To be fair, anyone who would eat in a place named Chi Chi’s probably ought to drop dead.
I have an English friend here who is about to take his Thai girlfriend on a three-week tour of a huge chunk of the US West and Midwest. They leave two weeks from now. Yellowstone, the Badlands, Mt Rushmore and others feature heavily on their itinerary, and he’s already booked and paid for a night in a lodge inside Sequoia National Park. They’re watching developments closely.
If they control the House or the Senate, and they are strongly enough against that particular legislation, and they suggest changes (especially ones that Republicans agree with), and the Republicans say “my way or the highway”, yes, I would say they should do it.
It’s really weird to me that people think that the House should just rubberstamp whatever the Senate wants. Why?
Your not asking me, but I’ll give my take on this. I’m not OK with the precedent, but I also don’t think it’s immoral or illegal.
It’s more accurately just described as a flawed process.
Maybe. It’s an interesting theory. He could have just got caught up in the moment. Or as others point out he might be deliberately trying to mislead the viewers.
I think it’s most likely that he simply had a slip of the tongue.
I can easily requote you; you’re the one who made a specific and erroneous claim about “government workers.”
If you want to talk about the economy of DC, that’s fine, but it washes over the issue of government workers (since the DC economy is only partially a function of “government workers” and since “government workers” are only partially located in DC.). It’s also mostly irrelevant to the direct impact of the shutdown on employment.
This really makes it seem like your efforts here are entirely semantic game playing. Do you have anything of worth to contribute? Should we appeal to Bricker for a ruling?
I clearly said “Washington” in my original post on this. You must have missed it.
We might as well drop it. No one has even attempted to address my point with a cite about what private sector workers think since that’s what I was claiming. It’s possible for people to think something that isn’t even true you know.*
Keep on thinking that all the private sector workers who have been struggling in the bad economy since 2008 don’t harbor a grudge against the Washington bureaucrats who have it much better than they do. If you think this you must not get out very often, especially not to flyover states.
*Not that I’m in agreement with anyone’s particular argument that Washington bureaucrats have been suffering in the bad economy anything like the public sector has. Just making the point.
It’s not just federal workers who are suffering because of this. There are already lots of workers in the private sector who are suffering because of these shenanigans, and it will only get worse the longer the shutdown lasts.
Ummm, no, not quite. I had in mind a basic level of healthcare that doesn’t tend to result in a full write-off on the part of the provider.
I will (provisionally) accept your 50% “fall-through-the-cracks” estimate on education.
The Democrats didn’t say “my way or the highway”. The ACA was discussed in committee and on the floor of Congress for weeks, and hundreds of changes were made at the request of Republicans. Since then, Republicans have lost a floor vote, an election, and a Supreme Court decision over it. Whose way or the highway, again?
I just had this very conversation with someone on a news board. Gave him statistics and cites and everything.
His response? “You’re just a socialist hippie and I’m right.”
God, those sites are depressing.
“No negotiation whatsoever” sounds like “my way or highway” to me.
I asked this before, and I can’t see that I ever got an answer. What, exactly, are Republicans putting on the table for negotiation that should make Dems interested in sitting down? Everyone, Democrats and Republicans, want government to re-open. The only matter that Republicans seem to want to negotiate is whether the ACA is eliminated or just watered down. Thus, the only negotiation is whether the Tea Party will win a little or win a lot.
So, if Republicans were serious about wanting to negotiate – which I do not believe they are sincere about – they should state what other topics they are willing to entertain during these negotiations to address Democratic priorities. How about gun control? Are Republicans offering a negotiation that includes the CR, ACA, and Obama’s gun control measures?
They tried convincing the public of this in the 2012 election- they failed. The Republicans will have another chance in 2014 and 2016- if the bill is as bad as they say it is, then those will be easy elections for them to win (and, therefore, easy for them to repeal the bill).
A majority in the House support a clean CR, but Boehner won’t bring it to a vote.
It certainly looks like what the Republicans are most afraid of is that a majority of the public will like the ACA.
Good God.
I can’t wait for you to move towards arguing that you only meant a few specific zip codes, and you didn’t mean to include employment in anything in Bethesda, Arlington or Silver Spring.
And now you say that you meant to address perception, rather than reality? Well that’s nice, since you can make any assertion you like about perception, and it is essentially unprovable.
Example: Republicans suggested removing the medical device tax from Obamacare. Lots of Democrats support that.
Yup. And in Democrats’ eyes, preventing Tea Party winning even a little is worth what they insist is a catastrophe for the country.
So a Republican preference, and one that most Democrats oppose, is a concession to the Democrats? If that’s considered a concession, then you must understand why the Democratic leadership is not really onboard…
Preventing political hostage-taking from becoming a legitimate tactic is necessary for the functioning of our country. If the Republicans think they can threaten shutdown/default over every disagreement and actually win, then the Democrats lose automatically on every single issue from now until they have a majority in both Houses plus the Presidency. So the Democrats have no choice- allowing this to be seen as a legitimate tactic is the end of governance with a divided government.
The Republicans can always try to win the next election, and win the Presidency, and repeal the ACA- which should be easy if it’s as bad as they say it is. That’s why the Republicans are the unreasonable party in this dispute.
Bolding mine.
It is beyond disingenuous for you to pretend that your use of the word “Washington” did not follow from your use of the term “government workers.” You’re just completely playing stupid games at this point.
Terrorist: Give me everything I demand or I will shoot this family
Police: No. We will not give in to your demands
Terrorist: <whine> Why won’t you negotiate? You just don’t want me to win <whine>
AFAIK, most Democrats agree with it.
Republicans have no choice. They are in the corner and the only way out is to win this. Or be humiliated and done for, politically.
That would be apt - if Republicans didn’t whittle down “everything they demand” to almost nothing by now.