Monday, September 16, 2013
What The GOP Is Threatening To Do With The Debt Ceiling--AGAIN...
sounds like extortion:
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: The- George- I think it’s fair to say- you- that never in history have we used just making sure that the U.S. government is paying its bills as a lever to radically cut government at the kind of scale that they’re talking about. It’s never happened before. There’ve been negotiations around the corners, because nobody had ever presumed that you’d actually threaten the United States to default.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: But how does this end, then? You know- they say they need changes in Obamacare. You say you’re not gonna negotiate. Are you just betting they’re gonna cave?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: No, no- George, here’s the problem. The- the- if we set- if we continue to set a precedent in which a president, any president, a Republican president- a Democratic president- where the opposing party controls the House of Representatives- if- if that president is in a situation in which each time the United States is called upon to pay its bills- the other party can simply sit there and say, “Well, we’re not gonna put- pay the bills unless you give us what our- what we want,” that changes the constitutional structure of this government entirely.
Other people see it as extortion as well:
Bob Woodward Says Republicans Are Using Extortion and Blackmail to Defund Obamacare
Woodward said, “This is really serious. Back in 2011, when the crisis visited them, the Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner was running around and saying if we don’t fix this, we could trigger a depression worse than the 1930s. And when I talked to Obama about this, he said, it was the most intense three weeks of his presidency. More than Osama Bin Laden and so forth. so — and the Republicans are out here, a group of them in the House essentially using extortion and blackmail methods to say, if we don’t defund Obamacare we’re not going to do the routine things of government.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
If it were up to me, I wouldn't hesitate to use a NUCLEAR BOMB to defund and defeat Obamacare IF that's what it took. };-)>
WHY?
Because I am firmly convinced the forced passage of this ill-thought-out, poorly written, hopelessly confusing, 2,700-page boondoggle of a bill with all its disgraceful, semi-secret pork barrel provisions is pushing the country in EXACTLY the WRONG direction.
It has nothing to do with "racism," "hatred" for President Obama, or the sheer cussedness leftists reflexively attribute to Republicans most of whom aren't even close to being the least bit "conservative."
It IS about POWER and CONTROL.
"You guys and gals" want UNLIMITED, UNCHECKED AMOUNTS of P&C. People of my philosophical persuasion feel duty bound to do everything we can to see that you don't get it, BECAUSE we are dead set against DICTATORSHIP, which IS what you advocate, whether you know it -- or want to admit it -- or not.
As an unabashed Conservative-Libertarian I oppose you -- not because I hate you [in truth I rather like - and even LOVE - many of you], but because I cannot accept your beliefs. There's nothing more to it than that.
Frankly, the cynic in me feels that you have nothing to worry about. The Republicans in charge are flabby, irresolute, spoiled, generally mush-brained windbags.
For the most part they've been in office too long, and their main objective -- like that of virtually ALL congresscreatures -- is to STAY in OFFICE by doing whatever it takes. Those RINO's on the Hill don't have the GUTS -- or the NOBILITY -- to stand up to "you guys" in any meaningful way, because it doesn't suit their selfish interests. What's more you KNOW that, so why expend all his energy beating a dying horse?
"What do I mean by "nobiity?"
I mean the honest pursuit of TRUTH and EXCELLENCE, devotion to PRINCIPLE and strength of character to put the interests of one's COUNTRY and one's CONSTITUENTS above those of Self and Party.
Is there -- was there ever -- an individual with that much integrity? Not in living memory, perhaps, but we should never give up hope this paragon -- A True Savior -- may yet be found.
You can be sure of this: I would cheerfully vote for such a rara avis, even if he ran as a Democrat. So there!
So how long should the can be kicked. I guess we should take the attitude it is all about me and to hell with the future generations.
It is in Obama's best interest to have the republicans shut down government because he can divert attention from him to them.
There was NO dictatorship involved in passage of the ACA. Mr. Obama was very clear, when he ran for the presidency, about his position on universal health care. The American people voted for HIM not McCain. And the bill was passed the way ALL bills are passed and the way all bills become law.
It is NOT a dictatorship when the US Supreme Court rules that the ACA IS CONSTITUTIONAL.
Your extreme hatred of the ACA does not mean that the President acted like a dictator. That is absurd. His administration and the Democrats got the law passed WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE CONSTITUTION.
You, of course, know that your view is NOT the only one that is shared in this country. I know that you understand that there are millions and millions of Americas who support the ACA.
I for one wish the ACA were more like Medicare, with a single payer. I believe that in order for citizens to be able to pursue life, liberty, and happiness, they ought to be free from the fear of becoming impoverished because of injuries or a catastrophic health issue.
I believe universal health care is a right. Without it all our other "rights" are useless. How can you enjoy anything if you're ill and in peril of losing your home and your life's savings?
It is I and many millions of folks like me who cannot understand folks like you.
And though we rather like you for your many wonderful qualities, WE cannot accept your violent opposition to a health care law that EVERY SINGLE CIVILIZED COUNTRY/DEMOCRACY/REPUBLIC ON THE PLANET enjoys.
The ACA was the humane and very, very American thing to do.
We take care of each other.
Any bill that is passed due to coercion, bribery and threats does not represent the best interest i=of the American people.
In order to pass AVA the sitting majority had to result in bribing senators who opposed it and offering exemptions to large corporations.
All this skulldugery so the government can take over control of healthcare and provide it to 10% who didn't like what the had, medicaid or none, at the expense of 87% who liked theirs.
I am not sure why you believe the government can administer healthcare for all.
If ACA is so great why are Unions, large corporations and even congress against having to use it?
Idiots on parade at con blogs:
AnonymousSeptember 16, 2013 at 11:25:00 AM EDT
THREE GUNMEN?
Yes, THREE BLACK GUNMEN just in case anyone is curious.
REAL CLEAR POLITICS
All polls cited sow substantial opposition to Obamacare
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
USA Today/Pew Research
9/4 - 9/8
1506 A
42
53
Oppose +11
Rasmussen Reports*
9/14 - 9/15
1000 LV
43
53
Oppose +10
CNN/Opinion Research*
9/6 - 9/8
1022 A
39
57
/Oppose +18
Gallup
8/17 - 8/18
1021 A
41
49
Oppose +8
FOX News*
7/21 - 7/23
1017 RV
40
53
Oppose +13
CBS News
7/18 - 7/22
1036 A
36
54
Oppose +18
ABC News/Wash Post
7/18 - 7/21
1002 A
42
49
Oppose +7
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl
7/17 - 7/21
1000 A
34
47
Oppose +13
What you need to understand my friend Freethink is in the long run the ACA will be embraced just as Social Security was embraced by Ronald Reagan as the greatest government program ever devised.
As a fellow rightie now I commend you for taking to the streets to complain about whatever Obama does though. We must hold the Kenyan Muslim's feet to the fire even if we have to make shit up about him. Just part of our duty as righties.
Dear, Ms Shaw,
I never said the president acted as a dictator in the matter of passing the ACA.
That role was effectively played by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi very well, indeed.
The Republicans were unable to exert any influence whatsoever over the passage of the bill, and were for the most part shut out of planning sessions and thus given no real opportunity to help shape or modify it in any meaningful way.
The bill passed -- against the wises of a clear majority of our citizens -- but not ONE SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted for it, so it passed along purely partisan lines.
People are less upset about that now, because of the passage of time and the gnat-like attention span of most Americans. BUT -- as the polls in my last post from numerous sources, many of them clearly liberal in orientation, clearly indicate -- a majority of the people still resent and reject the act.
I am entirely sympathetic to your hopes and dreams for high quality medical care for all Americans. I would like to see people equally well treated too. Always have always will.
What I fear, however, is that we are apt to achieve "equality" by reducing the standards of care for everyone. The result, I think, is more apt to be better access to medical care for those at the lower end of the economic scale, but considerably REDUCED quality and availability of care to those who have always been able to pay their own way through prudent budgeting, intelligent apportioning of priorities, and self-discipline.
I ALWAYS managed to pay for adequate health insurance, and I was "statistically poor" throughout much of my adult life. I make no claim to superiority, but I am very grateful for having been brought up with good common sense Bourgeois values.
Any number of liberal friends have accused me of being a "Calvinist" -- as though that were something very bad indeed like being a pederast or gaining riches exclusively at the expense of widows and orphans, etc. ;-)
Frankly I have no idea what the term means never having heard it used even once during my upbringing. I admit to having been reared a Protestant, but my father was a New England Congregationalist who later became a Presbyterian, and my mother, despite her Italian heritage, was baptized in the Episcopal Church. So I wound up being raised in BOTH religious traditions simultaneously.
I went to Sunday School at the Presbyterian church, and was then whisked off to St, Paul's Episcopal every Sunday morning to sing in the boy choir there. If I must say it for myself, I was an excellent boy soprano, and was often chosen to sing solos, until my voice started to change around age thirteen.
None of that ever did me a bit of harm that I can see, and I look back on those hectic-but-exhilarating days with great fondness.
If all that makes me a "Calvinist," then God bless Calvinism, for it must be a good thing.
Please read what I said earlier more carefully. I did not accuse the president of being a dictator. I accused "STATISTS" -- a good enough blanket term, I suppose -- of being WOULD-BE dictators, because the facts of Marxian - Socialist - Fabian - Liberal - Progressive - Statist theories, aims and ambitions clearly SUPPORT that contention, deny it as I'm sure you will.
Just because a majority may be persuaded through clever manipulation and long-term stealth indoctrination via the Media, the Entertainment Industry and the Educational establishment to vote for something tyrannical, doesn't make it a good thing.
I do not believe in "democracy," as such. I believe in REPRESENTATIVE government with clearly defined separation of powers where the use of power remains sparing, judicious, and uncorrupted by "special interests" of ANY kind.
Notice, please that I am not chastising you or anyone else for thinking differently. So far we ALL still have that right.
"Just because a majority may be persuaded through clever manipulation and long-term stealth indoctrination via the Media, the Entertainment Industry and the Educational establishment to vote for something tyrannical, doesn't make it a good thing."
Did you believe it was NOT "clever manipulation and long-term stealth indoctrnation via the media" when Ronald Reagan proposed his policies? Or was that done in an innocent, unpolluted and nonpropagandized way?
Can you honestly answer that?
FreeThinke: “"You guys and gals" want UNLIMITED, UNCHECKED AMOUNTS of P&C. People of my philosophical persuasion feel duty bound to do everything we can to see that you don't get it, BECAUSE we are dead set against DICTATORSHIP, which IS what you advocate, whether you know it -- or want to admit it -- or not”
Whoaa, there! People of my persuasion? I can make a stronger argument against people of your persuasion – especially policies that protect and further enrich America’s plutocracy, those who draw a disproportionate share of benefits from the tax code and have created an immoral inequality – the worst in almost a century.
How can you possibly justify the concept of “legal personhood” for corporations? Since when are corporations called upon to give their lives in times of war? Or serve on juries? People of your persuasion serve up massive tax perks for the super wealthy, then shift the burden of civilization to low-income earners paying regressive rates and struggling from paycheck to paycheck just to keep their heads above water. Don’t lecture me about DICTATORSHIP. This is offensive in extremis.
FreeThinke: “ As an unabashed Conservative-Libertarian I oppose you -- not because I hate you [in truth I rather like - and even LOVE - many of you], but because I cannot accept your beliefs. There's nothing more to it than that.”
Like a bad marriage to an abusive spouse who violates personal boundaries, you fail to distinguish between YOURS, MINE, and OURS. The United States is not just YOUR country; it is also MY country. It spends not just YOUR tax money; it spends MY tax dollars too. I too deserve my fair share of the national economic pie and public policies directed at MY PRIORITIES, not just yours. I resent your “my way or the highway” brand of politics.
I paid into the Medicare and Social Security system my entire life. It is MY money, not yours. Contrary to what you think, Medicare and Social Security are not "entitlements." These are EARNED BENEFITS that my forbearers struggled for.
I resent paying higher marginal tax rates than the billionaires who refuse to shoulder the cost of civilization ... thus creating a tax and economic inequality at MY expense.
I resent the credit worthiness of MY country being held hostage by a fringe group that has shown more anger management pathology than common decency or common sense.
Most of all, I resent the atmosphere of character assassination, bullying, deception, and fear exploited by you and your Tea Party who defame, devalue, disrespect and vilify any good citizen with whom you disagree. You hurl that crap at me, I'll hurl it right back at you.
(To think I was almost ready to forgive you; then you had to pull a dumb-ass stunt like this.)
FreeThinke: "Any number of liberal friends have accused me of being a "Calvinist" ..."
No, I wouldn't phrase it quite like that. You reject the teaching of Evolution but advocate Social Darwinism.
Free, what you and many conservatives fail to acknowledge regarding the ACA, or Obamacare as it is known is this...
You are correct in that many do in fact not like "Obamacare" including liberals. But, ad here is the kicker for conservatives... we do not like the ACA because it did not go far enough to the left.
We will still back it though, because in an atmosphere of complete obstruction by the GOP of a plan of their making, it was as close as we could get to the single payer system Shaw mentioned.
So while there is opposition, it is not as conservatives allege, because all of America believes it went too far, it is also because many do not believe it went far enough.
From Mother Jones:
Obamacare is More Popular Than CNN Thinks
—By Kevin Drum| Tue May. 28, 2013 9:00 AM PDT
99
From CNN:
A majority of Americans still oppose the nation's new health care measure, three years after it became law, according to a new survey.
According to the poll, 43% of the public says it supports the health care law....Fifty-four percent of those questioned say they oppose the law, also relatively unchanged since 2010. The survey indicates that 35% oppose the health care law because it's too liberal, with 16% saying they oppose the measure because it isn't liberal enough.
Right. Let me rephrase this:
According to a recent poll, 59 percent of Americans support Obamacare, while 35 percent oppose it. Among supporters, 43 percent support the law as is, while 16 percent think it doesn't go far enough.
The way CNN words the question in this poll, they almost have no choice but to say that 54 percent of the public opposes Obamacare. But that's wildly misleading. If you oppose Obamacare solely because you think it should be more generous, then you're not part of the group that's commonly thought of as the opposition: tea partiers, conservatives, Republicans, and so forth. These are the folks who want to repeal Obamacare completely and leave it a smoking husk, and they're the ones most of us think of as the "opposition." If your main problem with Obamacare is that it's not the NHS, you aren't part of that group.
"The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll showed that 57 percent of Americans disapprove of "cutting off funding as a way to stop some or all of the law from being put into place." Only 36 perent said they approve the idea. Kaiser has found consistent opposition to the proposal since 2011.
The effort to block any continuing resolution that funds Obamacare — and risk a government shutdown — has been pushed by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee (R-UT), along with various conservative advocacy groups.
Cruz and Heritage Foundation Jim DeMint both signaled last week that President Barack Obama might actually sign a bill to defund the new health care law and paradoxically gut his signature piece of legislation. Paul and Cruz are expected to headline a rally next month to promote the defunding efforts.
But Republican leaders have publicly shot down the idea. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) correctly pointed out that a government shutdown will not halt Obamacare, while House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) simply highlighted the fact that Republicans don't have the votes to make the defunding dream a reality."
Ted "We Need 100 More Like Jesse Helms in the Senate" Cruz is on the wrong side of history. And he will regret his stupidity in pursuing his goal to defund Obamacare.
But I hope he tries it so that I can watch him fail spectacularly.
Don't blame the cons. Blame the butter!
People who have been raised on CRITICAL THEORY have placed themselves beyond the reach of Reason. What they practice is a NEW kind of Chauvinism.
The practice of Endless Argumentation with no thought, hope, dream or determination of ever reaching a compromise let alone an agreement is vexatious to the spirit and instrumental in having made the social fabric stained, threadbare, smelly and ready to be cast onto the scrap heap.
There is NO WAY to WIN a WAR of ATTRITION, which is precisely what power hungry leftists have been waging against established norms, customs, mores, cherished traditions and time-tested methodologies for well over a hundred years.
Despite all that, just go in about your business, do the best you can amidst all the noise, haste, dementia, confusion and corruption.
If, however, you still entertain any notions of trying to persuade leftists of the error of their ways through thoughtful, reasoned debate,
FUGGEDABOUDIT!
You'd be apt to get better results trying to have a cozy little chat with a NEWEL POST.
Free Thinke, I do believe you are likening leftist to bulldogs with insatiable appetites.
Post a Comment