• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who do you hold at fault for the Govt shutdown?

Who is at fault for the shutdown?

  • Republicans

    Votes: 87 45.3%

  • Democrats

    Votes: 32 16.7%

  • Both

    Votes: 65 33.9%

  • Neither

    Votes: 8 4.2%
  • Total voters
    192
Thrilla said:
BOth... it's the only option that is accurate and factual..
Click to expand...

Wrong.
Democrats hold absolutely zero fault in this.

Your position would only be valid if Obamacare was a piece of legislation, on the table in some way, or connected to the Government shut down.
But Obamacare is NOT connected to the Government shut down in any way what so ever.

Obamacare is Law, not a bill.

What Republicans are doing now is no different than making the same demands about making abortion illegal or eliminating all tax liability after the first 1 million dollars.
If the Republicans were making those demands instead, would you still think the Democrats shared some of the blame?

They might as well demand the elimination of Social Security while they are at it. It would be no less moronic.
Those of you who somehow think that the Democrats should negotiate over a LAW that has nothing to do with the Debt Ceiling or with the CR, have just not thought this thing through.
That or you are misinformed or just want to see Obama fail so badly that your demands seem reasonable to you.
 
Some Democrats did want to use a shutdown as leverage to undo the sequester, but the leadership defeated it.
 
Painter said:
Wrong.
Democrats hold absolutely zero fault in this.

Your position would only be valid if Obamacare was a piece of legislation, on the table in some way, or connected to the Government shut down.
But Obamacare is NOT connected to the Government shut down in any way what so ever.

Obamacare is Law, not a bill.

What Republicans are doing now is no different than making the same demands about making abortion illegal or eliminating all tax liability after the first 1 million dollars.
If the Republicans were making those demands instead, would you still think the Democrats shared some of the blame?

They might as well demand the elimination of Social Security while they are at it. It would be no less moronic.
Those of you who somehow think that the Democrats should negotiate over a LAW that has nothing to do with the Debt Ceiling or with the CR, have just not thought this thing through.
That or you are misinformed or just want to see Obama fail so badly that your demands seem reasonable to you.
Click to expand...

sorry, my prior post was factually correct... spin as you will , but it's true,both share blame.... no doubt about it.

I suggest you bone up on the appropriations process... it's at the center of this lil shindig we are having... ACA is indirectly related.. funding for it is the very heart of the issue.
 
Thrilla said:
sorry, my prior post was factually correct... spin as you will , but it's true,both share blame.... no doubt about it.

I suggest you bone up on the appropriations process... it's at the center of this lil shindig we are having... ACA is indirectly related.. funding for it is the very heart of the issue.
Click to expand...

Funding is at the heart of most issues.
But the ACA does not require funding until tax credits roll out.
For now it is all about getting people signed up for insurance and the elimination of pre-existing conditions.

The Republicans stopped quite a few things. But they did not and can not, stop the ACA.

The ACA is a law.
It was passed by both the House and Senate, signed by the President, upheld by a Right Wing Supreme Court, and then reaffirmed by both electoral and popular vote during the election.
It is a LAW.
It is not on the table.

You might as well go after Social Security instead, for all the good it will do you.
You can shut it all down.
You can destroy our credit rating.
You can collapse our currency.
But you can NOT stop the ACA without 67 Republicans in the Senate.
 
Last edited:
Painter said:
Funding is at the heart of most issues.
But the AFA does not require funding until tax credits roll out.
For now it is all about getting people signed up for insurance and the elimination of pre-existing conditions.

The Republicans stopped quite a few things. But they did not and can not, stop the AFA.

The AFA is a law.
It was passed by both the House and Senate, signed by the President, upheld by a Right Wing Supreme Court, and then reaffirmed by both electoral and popular vote during the election.
It is a LAW.
It is not on the table.

You might as well go after Social Security instead, for all the good it will do you.
You can shut it all down.
You can destroy our credit rating.
You can collapse our currency.
But you can NOT stop the AFA without 67 Republicans in the Senate.
Click to expand...

if what you are saying is true about ACA not needing funding.... then Democrats have absolutely no excuse for not passing the House CR.

if what you are saying is true, then Democrats purposefully shutdown the government for no reason whatsoever when they decide not to pass the House CR.


so which is it.. are you wrong, or are Democrats fully to blame for fraudulently shutting down the government?
( the correct answer is.. you are wrong)

the shutdown s occurring because Democrats and Republicans cannot agree to the terms of the CR passed in each of the houses..... period, end of story.
neither party is budging.. both are sticking to their guns ( for now)

it takes 2 to tango.. and it takes 2 to form an impasse...... that just a simple fact a lot of people need to wrap their little heads around.
 
mac said:
And the Dems refusing anything other than exactly what they want is not unreasonable and childish prickisness?
Click to expand...

They didn't want the budget the House sent in the CR either it was based on the sequester and needs to be fixed but the Dems were willing to give it to them. But the little babies in the House won't budge unless we repeal Obamacare without the votes required by our Constitution. Its like they don't even know how our Govt. functions. They are making us look fools in front of the world.
 
Thrilla said:
if what you are saying is true about ACA not needing funding.... then Democrats have absolutely no excuse for not passing the House CR.

if what you are saying is true, then Democrats purposefully shutdown the government for no reason whatsoever when they decide not to pass the House CR.


so which is it.. are you wrong, or are Democrats fully to blame for fraudulently shutting down the government?
( the correct answer is.. you are wrong)

the shutdown s occurring because Democrats and Republicans cannot agree to the terms of the CR passed in each of the houses..... period, end of story.
neither party is budging.. both are sticking to their guns ( for now)

it takes 2 to tango.. and it takes 2 to form an impasse...... that just a simple fact a lot of people need to wrap their little heads around.
Click to expand...

So if I held your family hostage and said I will let you go if you kill your child? You would call that a stalemate? All you have to do is murder you child and you are free to go. It's not my fault if you are still being held, right? It's your fault for not budging.
 
iguanaman said:
They didn't want the budget the House sent in the CR either it was based on the sequester and needs to be fixed but the Dems were willing to give it to them. But the little babies in the House won't budge unless we repeal Obamacare without the votes required by our Constitution. Its like they don't even know how our Govt. functions. They are making us look fools in front of the world.
Click to expand...

yes, the Democrat didn't agree to the House CR... and they refused to negotiate on the terms.

careful, you are starting to understand why both parties are assholes and both are to blame for the slowdown....
 
Painter said:
Wrong.
Democrats hold absolutely zero fault in this.

Your position would only be valid if Obamacare was a piece of legislation, on the table in some way, or connected to the Government shut down.
But Obamacare is NOT connected to the Government shut down in any way what so ever.

Obamacare is Law, not a bill.

What Republicans are doing now is no different than making the same demands about making abortion illegal or eliminating all tax liability after the first 1 million dollars.
If the Republicans were making those demands instead, would you still think the Democrats shared some of the blame?

They might as well demand the elimination of Social Security while they are at it. It would be no less moronic.
Those of you who somehow think that the Democrats should negotiate over a LAW that has nothing to do with the Debt Ceiling or with the CR, have just not thought this thing through.
That or you are misinformed or just want to see Obama fail so badly that your demands seem reasonable to you.
Click to expand...

The debt ceiling is law. It's there for a purpose. To reign in spending. It's pointless to have a debt ceiling if you're going to raise it every time you've reached it.
 
Thrilla said:
if what you are saying is true about ACA not needing funding.... then Democrats have absolutely no excuse for not passing the House CR.

if what you are saying is true, then Democrats purposefully shutdown the government for no reason whatsoever when they decide not to pass the House CR.


so which is it.. are you wrong, or are Democrats fully to blame for fraudulently shutting down the government?
( the correct answer is.. you are wrong)

the shutdown s occurring because Democrats and Republicans cannot agree to the terms of the CR passed in each of the houses..... period, end of story.
neither party is budging.. both are sticking to their guns ( for now)

it takes 2 to tango.. and it takes 2 to form an impasse...... that just a simple fact a lot of people need to wrap their little heads around.
Click to expand...

But that is not even the issue at all.
Republicans are demanding a year delay for the implementation and enforcement of the individual mandate.
This has nothing to do with funding.

The argument is not over the budget or over money.
It is over Republicans wanting to harm or delay the implementation of a LAW.

The part they can't agree on has nothing to do with the budget and should not be a part of any CR.
There is nothing to negotiate.
 
iguanaman said:
So if I held your family hostage and said I will let you got if you kill your child? You would call that a stalemate?
Click to expand...

no, I wouldn't call it a stalemate.. it would simply be a valid reason to kill you.


why don't you try a a valid an analogy?.. or simply argue the facts?
 
Painter said:
But that is not even the issue at all.
Republicans are demanding a year delay for the implementation and enforcement of the individual mandate.
This has nothing to do with funding.

The argument is not over the budget or over money.
It is over Republicans wanting to harm or delay the implementation of a LAW.
Click to expand...

why are you ignorant about the nature of the bill ( the house CR) that has resulted in an impasse?
 
Slyhunter said:
The debt ceiling is law. It's there for a purpose. To reign in spending. It's pointless to have a debt ceiling if you're going to raise it every time you've reached it.
Click to expand...

The debt ceiling is not even the issue, YET.

However, you are badly misinformed about what it is to begin with. The debt ceiling is merely authorizing the Government to borrow in order to pay the bills that Congress has already agreed to pay.
To not raise it, is a fools errand. It would destroy us. First it would destroy our bond credit rating. Second it would cause our currency to collapse. I do not even want to consider third.

If you want to control our debt, then your focus should be with how we accumulate that debt, not with how we pay the bills we already owe.
 
Painter said:
But that is not even the issue at all.
Republicans are demanding a year delay for the implementation and enforcement of the individual mandate.
This has nothing to do with funding.

The argument is not over the budget or over money.
It is over Republicans wanting to harm or delay the implementation of a LAW.

The part they can't agree on has nothing to do with the budget and should not be a part of any CR.
There is nothing to negotiate.
Click to expand...

Obama already threw in multiple waivers and delayed the employer mandate so what is wrong with making the waver universal for everyone. After all we are supposed to be protected under the law EQUALLY.
 
Painter said:
The debt ceiling is not even the issue, YET.

However, you are badly misinformed about what it is to begin with. The debt ceiling is merely authorizing the Government to borrow in order to pay the bills that Congress has already agreed to pay.
To not raise it, is a fools errand. It would destroy us. First it would destroy our bond credit rating. Second it would cause our currency to collapse. I do not even want to consider third.

If you want to control our debt, then your focus should be with how we accumulate that debt, not with how we pay the bills we already owe.
Click to expand...
What is the point of having a debt ceiling if you raise it every time you reach it?
 
Slyhunter said:
What is the point of having a debt ceiling if you raise it every time you reach it?
Click to expand...

Exactly.
What is the point of having one...
Its existence is ridiculous and it merely gets used as a bargaining chip.
(I will pull the trigger and blow both our brains out if you don't cooperate.)

Again, the debt ceiling is about borrowing to pay our debts.
It is not about creating those debts, as Congress has already created them.
 
Painter said:
Exactly.
What is the point of having one...
Its existence is ridiculous and it merely gets used as a bargaining chip.
(I will pull the trigger and blow both our brains out if you don't cooperate.)

Again, the debt ceiling is about borrowing to pay our debts.
It is not about creating those debts, as Congress has already created them.
Click to expand...

the debt ceiling is supposed to be a symbolic limit... it's tell congress to chill out and talk about their spending .


.. unfortunately, it's utterly useless as anything other than a statutory bargaining chip... neither party is interested in reigning in debt.. both parties just love to blow the ceiling off every chance they get.
they simply do not give a **** how much they spend....
 
Slyhunter said:
Obama already threw in multiple waivers and delayed the employer mandate so what is wrong with making the waver universal for everyone. After all we are supposed to be protected under the law EQUALLY.
Click to expand...

good question... but it's a question that Democrats will not answer.
 
mac said:
They have the demand of keeping Obamacare intact, and they are willing to let govt close in order to do so.
Click to expand...

There's no more demand by the Democrats over Obamacare than there is a demand over the other billions of dollars worth of expenditures in the budget.

Nice try.
 
Sietske22 said:
Reid has let the Senate vote time and time again on the House bill.

Again and again, the Senate has voted to change the House bill into a clean bill and remove all things unrelated to the government's discretionary funding.

When will Boehner let the House vote on the Senate bill?
Click to expand...

What Bill? and what budget for that matter.
 
Visbek said:
With all due respect, that article is a massive truckload of BS.

The WSJ called him on it: Heritage Rewrites History - WSJ.com

Fox recognizes Heritage as the origin of the individual mandate: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News


Heritage defended Romneycare, including individual mandates, in 2006: Understanding Key Parts of the Massachusetts Health Plan

And again The Significance of Massachusetts Health Reform
and again The Massachusetts Approach: A New Way To Restructure State Health Insurance Markets And Public Programs
and again Massachusetts Health Reform: What the doctor ordered
Click to expand...
Heh. This is funny. State programs. Again and again? Hell, repeat the lie enough, and surely someone somewhere will buy into it, huh?
 
Visbek said:
With all due respect, that article is a massive truckload of BS.

The WSJ called him on it: Heritage Rewrites History - WSJ.com

Fox recognizes Heritage as the origin of the individual mandate: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News


Heritage defended Romneycare, including individual mandates, in 2006: Understanding Key Parts of the Massachusetts Health Plan

And again The Significance of Massachusetts Health Reform
and again The Massachusetts Approach: A New Way To Restructure State Health Insurance Markets And Public Programs
and again Massachusetts Health Reform: What the doctor ordered
Click to expand...
A cantaloupe has enough sense to know which party is responsible for the ACA.
 
Moot said:
Whether they voted for it or not, it was a Republicans idea (Heritage Foundation) and they helped to write the bill and were for it all the way up until Mitch McConnell decided he didn't like the mandate and got his wing of the party to oppose it. It was then that the GOP became the "party of no" and right or wrong have opposed everything Obama did or tried to do since.
Click to expand...
Okay. I guess that's why it's called Heritagecare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom