True, but I think it’s useful to keep in mind what has gone before. The ACA was drafted, committeed, debated, conferenced, voted, signed, scrutinized, approved, and enacted the same as any other law. This was not imposed on Republicans by some outside power. At some point you must accept that you’ve lost. If shutting down the government fails to get it (effectively) repealed, what will they try next? And if this law can be attacked with scorched-earth tactics, what law on the books can’t?
“something”? They have to win something? Why? Just because? Why must the republicans win? Is that in the constitution?
Again, they cannot come to terms with the fact that they lost. They should deal with their emotions on their own time, and stop holding the government hostage while they work through the stages of grief on Obamacare.
Boehner: “This isn’t some damn game.”
IOW, no, he doesn’t need “points on the board”.
There’s a couple more steps after that, as you must know as a Constitutional scholar. Steps of equal significance, with other people with equal right to decide what government money ought to be spent on, people who are responsible to the voters who put them in office to do just that in accordance with the voters’ wishes. You may not that there are more of the latter than the former, and that the voters’ wishes are far more directly represented by their views than by the former’s, and that the party controlling the House themselves represent only a minority of the people they purportedly serve.
So, given that, who’s in the right? :dubious:
You speak only of rights. Where do they have any responsibilities, in your worldview? To whom?
You’re offering the Democrats the possibility of the Republicans being finished politically…and expect them to give in? You’ve just offered them as great an incentive to hold out as the Republicans have!
Okay, how about a swap? Repeal Obamacare…and the Republican Party disbands.
See, I’m negotiating!
You know, suicide is legal in every State (I think, though I could be wrong - might be there’s some backwards law somewhere that never got repealed). It is fully allowed by the law. You will not get into legal trouble for trying to kill yourself (unless in doing so you endanger others).
The fact that it’s not forbidden doesn’t on its own *compel *you to give it a shot. Pun fully and shamelessly intended.
I don’t see any lies, no.
They can. The so-called “default” can be no big deal, and yet may cause an irrational panic.
Because they don’t want to commit a political suicide. I know you’d like them to. But they just don’t wanna.
I’ve never actually been in a union. Is it customary for union members on strike to continue to be paid and still have access to the company gym?
I know. Yet you and others here keep pretending that Democrats are risking what they insist is enormous damage to US economy for reasons loftier than “stick it to the Republicans”.
Again, if you are going to argue that Democrats have to offer a fig leaf to Republicans so that Republicans can claim they won on something/save some face/not have self-esteem issues; what, precisely, are Republicans prepared to do to make Democrats feel good about themselves?
I don’t think that’s much of a concern. This is not new. It’s been done something like 17 years in the past 50 years or so. It’s part of the process. It’s an attempt to force negotiations with someone who doesn’t want to. In this case, Obama and Reid.
But they have. And they’re taking a lot of innocents with them too.
If they need to feel like they’ve “won” something, well then, what the fuck would that be? The few who’ve dared talk openly admit they have no idea what that would even be.
Democrats (at least judging from this board) already feel pretty good about themselves.
There is a risk in that, yes. But this is what happens when one party forces through a piece of legislation against 100% of the opposing party. Not only do they feel no authorship, but it was forced down their throats. Add that to the belief that there are real problems with both the law and its implementation, and here we are.
And do you really think the Dems would consider the changes the Reps want if they’re not pulled to the negotiating table by their ears? The way the bill was passed strongly suggests “no”.
Only if they capitulate.
“The changes the Reps want” are simply “Kill the whole thing”. And you want that to be taken seriously?
What part of “You guys already had ample chance to persuade the American people and you fucking failed” are you denying?
Not according to the bills that the House passed. Unless you think that postponing the $95/year fine for one year and removing subsidies from Congressmen and their staff is gonna “kill the whole thing”.
This is ridiculously untrue. It was not passed over “100% opposition” and the Republicans got 161 amendments included in the final bill.