What is outragously stupid demands? Such a thing is entirely subjective. IMO the Republicans asking that regular joe blow down the street get an extension the same as big business and those in Congress got is not a "outrageously stupid demand". It's down right reasonable. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. And imo anyone that wasn't partisan or fearful would agree that it isn't.
It's not reasonable for two reasons. The first is because of simple logistics and confusion surrounding what would be required of Americans. The second would be because if you delay it now, there's nothing to stop the Republicans from throwing a fit next year and demanding the same thing. It's not reasonable.
You are the one claiming i'm talking about "outrageously stupid things".
You are. You said because the Democrats didn't start out making outrageously stupid demands (like defunding Obamacare), they have not offered Republicans anything in negotiation.
You consider it a waste of time. Others do not. Like the above comments, this too is entirely subjective.
Then others are deluding themselves because it is a waste of time. Regardless of how you feel about Obamacare, it's not going anywhere. It is already in effect, the exchanges have already been opened and taking enrollment...it's a waste of time. If Republicans want to change it, then do it through regular legislative means, or when you have greater power in government.
The only people who don't think it's a waste of time are people who are deluding themselves to think anything substantial is going to change.
The mandate has hurt every single American. That is truth. Whether people see it or not. The government now has the power to force people to buy from any private business just by attaching it to the IRS and the tax code. That is a loss of freedom. Yeah yeah, I've heard the lines..."Oh thats just a conspiracy theory"...."The government would never do that!"...."Slipper slope fallacy". Sorry, I've seen too many slippery slopes actually happen to think that this is any different. Besides, fact is that they do have that power now. Whether they use it or not is irrelevent. This once instance people lost some freedom.
We long ago lost the freedom to have affordable healthcare. You see required insurance as a loss of freedom, I see the potential for gaining freedom from life-savings draining medical care.
Yes, that is exactly what you are claiming. You are saying that if voters truely didn't like Obamacare then they would have voted in Romney no matter any other issue. You are ignoreing the multitude of other reasons that Romney was not voted in and Obama was.
Obamacare was a major platform of Mitt Romney's. For you to say otherwise is simply revisionist history. Republicans and Romney railed against Obamacare. It was a Day One agenda item. Given the state of the economy, the military engagements, high unemployment, etc., don't you think if Americans did not like Obamacare, they would have voted for Romney? Of course they would. Furthermore, your assertion an issue cannot dominate an election is simply false. Murdock and Akin both lost their Congressional runs because of one position on women's rights/abortion. Lawmakers in Colorado recently lost a recall election on the issue of gun control.
The fact is Obamacare was put on trial during the presidential election and it passed. It passed Congress, the President, the Supreme Court and an election. It's just a fact.
Yeah, it definitely expanded the role of government. On that count I cannot disagree with you. And yes, the Mandate in Obamacare is certainly unconstitutional.
No, no it is not. You can continue saying it all you want, but even the most conservative Supreme Court in recent history tells you you are wrong.
:roll: Believe it or not, not everyone that disagrees with you watches fox news. I certainly don't. Also, believe it or not there are actually people that think for themselves and do not follow political parties.
I never said you watched Fox News. What I asked is when they started pushing this talking point because I've seen it WAY to often to believe the majority of Republicans suddenly came up with it on their own.
Because Democrats are being childish?
Childish...because they are not giving in to the ransom demanded by House Republicans? "Defund/repeal Obamacare or else"?
And the republicans are not saying no to the resolution.
They are saying no to even taking a vote. The Senate passed the resolution. The Democrats expect they have enough votes in the House for the Senate version to pass. CNN projects there are enough votes to pass the House.
So why don't we have a vote?
Bold: Seriously this is already getting old.
Yes, I'm sure the truth does get old. It doesn't make it any less true. Passed by Congress, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court and affirmed in an election. Furthermore, it is supported by 3/4ths of our current government (Senate, President and Supreme Court).
The minority party is demanding a ransom from 2/3rds of the government in exchange for doing the job they are Constitutionally required to do. This entire shutdown is because Republicans want to control everything, despite being the party in the minority.
As for the rest: First question: Ask yourself why haven't the democrats accepted it?
They accepted EVERYTHING about it except the Obamacare provision. That's your negotiation.
"We'll agree to your demands, but only if you agree to our one condition of not including Obamacare". That's negotiation. Anyone who is not blinded by partisanship should be able to see that.
And whether you like it or not, both are at fault. As I said before, it takes TWO to disagree or agree in any arguement.
No, it does not work that way. Blame is not a two-way street by default. You have to look at the facts and assign blame based on the facts. And the fact is the House is holding the government hostage because they are not getting 100% of what they want, even though the Senate and President has already agreed to almost all of it.
There's only one place to place the blame.
What logistical problems?
The first and most obvious would simply be putting out the information. We've had three years to prepare for this and people, whether they like it or not, at least understand they have to sign up and have insurance by January 1st. Delay it a year, and all you do is provide more confusion to the system. Furthermore, you have insurers who have prepared for it ready to accept people, you have government workers whose job it is to help people through it, etc.
And then, those people still won't know if they'll have to sign up for next year because there's nothing stopping Republicans from doing the exact same thing next year.
And why wouldn't those same problems also apply to Big Business and Congress? Why are they so special that THEIR omission for a year wouldn't cause the same problems? As for the rest, :shrug: don't give them a reason to.
I'm not aware of why you're mentioning Congress. To the best of my knowledge, they are required to sign up like everyone else.
As far as Big Business goes, there's many differences between individuals and business. Individuals have to deal with one person signing up for insurance, big business have to deal with hundreds or thousands of people who they will have to provide insurance. Businesses have much greater resources to deal with a delay, but also have much greater responsibilities to comply with the legislation.
In the eyes of the various polls which show more people are upset with Republicans.
In my eyes they are both equally crazy and irresponsible and they all need to be ousted.
No arguments here.