I have A Question For The Republicans

[Logicman]

That is purely your bias and uninformed opinion. ACA passed the House, it passed the Senate, and Signed by President and confirmed by United States Supreme Court as constitutional. This is how the United States Government Works. The laws of this land however just or unjust you think they are, ARE not subjected to the few minority congressmen going on temper tantrum and holding the entire country hostage and millions without getting paid because they don't like certain portion or all of it.

They are under the impression that their opinion trumps all and their belief trumps all laws and other beliefs. This is the fanaticism from the group shall we called them Taliban Republicans is operating, be it out of pure belief or just as a ploy to get campaign contribution from their base.

For a group of people who swore to uphold the Constitution they are sure going out of their way to trump and violate it.

Diving Mullah

I stand by what I previously wrote.

And it's entirely Constitutional to try to vote a current law down or to defund it. Whoever gave you the idea it's not needs to rethink their position. And to call it Taliban Republicanism, when King Obama on his own changed the law 19 times without consulting congress is a monumental piece of hot air rhetoric.

 

[Jack Hays]

That is a rather limited interpretation of my post. As usual go on the attack, personal attack of course because that's all you got in your toolbox, and decide what something means instead of listening to what it means. You are welcome to see my effort here as naive, but intentions were to address the topic of the thread and now we are here instead. That's your fault not mine.

I do not wish to stoop to personal attacks, so I will break off now. Your post was content free except for the deliberate insult to Repubs. They are guilty in this matter, but they are no more guilty than the Dems. Your post makes that discussion more difficult, not easier. It's just agit-prop, disguised as earnest good intentions: the worst kind of hypocrisy.:roll:

 

[clownboy]

No I didn't I shared a real story about an observation made by a good hearted girl who feels bad that she thinks that way and questions her perceptions. The question is why would someone looking for the best get that impression. That is the conversation, not my daughter.

Nonsense and you should know better. When sharing a personal anecdote in debate you can expect that the anecdote and it's central players will be examined - especially when you use that anecdote to defame others, which you did. I can give you similar anecdotes where children have similar things to say about the democrats, but I'm not eager to expose them to ridicule from the hardcore dems here.

 

[American]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

This is the sorriest excuse for a house of representatives that I've ever seen....'course I'm just 79. The Tea Party extremists will completely ruin what we have and what was bought and paid for by a a lot of young blood......and I don't mean Iraq which bought nothing. 4500 young Americans died because an administration was hell bent to remove Saddam Hussein from power.......the reason? Saddam tried to assassinate Bush's daddy in 1993.

Obama went along with Republicans on a tax increase? Does anyone else see the obvious flaw in this assertion?

 

[Jack Hays]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

This is the sorriest excuse for a house of representatives that I've ever seen....'course I'm just 79. The Tea Party extremists will completely ruin what we have and what was bought and paid for by a a lot of young blood......and I don't mean Iraq which bought nothing. 4500 young Americans died because an administration was hell bent to remove Saddam Hussein from power.......the reason? Saddam tried to assassinate Bush's daddy in 1993.

This post is a collection of falsehoods. It is an example of what is wrong with our politics in both parties. This thread has a false foundation.eace

 

[clownboy]

That is a rather limited interpretation of my post. As usual go on the attack, personal attack of course because that's all you got in your toolbox, and decide what something means instead of listening to what it means. You are welcome to see my effort here as naive, but intentions were to address the topic of the thread and now we are here instead. That's your fault not mine.

Your wounded act is a personal attack technique in itself whether you are honest enough to recognise it or not. YOU put forward the anecdote that basically labels people assholes for their complex and considered political views and it's very hard to understand why you would be at all surprised there might be a negative response to that.

Drop it, don't do it again, and return to the topic.

 

[opendebate]

Nonsense and you should know better. When sharing a personal anecdote in debate you can expect that the anecdote and it's central players will be examined - especially when you use that anecdote to defame others, which you did. I can give you similar anecdotes where children have similar things to say about the democrats, but I'm not eager to expose them to ridicule from the hardcore dems here.

I am not going to address any further comments about my daughter. As for your comments about my intentions, I am often misunderstood here. This is my first debate site and granted I have a lot to learn but I won't stoop to coddling people who can't see past their emotional knee jerk reactions and have a discussion about tough observations of a party they are aligned with. You can call it naive but my intentions were as stated. Sometimes it is hard to hear a powerful point that strikes at something you are aligned with, that I understand, so if that story prompted a heated debate about content and someone was grown up enough to have THAT conversation...bring it. Tell me how the republicans are misunderstood, tell me what motivates policy that can appear harsh ...explain yourself. Don't attack the messenger or my little girl.

 

[opendebate]

Your wounded act is a personal attack technique in itself whether you are honest enough to recognise it or not. YOU put forward the anecdote that basically labels people assholes for their complex and considered political views and it's very hard to understand why you would be at all surprised there might be a negative response to that.

Drop it, don't do it again, and return to the topic.

You jumped on the bandwagon. you leave it alone.

 

[Diving Mullah]

I stand by what I previously wrote.

And it's entirely Constitutional to try to vote a current law down or to defund it. Whoever gave you the idea it's not needs to rethink their position. And to call it Taliban Republicanism, when King Obama on his own changed the law 19 times without consulting congress is a monumental piece of hot air rhetoric.

You need to read and understand your constitution before making claims and stand by fallacies. Kind Obama has executive authority to order his departments under his command to execute part of all of the Laws as he sees fit...Ergo EXECUTIVE POWERS.

Congress has authority to change modify or nullify part of or all of certain laws but it has to also go through Senate and depending whether it has 61 votes or more President can sign, return and ask more modification or veto. What congress is doing right now is outside of it purview regarding ACA. So instead they are putting the country in danger of default to extort the president to get them something that they otherwise are unable to get constitutionally.

In another words they are holding the good Credit standing of this country Hostage to get something they clearly have no authority to get.

That is why they are called Republican Talibans!


Diving Mullah

 

[Jack Hays]

You need to read and understand your constitution before making claims and stand by fallacies. Kind Obama has executive authority to order his departments under his command to execute part of all of the Laws as he sees fit...Ergo EXECUTIVE POWERS.

Congress has authority to change modify or nullify part of or all of certain laws but it has to also go through Senate and depending whether it has 61 votes or more President can sign, return and ask more modification or veto. What congress is doing right now is outside of it purview regarding ACA. So instead they are putting the country in danger of default to extort the president to get them something that they otherwise are unable to get constitutionally.

In another words they are holding the good Credit standing of this country Hostage to get something they clearly have no authority to get.

That is why they are called Republican Talibans!


Diving Mullah

If what the Repubs were attempting were really unconstitutional then no one would be worried about it. Their plan is irresponsible and politically stupid but it's well within constitutional bounds.eace

 

[Logicman]

You need to read and understand your constitution before making claims and stand by fallacies. Kind Obama has executive authority to order his departments under his command to execute part of all of the Laws as he sees fit...Ergo EXECUTIVE POWERS.

Congress has authority to change modify or nullify part of or all of certain laws but it has to also go through Senate and depending whether it has 61 votes or more President can sign, return and ask more modification or veto. What congress is doing right now is outside of it purview regarding ACA. So instead they are putting the country in danger of default to extort the president to get them something that they otherwise are unable to get constitutionally.

In another words they are holding the good Credit standing of this country Hostage to get something they clearly have no authority to get.

That is why they are called Republican Talibans!

Diving Mullah

I stand by what I previously wrote.

The fact is the ACA is a bureaucratic nightmare. Nobody, and I mean nobody, really understands it. Even its Democratic architect called it a train wreck.

And you're defending that mess?

 

[Diving Mullah]

I stand by what I previously wrote.

The fact is the ACA is a bureaucratic nightmare. Nobody, and I mean nobody, really understands it. Even its Democratic architect called it a train wreck.

And you're defending that mess?

I understand it fully...not that complicated.

As far as defending it...Like many laws there are things in there that I don't like, things that I hate and things that I do like. What I don't understand is this cataclysmic mentality by republicans that ACA will ruin America as we know it crap... Or saying the worst law enacted by man kind....

Sit down with President and Negotiate the parts you don't like with things that President and Democrats wants. This is the trick with negotiation; nobody gets everything they want, but some.

Diving Mullah

 

[Excon]

LOL....you sound like Dick Morris and Karl Rove when they predicted Romney by a landslide. Hang in there......your ship might come in but thankfully not in my lifetime

1.) You still didn't answer the question.
2.) Still showing you clearly have no idea of what you speak.

---

You shared this story as a way to insult people. I have no idea whether you have a child and I don't care. Your post is a pile of hypocrisy, and you don't get to pretend to be a victim.:lamo

Exactly!
And she hid behind her adult daughter to do it.

 

[Excon]

and if that had been the republican approach to governing, i would agree
but GOP leaders stated their intent was to oppose Obama ... to prevent his re-election
cannot say that it is because he is black, but they opposed anything he supported only because he supported it
they put party interests before national interests

Wtf?
:naughty
No, their interests are in the nations best interests.

the one's who voted for his massive tax break for the rich

It was a tax break for all.

 

[Excon]

There is a very simple answer to that.

well... look at this way...

The ACA was passed in 2009 by congress and senate regardless how controversial it was, It did pass the congress and was signed by the president...So it became the Law despite 43 attempts by the house to over turn it, it did stay the law. Even the Supreme court ruled that law is constitutional. Which means despite people's personal feeling on the matter it passed all the bars and now it is the law of the land.

None of which matters to the question.

Elections have consequences, this temper tantrum thrown by Republicans on a law that they don't like (they can't even overturn it so they want president to defund it) and for it they are willing to shut the government and subsequently hurt tens of thousands of Americans in the process because republicans disagree with president on the ideology.

Which matters not to the question, and is really a matter of perspective.
The Dems are at fault.

This suppose to be a Democratic Republic and things get done with both side decide to compromise. Last time The house majority leader said that they (meaning Republicans in the house) got 90% of what they asked for, so to me it means President and Democrats although weak or really bad negotiators are not the uncompromising ones. So the big question is why has it got to this point, or better yet why is it even allowed to get to this point. Last time even the thread of not raising the debt limit hurt AAA rating of the country, so are republican why are willing throw the baby with the bathwater Just because they can?

1.) This is a Republic.
2.) This isn't one sided. The Republicans have made concessions by making it a 1 year delay which is not what they want. It is the Dems who are not playing ball and are responsible.

The congress has lost the sight of their purpose...Their purpose is not to be reelected election after election but rather to make things better for All Americans. And no they are not doing it because most Americans want that, if that was true 90% of American are for some sort of Gun protection Law or better background checks Law, and yet we see no move from this congress bending to the will of the people on that. This is fanaticism on behave of Republicans, and because of it the country and Americans will suffer for it.

Wtf?
Make things better for all?
No, their job is to govern.
To do what is best for the country within the confines of the Constitution.
If that results in what is good for the people, so be it.
Getting rid of bad law like the monstrosity of ACA is good for both.

The simple answer to your question is because For the Good of the Country!

Sorry that doesn't answer the question.
They are opposed to it because it isn't good for the country. So you saying they shouldn't oppose it for the same reason is ridiculous.

 

[Ockham]

Sorry but I remember when this was going on and the Republicans were just being obstreperous and would not go and discuss anything. Why even the insurance companies had to almost have their arms twisted in order to go to the White House and discuss the health care initiative. :roll:

Happy thesaurus day by the way.

It's true Republicans didn't like the idea, but that doesn't mean they didn't want to be part of it and when they were locked out of the process, it was pretty obvious what the reaction would be. It would have been the same were the roles reversed. No private business wants the Government in their pants and the insurance companies are no different.

 

[Ockham]

I am being honest....sorry if you fail to comprehend that. When have the Democrats shut down the government and thrown a tantrum similar to what the teabaggers are doing today?

I fully disagree and it's obvious given the example I provided. If you can't be honest, there's no reason to continue.

 

[Ockham]

i don't think we can pride ourselves in our health care system if people die from lack of health insurance coverage.

So in the last 2 years, how many people have died from "the lack of health care insurance"?

For people without insurance still used the healthcare system - they went to free clinics and went to hospital emergency rooms for treatment. That was one of the selling points of the ACA and the phantom cost saving measures.

to be perfectly honest i don't know much about the health care system, not my field of study, but if someone dies from a abscessed tooth because his insurance could not provide him access to a dentist or doctor, i find that something is wrong in this system.

People die of all sorts of things but I have yet to see a direct correlation. Those who are seriously ill are treated insurance or no.

 

[disneydude]

I fully disagree and it's obvious given the example I provided. If you can't be honest, there's no reason to continue.

Obviously you are failing to understand. I agree...there is no reason to continue. Maybe next time.

 

[sawdust]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

This is the sorriest excuse for a house of representatives that I've ever seen....'course I'm just 79. The Tea Party extremists will completely ruin what we have and what was bought and paid for by a a lot of young blood......and I don't mean Iraq which bought nothing. 4500 young Americans died because an administration was hell bent to remove Saddam Hussein from power.......the reason? Saddam tried to assassinate Bush's daddy in 1993.

Legislation is not supposed to be based on quid pro quo. It's supposed to be based on values and good ideas. Obama has none of those values so cooperation with him is difficult.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Moderator's Warning:

Address the posts, not the posters. Don't make me find an infraction noodle!

 

[YoungConserv]

About as twice as many times the conservatives have done the same, thus 2x0= (well you know, right?)

Name a few.