The Tea Party is back in business! (2 Viewers)

[cstu]

Sure everyone can point fingers and call Tea Partiers crazy buffoons, but if we could resurrect the Founding Fathers to fix the mess in Washington, and they had to join a party, what party would they join? Democrat? - absolutely no way, Democrats are the pretty much the opposite of everything the Founders stood for. Republican - probably not due to sheer ineptness and general spinelessness against the Democrats. In my opinion, the Tea Party is the only party that would be somewhat recognizable to the Founders as a legitimate party and that is who they would side with. I guess that makes the Founders crazy buffoons too.

If we resurrected the Founding Fathers their minds would be blown that a Negro is President and that we have women and gays in Congress.

 

[cstu]

Theoretically, what would happen if one party in the House refused to ever pass a budget they knew would get approved by the Senate and President?

 

[Willie Neslon]

Sure everyone can point fingers and call Tea Partiers crazy buffoons, but if we could resurrect the Founding Fathers to fix the mess in Washington, and they had to join a party, what party would they join? Democrat? - absolutely no way, Democrats are the pretty much the opposite of everything the Founders stood for. Republican - probably not due to sheer ineptness and general spinelessness against the Democrats. In my opinion, the Tea Party is the only party that would be somewhat recognizable to the Founders as a legitimate party and that is who they would side with. I guess that makes the Founders crazy buffoons too.

I have actually thought about this before. The two parties of that day were the Federalist party and the democrat-republican party. Their main difference involved how to apply the provisions of the Constitution. With that in mind i believe they would not be members of any of today's political parties as the times have changed.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Varmint hit the nail on the head, if Congress doesn't rubber stamp Obama's demands they are seen as holding Obamacare "hostage", and then all the libs come in saying the R's need to win an election if they want to be able to muscle their policies through like Obama is trying to do here, it's a joke.

Democracy is so unfair. You have to have more popular policies than the other guy if you want to make them into law.

Popular policies my ###, don't you mean due to a supermajority it barely got through?

Obamacare is the product of a brief moment of total Democratic dominance in Washington. Key to that dominance was a 60-seat, filibuster-proof Senate majority. It wasn’t a sure bet for Democrats; despite victories in 2008, the party’s hopes for that majority depended on the outcome of a contested race in Minnesota. After a controversial recount, Al Franken became the 60th Democratic senator on July 7, 2009, giving Democrats an unassailable edge.

But that majority disappeared just 49 days later when, on August 25, 2009, Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy died. State law called for a special election to fill the empty seat. That would have taken months, and as public opposition to Obamacare grew, Democrats became increasingly anxious to pass the bill as quickly as possible. Luckily for them, Democrats in the Massachusetts legislature came to the rescue, changing the law to allow the immediate appointment of Democrat Paul Kirk. Kirk was sworn in on September 24, 2009, giving Democrats 60 votes once more.

The sheer unpopularity* of Obamacare will have political consequences. Don't like the checks and balances in our government to combat easy funding of the ACA through the House that barely got there only due to a supermajority after the Democrats in Mass changed the law to facilitate it? Tough ####.

______________

* Which do you think would be better for you and your family -- the new health care

system or the system that was in place before the new health care law? 1-2 Oct 13

The new health

care system

36%

System that was in

place before

52%

(Don’t know)

12%

 

[Maelstrom]

Sure everyone can point fingers and call Tea Partiers crazy buffoons, but if we could resurrect the Founding Fathers to fix the mess in Washington, and they had to join a party, what party would they join? Democrat? - absolutely no way, Democrats are the pretty much the opposite of everything the Founders stood for. Republican - probably not due to sheer ineptness and general spinelessness against the Democrats. In my opinion, the Tea Party is the only party that would be somewhat recognizable to the Founders as a legitimate party and that is who they would side with. I guess that makes the Founders crazy buffoons too.

The Founding Fathers were actually pretty darn intelligent and sensible. They were also willing to compromise on things. Don't think they would join either party - unfortunately, they probably wouldn't succeed in today's political environment because they wouldn't be willing to pander to the extremes on either side.

 

[timschochet]

Sure everyone can point fingers and call Tea Partiers crazy buffoons, but if we could resurrect the Founding Fathers to fix the mess in Washington, and they had to join a party, what party would they join? Democrat? - absolutely no way, Democrats are the pretty much the opposite of everything the Founders stood for. Republican - probably not due to sheer ineptness and general spinelessness against the Democrats. In my opinion, the Tea Party is the only party that would be somewhat recognizable to the Founders as a legitimate party and that is who they would side with. I guess that makes the Founders crazy buffoons too.

Umm no. Andrew Jackson might have appreciated the Tea Party as useful voters for him- he never would have allowed them to forge policy though. The Know Nothing's of the 1850s would have welcomed the Tea Party as brothers in ignorance, as would the McCarthyites, John Birchers, and fans is Spiro Agnew. But the Founding Fathers would have looked at them with horror. Thomas Jefferson would have mumbled something about the ignorant masses, and James Madison would demand to know how our public education system could possibly produce such nincompoops.

 

[jonessed]

Hey Dr. J, Linus, and JoJo:

Can you guys go, you know, play with your toys in the other room? The grownups are trying to have a serious discussion here.

I think they're all in Linus' room watching cartoons right now, humpback. Why don't you go check it out? I'm sure you'll find that a lot more interesting.

It's really too bad that you feel forced to resort to personal insults.

Oh please. I'm having a little bit of fun. What I wrote is very different from calling somebody a POS, don't you think?

No.

 

[dparker713]

Varmint hit the nail on the head, if Congress doesn't rubber stamp Obama's demands they are seen as holding Obamacare "hostage", and then all the libs come in saying the R's need to win an election if they want to be able to muscle their policies through like Obama is trying to do here, it's a joke.

Democracy is so unfair. You have to have more popular policies than the other guy if you want to make them into law.

Popular policies my ###, don't you mean due to a supermajority it barely got through?

When one party ####s up so much that they hand a supermajority to the other party, do you suppose that might mean they'll lose on a significant point of contention? Maybe then each party shouldn't try to #### up that bad, eh?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Varmint hit the nail on the head, if Congress doesn't rubber stamp Obama's demands they are seen as holding Obamacare "hostage", and then all the libs come in saying the R's need to win an election if they want to be able to muscle their policies through like Obama is trying to do here, it's a joke.

Democracy is so unfair. You have to have more popular policies than the other guy if you want to make them into law.

Popular policies my ###, don't you mean due to a supermajority it barely got through?

When one party ####s up so much that they hand a supermajority to the other party, do you suppose that might mean they'll lose on a significant point of contention? Maybe then each party shouldn't try to #### up that bad, eh?

So you support supermajorities that can make law whatever they want even if the public is against it? Duly noted.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

House Republicans seek probe of D.C. monument closures

Feds try to close Ocean because of shutdown.

You can't make this #### up.

 

[roadkill1292]

From Forbes...

The bottom line is that the resulting Obamacare replacement plan would provide for universal coverage (which Obamacare fails to do), with no individual mandate, no employer mandate, and a net tax and spending cut of at least $1 trillion over the first 10 years alone. The public would overwhelmingly embrace such a Republican health care alternative as vastly preferable to Obamacare. What a resounding reversal that would be in the public’s appraisal of President Obama and his legacy for Obamacare to be replaced by such a Republican alternative based on freedom of choice, market competition and incentives, rather than Obamacare’s effective take over and control over health care.

Health care based on the free market is pretty clearly second best and the public realizes this. There will be no clamor for more of the old system when other countries have better ones. As in so many other issues, demographics and shifting public opinion will make single payer inevitable.

 

[timschochet]

Hey Dr. J, Linus, and JoJo:

Can you guys go, you know, play with your toys in the other room? The grownups are trying to have a serious discussion here.

I think they're all in Linus' room watching cartoons right now, humpback. Why don't you go check it out? I'm sure you'll find that a lot more interesting.

It's really too bad that you feel forced to resort to personal insults.

Oh please. I'm having a little bit of fun. What I wrote is very different from calling somebody a POS, don't you think?

No.

Well then you must be having a hard day. Get some sleep, and let's see how you feel in the morning.

 

[The Commish]

Astute observations Chaz. The problem is that it's not just Ted Cruz and a few looney morons. A large % of Americans are completely clueless as to how the gov't runs, and they liken gov't debt, deficits, and the budget to their own household debt, deficit, and budgets. See icon's thread about "OMG DEBT!!!!!!!"

The tea party morons aren't just a fringe radical group, their ideas are supported by the majority of the base of the party. That's why we're in this debacle, and John Boehner won't call them out.

Didn't you mean the majority of Americans? I know you get off calling everyone else stupid, but if you can't spot the sucker...

My gym trainer was asking me about the government shutdown so I filled him in. Then I asked him if he was familiar with the ACA (aka Obamacare), he said he heard of it. I knew he didn't have health insurance so I asked him, did you know if you don't sign up for it they are going to fine you, starting at about $100 and ramping up to $700 in two years and that his alternative to pay for it would run him about $4k? His response, "#### that", and no he didn't know that. So while the masses may not be as educated as TGunz, the word is not getting out there in terms of just how bad this is going to be for a lot of Americans.

So your trainer is either going to have to get health insurance or he'll be force to contribute to the insurance society is already paying for him that he is currently shirking on.

How is this bad for a lot of Americans again?

See...this is some of the utter bull#### that the left spews....yeah it's just one side that does this crap. How the hell do you know he doesn't pay his bills out of pocket??

Are you really so desperate to make this both sides fault that you want to call tommy out because this individual trainer might be the exception to the rule? Could be the noise in the statistics? And if he happens to be the exception that pays out of pocket he is being greatly harmed by the vast majority of his fellow uninsured peers if he ever has any significant medical bills.

Is it really that tommy believes that this "calculated risk" is one that places society in too much of harms way to be allowable? (I didn't ask if you agreed with tommy, just whether it was a reasonable position to take?) I

Show me that he's the exception to the rule I don't care about sides so no, not desperate at all. All you jackals are out to separate yourselves from the other side rather than focus on the problems. Yes, it's bull#### to sling strawman arguments around while trying to suggest you don't (or at least not as much as the other guy). The dog and pony show in Washington is played out. Until they start curbing costs and working on tort reform, it's all just theatre to keep a job, not do a job.

 

[Gr00vus]

The dog and pony show in Washington is played out. Until they start curbing costs and working on tort reform, it's all just theatre to keep a job, not do a job.

Until we start voting people in besides Ds or Rs nothing is going to change. It's not them, it's us.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

If giving in on the medical device tax would end this, then democrats obviously don't give a crap about the american people either.

Bunch of morons in washington.

The democrats will not negotiate ( or pass seperate spending bills to help children with cancer, keep the WWII memorial unbarrycaded ect ect ) with the hostage taking republicans because they love America!

The time to negotiate the aca was when it was drafted and originally voted on. Then discuss improvements after it's been enacted for a while to see how it is implemented. This now is just a joke/temper tantrum.

The time to get anything done is when you have enough votes to get it done. There was no way this was going to be discussed on their terms with the supermajority that got obliterated largely as a result of passing this horrible bill. Thanks in large part to this horrible bill the American people have afforded them a more powerful voice to try and get this removed, and they're using it as they were mandated.

Mandated? Seriously? There was a presidential election last year that had this as a main issue. The other guy got crushed. Republicans picked up seats in the house but lost out in gross votes. They have no mandate. That's ridiculous to state that.

 

[dparker713]

Varmint hit the nail on the head, if Congress doesn't rubber stamp Obama's demands they are seen as holding Obamacare "hostage", and then all the libs come in saying the R's need to win an election if they want to be able to muscle their policies through like Obama is trying to do here, it's a joke.

Democracy is so unfair. You have to have more popular policies than the other guy if you want to make them into law.

Popular policies my ###, don't you mean due to a supermajority it barely got through?

When one party ####s up so much that they hand a supermajority to the other party, do you suppose that might mean they'll lose on a significant point of contention? Maybe then each party shouldn't try to #### up that bad, eh?

So you support supermajorities that can make law whatever they want even if the public is against it? Duly noted.

Actually, I support not ####### up so bad that you concede a supermajority. I just don't understand why you care though, after all your bitcoin fortune should be secure regardless of the party in charge or their policies.

 

[snogger]

Liberals, moderates, moderate Republicans, and independents: this is the fault of the Republicans. The Tea Party are behaving like crazy buffoons.

Conservatives, and people who don't pay too much attention to politics: this is everybody's fault. Both sides are acting crazy and both sides are to blame.

This isn't arrogant, this is the way things are. Both sides don't have to be equal or equivalent in the amount of crazy we assign them. Sometimes one party (or parts of one party) is more crazy than the other. The Tea Party basically asked the Democrats to compromise on (funding) a bill that was already on the books, and have been planning this showdown for a while. Don't know how someone can try and turn that around on the Democrats.

Well...?

If this thread is any indication, the left has more than their fair share of crazy.

I'll ask again- what about the lefts position in this situation is on the crazy side? I don't get it.

I'd say the "we're winning" comments from the left while thousands of families are trying to figure out how to make it without a paycheck is "crazy"

 

[dparker713]

Astute observations Chaz. The problem is that it's not just Ted Cruz and a few looney morons. A large % of Americans are completely clueless as to how the gov't runs, and they liken gov't debt, deficits, and the budget to their own household debt, deficit, and budgets. See icon's thread about "OMG DEBT!!!!!!!"

The tea party morons aren't just a fringe radical group, their ideas are supported by the majority of the base of the party. That's why we're in this debacle, and John Boehner won't call them out.

Didn't you mean the majority of Americans? I know you get off calling everyone else stupid, but if you can't spot the sucker...

My gym trainer was asking me about the government shutdown so I filled him in. Then I asked him if he was familiar with the ACA (aka Obamacare), he said he heard of it. I knew he didn't have health insurance so I asked him, did you know if you don't sign up for it they are going to fine you, starting at about $100 and ramping up to $700 in two years and that his alternative to pay for it would run him about $4k? His response, "#### that", and no he didn't know that. So while the masses may not be as educated as TGunz, the word is not getting out there in terms of just how bad this is going to be for a lot of Americans.

So your trainer is either going to have to get health insurance or he'll be force to contribute to the insurance society is already paying for him that he is currently shirking on.

How is this bad for a lot of Americans again?

See...this is some of the utter bull#### that the left spews....yeah it's just one side that does this crap. How the hell do you know he doesn't pay his bills out of pocket??

Are you really so desperate to make this both sides fault that you want to call tommy out because this individual trainer might be the exception to the rule? Could be the noise in the statistics? And if he happens to be the exception that pays out of pocket he is being greatly harmed by the vast majority of his fellow uninsured peers if he ever has any significant medical bills.

Is it really that tommy believes that this "calculated risk" is one that places society in too much of harms way to be allowable? (I didn't ask if you agreed with tommy, just whether it was a reasonable position to take?) I

Show me that he's the exception to the rule I don't care about sides so no, not desperate at all. All you jackals are out to separate yourselves from the other side rather than focus on the problems. Yes, it's bull#### to sling strawman arguments around while trying to suggest you don't (or at least not as much as the other guy). The dog and pony show in Washington is played out. Until they start curbing costs and working on tort reform, it's all just theatre to keep a job, not do a job.

How the #### does tort reform have anything to do with anything in this thread? And you do realize there are three components of the government ledger right? Spending, growth AND revenue. Somehow you've singled out the only segment that Rush Limbaugh espouses, maybe its the only one that doesn't effect him?

 

[dparker713]

Liberals, moderates, moderate Republicans, and independents: this is the fault of the Republicans. The Tea Party are behaving like crazy buffoons.

Conservatives, and people who don't pay too much attention to politics: this is everybody's fault. Both sides are acting crazy and both sides are to blame.

This isn't arrogant, this is the way things are. Both sides don't have to be equal or equivalent in the amount of crazy we assign them. Sometimes one party (or parts of one party) is more crazy than the other. The Tea Party basically asked the Democrats to compromise on (funding) a bill that was already on the books, and have been planning this showdown for a while. Don't know how someone can try and turn that around on the Democrats.

Well...?

If this thread is any indication, the left has more than their fair share of crazy.

I'll ask again- what about the lefts position in this situation is on the crazy side? I don't get it.

I'd say the "we're winning" comments from the left while thousands of families are trying to figure out how to make it without a paycheck is "crazy"

Their comments aren't "we're winning". It's "we already won" in reference to healthcare. Kinda like abortion, and gay marriage, and medical marijuana. HTH.

 

[Willie Neslon]

If Republicans were only looking for small spending cuts similar to the disagreements Democrats had in Reagan's day this shutdown would have been over already.

Maybe. The bigger difference is back then when there was a discrepancy, Speaker Tip O'Neil would come to the White House and he and President Reagan would sit down with a conyac and come to an agreement. the night would be hard fought but end with a hand shake and a deal. Today Speaker Boehner comes by but the President is on Oprah or making his case on twitter. There is no discussion, only finger pointing.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

All you jackals are out to separate yourselves from the other side rather than focus on the problems.

So glad you are above it all.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Until they start curbing costs and working on tort reform, it's all just theatre to keep a job, not do a job.

Tort reform?

You do realize that you have consistently argued in this thread that both sides are at fault for not implementing the policies of the right.

Yes, it's bull#### to sling strawman arguments around while trying to suggest you don't (or at least not as much as the other guy). ...

So you tear down the left for not focusing on the issues of the right.

 

[quickhands]

Liberals, moderates, moderate Republicans, and independents: this is the fault of the Republicans. The Tea Party are behaving like crazy buffoons.

Conservatives, and people who don't pay too much attention to politics: this is everybody's fault. Both sides are acting crazy and both sides are to blame.

What an arrogant POS you are. Yep, you pretty much verified the liberal stereotype. Congrats...

It's really too bad that you feel forced to resort to personal insults. Can you tell us more about the New World Order, please? I can never get enough of that. Throw in some black helicopters while you're at it.

tim, if someone sees themselves as a tea party person you just called that person a crazy buffoon. and then you get on your high horse. you might not be an arrogant pos but you sure can act like one.

 

[quickhands]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

 

[Willie Neslon]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

 

[quickhands]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

 

[Willie Neslon]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

I was responding to another post.

 

[Willie Neslon]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

Yes! He ORDERED them back to work.

 

[Christo]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

How are these two situations similar?

 

[quickhands]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

Yes! He ORDERED them back to work.

and they said no.

 

[timschochet]

Liberals, moderates, moderate Republicans, and independents: this is the fault of the Republicans. The Tea Party are behaving like crazy buffoons.

Conservatives, and people who don't pay too much attention to politics: this is everybody's fault. Both sides are acting crazy and both sides are to blame.

This isn't arrogant, this is the way things are. Both sides don't have to be equal or equivalent in the amount of crazy we assign them. Sometimes one party (or parts of one party) is more crazy than the other. The Tea Party basically asked the Democrats to compromise on (funding) a bill that was already on the books, and have been planning this showdown for a while. Don't know how someone can try and turn that around on the Democrats.

Well...?

If this thread is any indication, the left has more than their fair share of crazy.

I'll ask again- what about the lefts position in this situation is on the crazy side? I don't get it.

I'd say the "we're winning" comments from the left while thousands of families are trying to figure out how to make it without a paycheck is "crazy"

It was in bad taste. And several of the comments that jon pointed out were in bad taste as well.

But I think both you and jon missed my points. I'm not suggesting the comments by the Republicans/Tea Party are crazy (though some of them certainly are) I'm suggesting their position on this issue is crazy. To shut down the government in order to defund or delay Obamacare represents an extreme position. It puts the GOP clearly in the wrong here.

 

[Willie Neslon]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

 

[Willie Neslon]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

Yes! He ORDERED them back to work.

and they said no.

And the rest is history.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

How are these two situations similar?

In both cases the president would prefer to negotiate with Iran?

 

[quickhands]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

Yes! He ORDERED them back to work.

and they said no.

And the rest is history.

well I guess I dont understand your point. you said reagan could order solutions, and people would obey. I pointedbout thats its not true.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

Obama wouldn't do it in say Cairo Egypt and talk to the people?

Then we wouldn't watch the people step up in places like Egypt or Libya? (not calling it a causation, but whatever)

 

[Homer J Simpson]

If Republicans were only looking for small spending cuts similar to the disagreements Democrats had in Reagan's day this shutdown would have been over already.

Maybe. The bigger difference is back then when there was a discrepancy, Speaker Tip O'Neil would come to the White House and he and President Reagan would sit down with a conyac and come to an agreement. the night would be hard fought but end with a hand shake and a deal. Today Speaker Boehner comes by but the President is on Oprah or making his case on twitter. There is no discussion, only finger pointing.

Yeah, it's a shame how much the Republicans try to compromise and just get consistently rebuffed by Obama. It sucks having such an extremist in the White House.

 

[badmojo1006]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

 

[Willie Neslon]

What I don't understand is that if President Obama doesn't want the government to be shutdown why doesn't he just put an end to this? Why not issue an order to put everyone back to work? he is the president, he is supposed to be the most powerful person in the country. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if President Reagan was in charge that this would not happen, he would simply say to stop and get people back to work. If you're as old as me you remember that is exactly what he did it during the airline strike. Maybe this president isn't as powerful as he thinks? No that couldn't be it.

lol. no he didnt. and that is 180 degrees from what happened.

That is absolutely what they did. Their sit downs in the white house were legendary. They would have dinner with the wives and then hammer out what they needed to until sunrise.

he fired patco. he ordered them back to work. (it was illegal for them to strike) they refused and didnt go back to work. he fired them. and no patco member ever was hired back.

Yes! He ORDERED them back to work.

and they said no.

And the rest is history.

well I guess I dont understand your point. you said reagan could order solutions, and people would obey. I pointedbout thats its not true.

The point is he got it done.

 

[bear]

Liberals, moderates, moderate Republicans, and independents: this is the fault of the Republicans. The Tea Party are behaving like crazy buffoons.

Conservatives, and people who don't pay too much attention to politics: this is everybody's fault. Both sides are acting crazy and both sides are to blame.

This isn't arrogant, this is the way things are. Both sides don't have to be equal or equivalent in the amount of crazy we assign them. Sometimes one party (or parts of one party) is more crazy than the other. The Tea Party basically asked the Democrats to compromise on (funding) a bill that was already on the books, and have been planning this showdown for a while. Don't know how someone can try and turn that around on the Democrats.

Well...?

If this thread is any indication, the left has more than their fair share of crazy.

I'll ask again- what about the lefts position in this situation is on the crazy side? I don't get it.

I'd say the "we're winning" comments from the left while thousands of families are trying to figure out how to make it without a paycheck is "crazy"

I guess you have no problem with Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul discussing on a mic they didn't know was live that "we're gonna win this"? They are major players of the party that brought this upon the people you seem so concerned about. You have no problem with the people who are the actual causes of these families distress?

 

[Willie Neslon]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

 

[timschochet]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

And beyond that, how can anyone suggest that Obama hasn't been firm in this situation?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

Yes, he should fire the tea party members of congress like Reagan would. I agree.

 

[timschochet]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

The only way that Obama can end the crisis by himself is to cave to the Republican demands. If he does so, he weakens the Presidency- not just his Presidency, but THE Presidency- and he weakens our democratic system, perhaps beyond repair.

I don't mind if Obama were to offer some minor things like the device tax, if that would do any good. I've said so several times. But he CANNOT agree to the demand of defunding or delaying Obamacare. He can't. So I'm not sure what it is you want him to do.

 

[DrJ]

If Republicans were only looking for small spending cuts similar to the disagreements Democrats had in Reagan's day this shutdown would have been over already.

Maybe. The bigger difference is back then when there was a discrepancy, Speaker Tip O'Neil would come to the White House and he and President Reagan would sit down with a conyac and come to an agreement. the night would be hard fought but end with a hand shake and a deal. Today Speaker Boehner comes by but the President is on Oprah or making his case on twitter. There is no discussion, only finger pointing.

Yeah, it's a shame how much the Republicans try to compromise and just get consistently rebuffed by Obama. It sucks having such an extremist in the White House.

This guy gets it.

 

[DrJ]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

The only way that Obama can end the crisis by himself is to cave to the Republican demands. If he does so, he weakens the Presidency- not just his Presidency, but THE Presidency- and he weakens our democratic system, perhaps beyond repair.I don't mind if Obama were to offer some minor things like the device tax, if that would do any good. I've said so several times. But he CANNOT agree to the demand of defunding or delaying Obamacare. He can't. So I'm not sure what it is you want him to do.

What does the President actually do anyways? He signs a bunch of bills, that's about it. We don't need him either.

 

[Willie Neslon]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

The only way that Obama can end the crisis by himself is to cave to the Republican demands. If he does so, he weakens the Presidency- not just his Presidency, but THE Presidency- and he weakens our democratic system, perhaps beyond repair.

I don't mind if Obama were to offer some minor things like the device tax, if that would do any good. I've said so several times. But he CANNOT agree to the demand of defunding or delaying Obamacare. He can't. So I'm not sure what it is you want him to do.

How about being a leader?

 

[timschochet]

The one aspect of this whole thing that never fails to stun me is that the bill to fund the government is only for 8 weeks. 8 WEEKS!!!! Even if they passed it, this whole thing would start again on December 1.

No matter what side of this issue you're on, you've got to acknowledge that this is truly absurd.

 

[timschochet]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

The only way that Obama can end the crisis by himself is to cave to the Republican demands. If he does so, he weakens the Presidency- not just his Presidency, but THE Presidency- and he weakens our democratic system, perhaps beyond repair.

I don't mind if Obama were to offer some minor things like the device tax, if that would do any good. I've said so several times. But he CANNOT agree to the demand of defunding or delaying Obamacare. He can't. So I'm not sure what it is you want him to do.

How about being a leader?

What exactly does this mean to you? Be specific, and describe what it is that you think Obama should do that he is not doing.

 

[Willie Neslon]

When President Reagan wanted the end of the Berlin wall he went right there and said TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. If President Obama was in office then he'd go on Jay Leno and say "you know, maybe they should think about uh removing the uh wall there." That is the point.

This shtick is wearing a little thin

All i've seen is him doing interviews. How about stepping up and ending the crisis? He's done great in other areas but what he does when it comes to this stuff just isn't working.

The only way that Obama can end the crisis by himself is to cave to the Republican demands. If he does so, he weakens the Presidency- not just his Presidency, but THE Presidency- and he weakens our democratic system, perhaps beyond repair.

I don't mind if Obama were to offer some minor things like the device tax, if that would do any good. I've said so several times. But he CANNOT agree to the demand of defunding or delaying Obamacare. He can't. So I'm not sure what it is you want him to do.

How about being a leader?

What exactly does this mean to you? Be specific, and describe what it is that you think Obama should do that he is not doing.

Get it done.