AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Yes I am. 310 million people against the 536 "clowns" AND the people that paid for them.
United States of Entropy
- Thread starter INDY500
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Yes I am. 310 million people against the 536 "clowns" AND the people that paid for them.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Each side claims to have the "facts" on their side. Each pundit I see on any channel is always spouting off some number about something and is simply shocked the other side doesn't see the same thing.
Seriously, if you step outside your party blinders for one week - you will see what I mean.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
That's what they want you to think.
It's like people who deny climate change. You are falling for it.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Anitram, does this qualify as an FYM version of False Equivalency?
There is no economic/political consensus on the impact of ACA (which is at the heart of this issue). However, there is 95% scientific consensus on climate change.
Apples to oranges...
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
About the Tea Party's abortion stance at the local level? This does seem to indicate local level involvement, but it doesn't mention abortion. It still seems they are more concerned with budget deficit and limited government issues.
No.
My point is that it is very clearly being articulated by Republicans themselves that this is nothing but obstructionism because they have been taken hostage by the Tea Party. You want to blame both parties? Really? While one is telling you that the reason for the government shut down and obstruction is to appease a small faction of ideologues?
Pray tell what there do you see constituting reasonable legislative intent? And where in the Democratic party do you see behaviour to justify your "they're both acting the same" view? Do we have a group of Democrats holding the nation hostage because we don't have single payer? Nevermind any other topic, let's concentrate on the shutdown and the related defunding of Obamacare.
The only way to keep claiming they are exactly the same is to employ serious cognitive dissonance.
My point is that it is very clearly being articulated by Republicans themselves that this is nothing but obstructionism because they have been taken hostage by the Tea Party. You want to blame both parties? Really? While one is telling you that the reason for the government shut down and obstruction is to appease a small faction of ideologues?
Pray tell what there do you see constituting reasonable legislative intent? And where in the Democratic party do you see behaviour to justify your "they're both acting the same" view? Do we have a group of Democrats holding the nation hostage because we don't have single payer? Nevermind any other topic, let's concentrate on the shutdown and the related defunding of Obamacare.
The only way to keep claiming they are exactly the same is to employ serious cognitive dissonance.
Are you seriously asking this?
Party A won the election on a platform of X.
Party B ran explicitly and loudly against X and lost the presidency, lost the Senate and actually lost the House popular vote but ended up with control because their governors gerrymandered the seats.
Supreme Court upholds constitutionality of X. Teabagger members of Party B actually come out stating that just because the SCOTUS says something is constitutional doesn't make it so (!!).
Party B attempts to repeal X 43 (yes I checked it), FORTY-THREE times. Fails.
During a routine budgetary measure, Teabagger members of Party B decide to have one more go at it so they attempt to defund X. Many moderate members of Party B then come out stating that the reason for this is because Teabaggers are dictating the course of action with tacit threats that any moderate Republican who doesn't agree with them will get primaried.
And you think this is the same.
GO WIN AN ELECTION, REPUBLICANS.
For which American people are they fighting? Not the ones that voted.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Good Lord, man. It's got nothing to do with party blinders. Irvine and Anitram are putting forth arguments that you're ignoring almost entirely.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
As you know - I'm actually a supporter of free, universal health care and not this ACA sham...
Anyway - something to think about:
1) It could be reasonably argued that this bill was passed without ANY bi-partisan support, thus ignoring the opinion of nearly half of the nation's population: The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it. That's not exactly a mandate.
2) 47.2% of the population did vote against Obama - does that mean that almost half of the nation no longer has a say?
3) It could also be argued that the Tea Party success in 2010 was the nation's response of ACA being passed. That fact should be taken into consideration.
4) And of course - the general public may have supported Obama in 2012 - but ACA has not enjoyed majority support.
So, who is "listening" to the will of the people? The president that got elected but passed unpopular legislation with zero bi-partisan support (which is astounding considering the cost/impact of the bill), or the Republicans that are literally responding to the majority of the people that oppose Obamacare?
Anyway - something to think about:
1) It could be reasonably argued that this bill was passed without ANY bi-partisan support, thus ignoring the opinion of nearly half of the nation's population: The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it. That's not exactly a mandate.
2) 47.2% of the population did vote against Obama - does that mean that almost half of the nation no longer has a say?
3) It could also be argued that the Tea Party success in 2010 was the nation's response of ACA being passed. That fact should be taken into consideration.
4) And of course - the general public may have supported Obama in 2012 - but ACA has not enjoyed majority support.
So, who is "listening" to the will of the people? The president that got elected but passed unpopular legislation with zero bi-partisan support (which is astounding considering the cost/impact of the bill), or the Republicans that are literally responding to the majority of the people that oppose Obamacare?
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
They did - in 2010 - as a response to Obamacare. These are the folks you are dealing with now - elected to do EXACTLY this.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Should we talk about how a democracy works?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
And Obama clobbered his opponent for the 2nd time in a row in 2012. And the Dems control the Senate. And they have more votes in the House.
So you have no leg to stand on here.
Representatives are elected to govern, not to protest.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Except that 57% of the nation oppose the bill.
U2DMfan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I'll say this much. Both parties are sellout whores that have allowed the whole country, to one degree or another, to be sold up the river to Big Business. That much is true. But that does not mean they behave the same way within the realm of governance or even electoral politics. The Republicans perpetuate the most egregious thing in all of American politics. They continually convince people, often knowingly and cynically, to vote against their own best interests. And they also play far harder in terms of raw politics which is what we're seeing now. Because if they didn't do either one of these things, they'd be almost useless and ineffectual and certainly the permanent minority party.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Sure, Harry Reid and the Democrats could give funding to NIH, NASA, and National Parks right now. But they won't. Why? Because they're playing the same game (and they may actually be winning based on the polls).
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Very much agreed.
Just a decade ago they were talking about the Democrats being a permanent minority party. This is just another cycle.
U2DMfan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Actually you might be right. I'm sure they promised their constituents that they would do whatever it would take.
But at this point it's not only the law, it has been reinforced by the USSC. Obama has no responsibility to negotiate with the House on this matter. At all.
So if that is the case, and it clearly is, then what are they doing besides performing a political stunt?
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Many years back, before Obama got elected, when Gay Marriage was being defeated, I don't recall you being so convinced about the benefits of democracy.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I'm guessing they are hoping for some sort of compromise - perhaps another year delay on ACA. But I'm just guessing.
It seems to me the Republicans are losing the PR battle here - but the very people elected to do this are probably soaring high in their local polls. It's all about being re-elected - the beauty of democracy - right Irvine
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Talk about your apples to oranges ... Wow.
But since you're playing the "everything is the same" game, I suppose I'll say that te one thing SSM and the ACA have in common is that both are constitutional.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
That only proves it was not un-Constitutional. A majority of the public still opposes the bill - especially the districts that elected the Tea Party Caucus.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
I'm guessing they are hoping for some sort of compromise - perhaps another year delay on ACA. But I'm just guessing. It seems to me the Republicans are losing the PR battle here - but the very people elected to do this are probably soaring high in their local polls. It's all about being re-elected - the beauty of democracy - right Irvine
Why? Why should there be ANY compromise on the ACA?
Is there some sort of Republican alternative to the ACA upon which compromises could be made?
Given that the ACA is itself a massive compromise, and a smashing success in Massachusetts, and a major achievement of Mitt Romney, and the central issue of the 2012 campaign, and has passed both houses and the SCOTUS, tell me, upon what do we compromise?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
What are you even talking about? We do to get to blow up the government because laws pass that a minority of people don't like. Governing is not "my way or I'll wreck the country."
Read this:
http://m.newyorker.com/online/blogs...efund-obamacare-suicide-caucus-geography.html
U2DMfan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Whoever said that didn't know a thing about projected demographics decades down the road. But there is a lot of natural appeal to the Democrats regardless of whatever cynical tactics might exist. Republicans have very little natural appeal and desperately require their cynical tactics.
Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections and the one time they didn't, Kerry got more votes than any losing candidate has ever received. Whatever else they have going against them, they have some things going for them as well.
And without the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and hijacking Jesus issues, the Republicans might never have won a national election again after Nixon.
It's hard to sell average folk on being THE party of the ultra rich unless you can create the alternate universe that promises them mythical tax cuts that pay for themselves, among many other things. This aligns the mid.lower class and the rich. Great strategy! Terrible after effects.
I really detest both parties but there is one way worse than the other on some of these core things. And I'm not just talking about a given issue here or there, but just in general. Dishonesty. Or if it's not dishonest but is actually sincere, then it's incredible ignorance.
It's something that has really bothered me lately on a personal level, dealing with members of my own family that believe such ignorant things about Obama. And I am no big fan of Obama, but I am HUGE fan of the truth. And these are people that voted FOR him in 2008. It's just...maddening. More and more I blame the sheer cynicism within the GOP that metes out this garbage. The flat out refusal to admit certain truths. I can fill up a whole page on what I don't like about the Democrats but they don't quite reach this level.
Romney lost the 2012 election because of this stuff. Because he couldn't make 2+2 = 5. As Clinton said at the DNC, it was a math problem. Republicans have been selling that bad math for years. And people had been buying it for all sorts of reasons other than the actual math itself.
I don't see this as a cycle until I see the Republicans evolve. I see them headed in the opposite direction actually, devolving. We see it right now, the fringe are handing the moderates their hat. And the moderate candidates for President twice in a row were polluted by having to appeal to that fringe.
As much as I rail against both parties, I sense the frustration with the equivalence that's been made here (perhaps my own words perceived that way?) and just wanted to make my opinion known on that. I'm pretty moderate, but yeah, Left of center. And I almost hoped I could have supported someone else in 2012, I just couldn't. I liked Huntsman but a guy like that had no prayer in this Republican party. When that changes, maybe it starts to look more like a cycle to me as someone that supported the principled moderate McCain in 2000 and hasn't supported a Republican for President since.
U2DMfan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
It's no great wonder. What they are doing, whether they feel emboldened to do it or not, is pretty much dickish BS. And it's hurting people.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
A bill passed with zero votes from the opposition party can hardly be called a compromise.
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
AEON
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
That may have been true once, but it certainly isn't true anymore. Since the Democrats took charge in 2008, the "ultra rich" have only gotten "ultra richer." How can this happen if the "party of the people" was actually looking out for the middle class? That's why I'm calling BS.
- Status
