Anyone else (possibly) getting a mandatory vacation come Tuesday?

[The Mad Monk]

No hogwash. Also, this "new and repulsive tactic" is now almost forty years old. In fact, W is the only president in that time period who did not have to face it.

[PLATO]

Sorry but this is hogwash. Or to put it slightly more politely, it's what they would love people to think. There are several centuries of examples of the US government functioning, and this latest tactic of holding the country hostage over existing law is a new and repulsive one. The system was never 'designed' to work this way. If this keeps happening, what exactly do you think is going to stop the Democrats doing exactly the same thing next time the roles are reversed? Perpetual gridlock, endless shutdowns of government, debt defaults, gee isn't that something to look forward to in the future?

I expect the parties to work together on legislation as sweeping as this and not for one party to shove it down the throat of another. If the Republicans do this in the future, then I would expect the Democrats to react similarly. The key here is the magnitude of the law. If it was not so sweeping a change then fine, but since it was passed exclusively by one party with little input, consultation, or negotiation with a party that arguably represents 40%+ (at least...by any measure) of the country, then I say "This is what you get".

This is not the first time the minority party has held the majority party "hostage". It may be the first time over a single law, but I cannot think of another law that was both so divisive and was passed in so one sided a manner either...at least one of this magnitude.

[Patroklos]

Funnily enough, the Republican approach to healthcare is very similar to politicians attitudes to prohibition back then. They were happy to deny it to others while continuing to have it for themselves.

Democrats exempting themselves and their staffs from what they are forcing every other American to do is a more apt comparison.

And Plato, there is quite a recent issue involving "these of the land" that Democrats gummed up the gears of government over for nearly a decade; Bush era tax cuts. While its first authorization was bipartisan unloke the ACA the reauthorization was along party lines.

The Democrats are simply angry they are not worshiped as emperor gods, that's the only thing going on here.

[PLATO]

Democrats exempting themselves and their staffs from what they are forcing every other American to do is a more apt comparison.

Not really...Congress regularly excludes themselves from laws that they pass.

[Sava]

Democrats exempting themselves and their staffs from what they are forcing every other American to do is a more apt comparison.

And Plato, there is quite a recent issue involving "these of the land" that Democrats gummed up the gears of government over for nearly a decade; Bush era tax cuts. While its first authorization was bipartisan unloke the ACA the reauthorization was along party lines.

The Democrats are simply angry they are not worshiped as emperor gods, that's the only thing going on here.

Where do you come up with this nonsense?

This is why FOXnews' target demographic is demented old white people.

[MrFun]

I expect the parties to work together on legislation as sweeping as this and not for one party to shove it down the throat of another. If the Republicans do this in the future, then I would expect the Democrats to react similarly. The key here is the magnitude of the law. If it was not so sweeping a change then fine, but since it was passed exclusively by one party with little input, consultation, or negotiation with a party that arguably represents 40%+ (at least...by any measure) of the country, then I say "This is what you get".

This is not the first time the minority party has held the majority party "hostage". It may be the first time over a single law, but I cannot think of another law that was both so divisive and was passed in so one sided a manner either...at least one of this magnitude.

All Congress was suppose to do this time, was its job; to pass a fuckin' budget.

The ACA is law; it's not a bill anymore, so there's really nothing to compromise on.

Besides that, the House Republicans are not interested in compromising; they're only making a pretense in appearing to want to compromise, when in actuality, they want this: shove their terms/proposals down Democrats' throats, or we shut the government down.

[kentonio]

No hogwash. Also, this "new and repulsive tactic" is now almost forty years old. In fact, W is the only president in that time period who did not have to face it.

Yes hogwash. Previous shutdowns have usually involved the parties disagreeing on spending numbers. This is not about that, this is a minority party trying to force the majority party to cripple a democratically mandated law that has already passed congress. It's attempted hostage taking and nothing less, and yes it's new.

[kentonio]

I expect the parties to work together on legislation as sweeping as this and not for one party to shove it down the throat of another. If the Republicans do this in the future, then I would expect the Democrats to react similarly. The key here is the magnitude of the law. If it was not so sweeping a change then fine, but since it was passed exclusively by one party with little input, consultation, or negotiation with a party that arguably represents 40%+ (at least...by any measure) of the country, then I say "This is what you get".

This is not the first time the minority party has held the majority party "hostage". It may be the first time over a single law, but I cannot think of another law that was both so divisive and was passed in so one sided a manner either...at least one of this magnitude.

Oh please, when a party holds both houses and the presidency and are passing legislation that they were mandated to enact, then it's not 'forcing it down the throats' of anybody, it's doing what they were elected to do.

[The Mad Monk]

x-double dipped'd, but hey it still works

Shutdowns have worked to force issues the past seventeen times they have occurred.

I suppose the reason you're ignoring this is that it destroys your narrative.

[Sava]

Poor Republicans.

[DinoDoc]

It's attempted hostage taking and nothing less, and yes it's new.

How would you describe the actions of the Democratic Party in 1987 when the government was shutdown over an attempt by the Democratic party to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine? Was that terrorism?

[Sava]

wah wah wahhhhh

[DinoDoc]

wah wah wahhhhh

Did you have a stroke? Your ability to write coherently in English is suddenly worse than usual.

[The Mad Monk]

Shhh, don't cry Sava, it will be alright.

[Lorizael]

You're ability to write coherently in English is suddenly worse than usual.