Obama Threatens the American People with a Gov't Shut Down

Makes you wonder, don't it?

 

LOL, Presidents don't pass budgets. They sign them. Obama has sent a budget to Congress every single year.

The lack of basic knowledge does make me wonder.

 

The Senate keeps sending the House a clean CR that simply funds the govt.

When will the House finally vote on it?

 

Except of course, to those who choose to pay the TAX rather than pay for insurance they don't have to get.

Just because a twenty year-old is stupid enough to vote for King Obama doesn't mean he's going to throw his own money away.

Just yours.

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing is clean if it's in contact with MessiahCare.

 

And event the RAT-infested Senate has laughed them down.

 

Oh please, the GOP has been infested with tea party nutjobs who, because they lost two elections and can't pass their legislation democratically, are now holding the american form of government hostage to try to extort their policies into power.

Its blackmail by tea party jihadists.

 

The Senate is refusing to discuss eliminating the Congressional carve out and delaying the penalty for Americans like they have done for business. That is why the government is shut down.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to forget that "the GOP has been infested with tea party nutjobs" because the American people put them there.

 

Yet they lost two elections in a row, lost the presidency twice, and lost their majority in the senate and nearly in the house as well.

The american people spoke and they didn't want the wackos in power.

 

You know what's REALLY amazing?

What we're seeing right now is DEMOCRATS IN POWER. Like you said, they WON the last 2 presidential elections. So why are they still whining about the mean ole Republicans?

Why is there a total gridlock in congress resulting in govt shut, few jobs being created, 60% unemp among young black males, gasoline over $3, food costs soaring, welfare roles bulging, etc., etc.

Yeah, buddy... those American people who spoke sure knew what they were doing electing an inexperienced rockstar, didn't they? The country hasn't been this divided in... maybe never. At least not in my lifetime.

 

Only because the Republican elite ran Democrat light contenders for President. The Senate is harder to turn over because only about 1/3 is up for re-election.

 

Are you kidding me?

They ran their big names and lost! The American people voted for Obama after Obamacare was laid out on the table.

Guess what? Now the GOP has shut down the government trying to force the defunding of Obamacare.

They lost and now they are holding the American system of government hostage in an attempt to force their policy through via hostage negotiation.

- - - Updated - - -

Are kidding me here?

Maybe that's because theirs one third of the legislature doing everything in their power to destroy the country. They are refusing to do their jobs as elected officials until their demands are met.

That's a disgrace to the American way of life.

 

I agree with you, but your line of reasoning is set out for conservatives, not liberals. That's fine, but if your goal is to actually convince people you're better off addressing their points rather than repeating talking points.

The Democrats say that the Republicans are holding the budget hostage - the Republicans say that the Democrats are holding the budget hostage. Both sides have the ability to end the shutdown if they concede. So the thing we need to show is that the Republicans are being legitimate in this tactic - that's the difference between taking hostage and taking what's rightfully yours.

So what constitutes a legitimate tactic? Well, in the context of the political system - the law does. It doesn't matter, for example, that Teddy Roosevelt stole the election from Taft and gave it to Wilson - this action might have been irritating and unsportsmanlike, but it was completely legal, and hence legitimate. The same can be said of the Republicans' tactic employed here. They have a right to vote in whatever way they see fit (otherwise what's the point in having a vote at all), and according the constitution appropriations are to be voted on,

This is a limit on Congress' power. They have to pass money bills separate to legislative bills. The Democrats are right in that there exists a convention where appropriations are almost always rubber stamped, but this convention is non-binding - each member still has a vote which they can use in any way they see fit - their reasoning is irrelevant, they have this lawful power.

[hr][/hr]

So, in reality, the disagreement here is no more special than that over the ACA in the first place. Each side disagrees and is holding steadfast. If you dislike this set of circumstances, you can offer each other something to find agreement (for example, a 1 year delay), or you can enjoy not being able to pass the bill.

As for who is at fault for not compromising, I think the blame can be shared. Sure, the Republicans have proposed a compromise, but the question is whether or not the compromise is reasonable. Anyone can present [what you want - 10%] and call it a compromise, but whether it's reasonable is another question. On this point I think the Democrats have something like a point. The House proposal of removing funding for the ACA was always unreasonable, but at least they've come to the table, the Democrats have straight-up refused to enter any negotiations.

[hr][/hr]

So in summary, the Republicans are entitled to use this tactic, there's nothing illegitimate about it. If you guys want a budget you need to come to an agreement that pleases both parties, or enjoy your partial government shutdown.

 

Just as they have the ridiculous budget the Tearrorists have sent them. So what is your point?