Boehner Blinks, Republicans Snatch Defeat From Jaws Of Victory
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
Plus, the addicts are forcing someone else to pay for it. The head drug dealer, Obama, is counting on the fact that the bills will come due after he is gone. That, plus he is certain the only way to pay them will be crippling tax hikes on productive citizens, ie not his base, so it is a win-win for him.
Quote from piezoe:
Why do the Republican's have a death wish? Entitlement reform??? Don't make me laugh. They want to weaken the two most popular government programs, and one of these works as well any any program the government has ever initiated. The only way for them to succeed without being killed in the process is to use tactical Saran weapons on the entire AARP membership before they embark on this bound to lose battle.
What is it with these folks? Are they trying to prove what we already suspect, viz., the only part of their noggins left functioning is their brain stems.
Well for once, you're right.
We have these choirboys like Paul Ryan who are too clever by half. Yes, SS and medicare are unsustainable. Something has to be done. But they are called the third rail of politics for a reason. Romney was too arrogant to grasp that and paid the price.
People have a very good reason to bitterly resent changes to SS and medicare. They've paid into them their whole working lives, plus they are the only government benefit those not in the 47% will likely ever get.
So yes, combine that with amnesty and I will agree that a lot of republicans do seem to have a death wish. Either that, or democrats have managed to plant double agents all through the republican party.
I think this is preferable on most matters. Obamacare however is a direct threat to our country and economy. It was passed on a purely partisan vote, is deeply unpopular and is undermined by the many waivers given to political cronies.
I think it is fair game for the republicans to go after in any way they can. At the end of the day, the voters will decide if it was appropriate or not.
Don't pretend this is the first time this process has been used. The democrats used it back in the 1970's to defund the vietnam war, to allow their communist pals in north vietnam to violate the peace treaty Nixon had negotiated and take over the south. Mass murder followed, but since it was communists doing it, the international human rights crowd looked the other way.
Yes, it was passed on an entirely partisan vote! And it was supported by a majority of the voting populace at the time (How quickly we forget!). In fact, Obama was swept into office largely because he promised to reform medical care and bring care to millions of uninsured.
Obamney care is less popular now because of the concerted campaign against it, but no one knows yet how it will work out. Certainly it will have to be tweaked. But Republicans can' t stop the funding for it right now. They only make themselves look like idiots to try and do something that is bound to fail. There is no possibility of either a government shutdown or a default being sustained. They badly need some adult leadership.
You certainly are entitled to your opinion of Obamney care. It was only passed after big compromises with a minor faction of the Democrats led by Baucus in the Senate, who apparently was in the pocket of the Insurance companies. That's why the public option was killed, and that seriously crippled the legislation. It wasn't either Reid or Pelosi, it was Max Baucus.
This is the nature of the democratic process, you are almost guaranteed to get something less than optimal, but better, in most cases, then the worst possible. It is , in a word, the mediocre that should be expected from democracy, but something really good comes out of it once and a while when you have cooperation. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, I'm an educated observer.
If you are referring to the 1973 case-church amendment that prohibited U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos without prior approval of the Congress, you've picked a bad example. (I remember the Vietnam war as though it was yesterday. It was a dark hour for the U.S. because we were on the wrong side in that civil conflict; we had no business getting involved. We lied about the Tonkin Gulf incident, and continued the lies thereafter. We were war criminals!) That amendment passed by overwhelming bi-partisan majority in both houses, more than enough to override a presidential Veto. And thank goodness!
__________________
N.B. -- little known fact. The U.S, paid for roughly 80% of the French war in Vietnam. Then when the French gave up, we moved in by provoking a conflict and installed our own guy, who had been living in the U.S., in South Vietnam. Like the Japanese, and the French before and after them, we wanted control of Indochina because of its rich resources -- agricultural, mineral (tin+other), oil. We were Ok with the French having control, but not with the Vietnamese having control of their own country. Our Ambassador to Japan, Edwin Reischauer, an expert on Indochina, advised us to not get involved or else support the North, because ho chi minh was friendly to American interests and would act as a bulwark against further Chinese influence in the region. He was right of course, so naturally we ignored his advice. (ho had asked us for help with famine in his country and we turned him away. We were assholes.)
Republicans, Demokratz, same s%^t pretty muchly. Boehner is an idiot. People admired Bill Clinton when he stonewalled the prosecution while under oath in his sex scandal trial. They forgot about the scandal and admired the way he gave the figurative finger to the prosecutors.. these Republicans don't have very good political guidance. Boehner's rating might have taken a hit proportionate to how much he was seen as the reason for the shutdown but the longer term thing would have been that he stood there and stonewalled the bullshit Demokratz and that would have been good for his image.
IMO they all know the outcome, the Public Sector thingy will get to continue as it has for many decades. In the meantime they must be working across the aisle to make sure they all get to keep on with their theft...
IMO they all know the outcome, the Public Sector thingy will get to continue as it has for many decades. In the meantime they must be working across the aisle to make sure they all get to keep on with their theft...
OK Comrade
you are mostly correct here. It was a bipartisan effort that abandoned the effort, which is only right since it was a bipartisan effort that got us into the mess to begin with. Yes, our criminally corrupt government was setting up and dealing with other criminally corrupt governments. No surprise there, that's what governments do. All governments. What's lost in your assessment is the million+ innocent people who were slaughtered during and after our involvement, and the indifferent shrug of the shoulders by us and the international community as we/they watched it happen. As usual, there were no clean hands. There never is. My only argument with hard leftists, and hard righties, is that both act as if their hands are clean, or at least cleaner than those on the other side. They're not! Not on this issue, or any other issue.
Interesting. Supporting a dictator because he'd be more friendly to the US.
The way it works is if a dictator is a commie, the left wants to support him.
If the dictator is more in the line of a Pinochet, the left screams that it is a crime against humanity to support them
Funny how that works.
The Republicans ARE better... but only to the extent that the DemoCraps should be shot first.