Except for the 161 amendments demanded by Republicans and adopted in the ACA, right?
Sure, HERE on Reality Based Earth. But on Obamapocalypse Earth, Obama twirled his mustache and laughed while the Demoncrats crafted the most evil bill imaginable, sacrificing thousands of unborn children for the blood it was written in. God fearing Republicans looked on helplessly, unable to act due to Obama’s evil sorcery.
You know what? They fucking deserved it. Equipoise started a thread just weeks after the dark guy took office, about how the Republiopaths were frothing at the mouth that there should be government regulation on Michelle Obama’s bully pulpit. That is why the Ds told them to fuck off, though not nearly as assertively as you suggest. The volume of stupid pouring forth from the Republiopaths eclipses even the tepid bile you have been spewing.
so true
what a fantastic thing, and people in the US of A can’t even imagine this
Those are different. It’s OK to dictate personal shit to OTHER people.
So, just a vague term for the party without actually acknowledging that the president and Congressional leaders did nothing in the way that you falsely claimed.
More invention.
Much of the ACA was based on previous Republican proposals that the Republicans rejected as soon as it was presented by the Democrats. Your claim was that the Republicans were told to go away and not allowed to participate in the creation of the bill. Your support for that odd claim is that some Democrats made noises like that while ignoring the efforts by the actual party leaders to get bi-partisan support. The Republicans were following (or cowering before) the rhetoric of Limbaugh others and refused to work with the Democrats. While they refused to participate in the early stages of crafting the law, when it was brought to the floor for a vote, the Democrats accepted over 150 Republican amendments to the original bill rather than demanding that it go through with no changes.
Re-writing history does not make your fiction true.
Because it’s actually bad, for some reason no one can explain.
I’m curious if Clothahump will commit to the following premise:
If the Trump administration lasts four years and the national debt increases by 50%, will he consider that a “disaster” ?
Hah, just kidding, I’m only actually curious to see if he either ignores the idea or tries to spin it in some way.
Legitimate question, since both the Republican and Trump tax plans massively slash taxes for the rich and will result in a huge drop in revenue for the Feds. They can’t possibly make up for it with cuts, even with a free hand, certainly not with promised (and desperately overdue) investments in infrastructure.
Are you kidding? Brave Republicans fixed the entire national debt problem in one night. It’s not that Trump will lower the debt or deficit; it’s just that it suddenly won’t matter for the next 4 years, the same way it hasn’t mattered during any Republican administrations for the last 35 years. Problem not solved, just gone.
And frankly, you could show a lot more gratitude.
Republican deficits are made of rainbows and roses, didn’t you know?
They did exactly as I claimed. Democrats ignored and rebuffed Republican ideas and propositions from the onset (or winning of the election). And not just in the backroom, negotiating rooms, right out and in the open
I don't blame them to a point, but the attitude could have been mellowed and tempered to a point that outlier Republicans came on board. Or didn't dismiss it as outright as they did when it came time for a full vote.They were told we don’t need you. This is our deal. Go away.
Who? Who was after bi-partisian support?
The President sure didn’t seem to be.
I’ll never understand why your side accepts and assumes that Limbaugh et al create the policy rather than respond and comment on it.
But whatever. Everyone needs a bogeyman.
The Baucus bill?
Most, if not all of it, was dismissed and put aside by Harry Reid with the Managers Amendment.
I’m not re-writing shit.
No, you are writing shit.
[quote=“HeweyLogan, post:352, topic:770465”]
They did exactly as I claimed. Democrats ignored and rebuffed Republican ideas and propositions from the onset (or winning of the election). And not just in the backroom, negotiating rooms, right out and in the open
[/QUOTE]That video was about a bunch of amendments proposed AFTER everything was written and passed, when Republicans were trying to get the bill into reconciliation, where they could stall even longer. Trying to portray that sequence as happening at the beginning is ignorant at best, and outright lies at worst. Compared to the rest of the uninformed cow dung you’ve spewed, I have to say I’m leaning towards the latter.
You mean passed by the Senate. It didn’t pass the house until March 21, 2010. It was signed into law by Obama on March 23rd, 2010. The video is from Feb 25, 2010.
(I didn’t intend to say the video was from the start. I meant it as a theme of what Republicans faced)
But hey, uncle. I give. Mercy. There isn’t a thing the Democrats have ever done that is or was disaster.
Except this last election.
No, but you implied it as “this was what they faced all along” and was your argument against being given proof that there WAS an olive branch at the beginning of the process, and the Republicans burned it. I’m not arguing the disaster issue, just that you’re a blatant liar.
In all seriousness what was the olive branch that was offered? Because I sure don’t remember one. I remember it as a take a seat in the back, we’re doing this now. Input not needed.
I was alive and an adult then. I may not have been the most observant on its passing, but I don’t recall being completely clueless on it either. I remember my take.
Point me to an article, something. I’ll read it.
[quote=“HeweyLogan, post:352, topic:770465”]
They did exactly as I claimed. Democrats ignored and rebuffed Republican ideas and propositions from the onset (or winning of the election). And not just in the backroom, negotiating rooms, right out and in the open
[/QUOTE]Bolding mine.
Bold this.
I used that as an example of what I was talking about in terms of Democrat disinterest in Republican input on ACA/Obamacare at the time. I was told it didn’t exist, or was minimal. It did. It came later in the process than that quote or snippet I found directly confirms, but as a representative of the attitude at the time, I don’t think it’s that far off.
Democrats saw universal healthcare as a mandate and ran with it. More power to them (I’ve said this a couple times now on its passage). But don’t act like it was a bi-partisan plan that had input from anyone else - it’s a Democratic bill. With full Democrat support.
All this supports what I was getting at when I first joined this discussion - Democrats don’t think they’ve been responsible or created a disaster (outside of Vietnam, mentioned earlier).
If that’s your attitude, again, more power to you. I don’t think that’s true of either party. They both have their mistakes, failures, and disasters. I didn’t ask people to come into this thread to explain or list what they thought were Democrat disasters only to turn around and dismiss each and every one them as being nothing but a success and distinctly not a disaster.
Dishonest, crap, discourse is what I was commenting on. It was. And is.
Ooh, something I quoted must have struck a nerve.