties, and it's a "little dig" when I don't bite on your flame-bait.
I love how it can never be just the Republicans fault. It's either the Democrats fault or Democrats are also at fault.

Yes, Tea Party Republicans wanted to shut down the government. They have been wanting this in the last 2 years.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 06:59 AM
 
There are some who believe you should attempt to stop a vehicle when its wheels are coming off, particularly with one's own family in it. Others are okay with allowing the vehicle to careen wherever it may because A. when it flies off an overpass and crashes into a ball of fire -- some Republicans will be able to say "see I told you so" and pick up a few votes; B. some Democrats are merely protecting their single accomplishment in 5 years, good or bad; and C. some Democrats fear if you give in to Republicans at these critical moments, you'll set an unacceptable precedent of compromise.
ebuddy
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 09:04 AM
 
Just because polls are quoted, doesn't mean you've inspected the internals of it to actually understand any POLITICAL polls, or how they work. It doesn't change the fact that the Democrats, appointed by the current admin pissed away billions on wasteful BS. Can you remember further back than your last nap? Remember the GSA waste scandals, all the parties the Gov't had and the half billion dollar OwebamaCAIR web site? How about the NSA data center? How good is that been working? How did they miss the Boston Bombers? This POS president and his disgusting minion have made it tough on US for the wasteful BS they caused. Why hasn't President Stupid ever sent a serious budget? You can also blame the media for not reporting relevant facts about the admins ignorance, and irresponsibility.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 09:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Bess, it was the Senate that shut the government down. The tea party doesn't have that kind of power.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
For that matter, what are Republicans being offered and why the notion that there is an obligation to offer something to a political party?
The Republicans are asking the Democrats to negotiate, but so far the only item being bandied about is ACA funding with nothing in return. And one wonders why the Democrats find it unpalatable. It's not a compromise, it's a concession. With nothing given in return.



Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Otherwise, what the Democrats have been offered are opportunities to fund the aspects of government upon which there is across-the-board agreement. This is supposedly very important to them and a solution to the problem exists.
Bwahaha, so what's being offered is government funding? So if the ACA didn't exist the Republicans would be doing the same thing? Reps don't think it's important to fund the govt.?

Here's my favorite detail most people seem to gloss over – the continuing resolution the House did pass was only for a matter of weeks. So the House wanted the Democrats to delays the ACA by a year to fund the government for weeks. lol. Who wouldn't turn that down?


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Unless of course you're operating under something other than the will of the people and compromise.
70% of the people didn't support shutting down the govt. over ACA. So who's will is being represented?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Just because polls are quoted, doesn't mean you've inspected the internals of it to actually understand any POLITICAL polls, or how they work.
I hope from this point on polls are not used to support ACA popularity or lack thereof, because not only are they generally suspect, but these ones in particular are full of all sorts of problems.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post

That was my reaction too, but I'm trying not to be passive aggressive. I guess we'll have to wait until Snow-i comes back to explain what he meant by that.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Why hasn't President Stupid ever sent a serious budget?
Maybe because that is the job of Congress?

United States budget process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
That was my reaction too, but I'm trying not to be passive aggressive. I guess we'll have to wait until Snow-i comes back to explain what he meant by that.
It'd be one thing if he claimed it was both sides, but the only way you could claim the Senate shut the government down is if you think that legislation is a game of hot potato and the Senate was the last one holding the resolution therefore they are at fault.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Maybe because that is the job of Congress?

United States budget process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you even read that? The very first line of the section entitled "The Process" is

"The United States budget process begins when the President of the United States submits a budget request to Congress."

You're kidding, right?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:14 PM
 
Way to demonstrate he's canadien.

That's what you get for responding to BadKosh. He didn't say Obama didn't submit a budget, he said Obama didn't submit a "serious budget" which translated means "budget I like."
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:37 PM
 
Yeah, the Democrats liked Obama's budget so much they echoed the Republicans...ZERO VOTES.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:38 PM
 
Isn't it pathetic that democrats don't seem to be able to live and work within their means? Tax n Spend is all they know. Cost cutting is a foreign concept to liberal stooges.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Maybe because that is the job of Congress?

United States budget process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Details are too difficult for you to grasp? Does that go for reality too?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Did you even read that? The very first line of the section entitled "The Process" is

"The United States budget process begins when the President of the United States submits a budget request to Congress."

You're kidding, right?

No. The key word here is *REQUEST*.

Were you kidding about the Senate shutting down government?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Isn't it pathetic that democrats don't seem to be able to live and work within their means? Tax n Spend is all they know. Cost cutting is a foreign concept to liberal stooges.
Do the years 2000-2008 not exist for you?

Edit: Dammit now he's got me responding; I blame you besson
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Isn't it pathetic that democrats don't seem to be able to live and work within their means? Tax n Spend is all they know. Cost cutting is a foreign concept to liberal stooges.
Just to counter troll a little, for, I dunno, fun??

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Details are too difficult for you to grasp? Does that go for reality too?
Let's recap. You wrote:

President Stupid ever sent a serious budget?
I pointed out that a president doesn't create budgets himself. What happened here?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 12:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Math and Politics don't mix.
See! Anecodotal evidence reinforcing the scientific! I bring you guys ****ing wisdom
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 01:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Edit: Dammit now he's got me responding; I blame you besson
Yeah, we best pace ourselves. When the country defaults I'm sure we'll be hearing more false equivalency stuff. This party is just getting started!

You know, the Clinton years took place before I arrived here, but I was told that they were very much like what we have now as far as the Republicans trying every trick in the book to destroy his presidency, ranging from the silly to milking any sort of leverage they had at various times. Does this seem like deja vu to those who followed politics during those years?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 01:16 PM
 
I don't about the Clinton years, but watching some of the conservative members here just dig in, fill with emotion and spite, well, I see a lot of this forum and myself back in 2004-2008 in that.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 04:43 PM
 
Just in case anyone still doubted that the Tea Party is a haven for neo-Confederates, we had this on full display when Tea Party activists hijacked the "Million Vet March on the Memorials" this weekend …



Ugly rebel yell in front of the White House | WashingtonPost.com

And as a former GOP staffer put it …

The government shutdown, and the prospect of an unprecedented debt default, have sparked a new wave of debate about whether the system of government set forth in the Constitution is equipped to handle the tactics taken up by the modern GOP. Salon spoke Friday with Mike Lofgren, who worked as a Republican congressional staffer from 1983 to 2011 (including 16 years as a senior analyst on the budget Ccommittees of the Senate and House) before leaving and writing the best-seller “The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted.”

We discussed the last government shutdown (“terrible”), the current GOP (“neo-Confederate insurrectionists”) and how this showdown could end. A condensed and edited version of our conversation follows.

So in the lead-up to the shutdown and the way it’s played out so far, what if anything has surprised you?

Nothing. Of course the media is kind of covering it like the Michigan-Ohio State game, and love anything with a countdown clock or supposed suspense and all this other crap, and the easy visuals of some park service guy putting up a sawhorse at the Jefferson Memorial. None of that surprised me. [But] this is not something happening according to exigent circumstances or happenstance. This is something that the GOP wanted.

And I’ll say this: I am not an Obama partisan. I have many bones to pick with him, including the healthcare bill. If your intent was to insure as many people as possible, you’d have single payer. You also wouldn’t pay off big Pharma and the insurance companies. That said, the difference between what Obama and the Republicans are doing is like the difference between stomach upset and galloping Ebola.

These people are basically neo-Confederate insurrectionists. They are in substantive rebellion against the orderly government of the country. And one of the things I noticed — and it’s something that’s very common in human beings — we all try to mollify or appease the crazy uncle at Thanksgiving dinner. You know, “Don’t make a scene.” Well, I noticed in the last few years of my service on the Hill that a number of Democrats seemed to be afraid of Republicans. And Obama pretty much wasted his first term trying to mollify them. I think he’s finally stumbled upon a strategy that’s better: simply not give them what they demand. Because this is a deliberate strategy to hold the government hostage.
Ex-GOP insider unloads: Blame “neo-Confederate insurrectionists” for shutdown! - Salon.com



OAW
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:15 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,